Did you guys listen to the podcast between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris?
What a shitshow.
JP vs. SH
Easton Cox
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
m.youtube.com
en.m.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Jose Collins
bamp
Mason Johnson
>expecting two philosophers to set aside their axiomatic presuppositions for anything.
Sam Harris is a fag anyway. "Jordan....Jordan...please agree with me WHY AREN'T YOU AGREEING WITH ME REEEEEE."
It wasn't much of a debate. Peterson isn't a great orator unfortunately.
Julian Hughes
Link please
Julian Bennett
Harris sperging out so bad over semantics and epistemology, I was so dissappointed. Jordan took it about as well I expected, I think he went in expecting a conversation and got a debate
Gavin Phillips
Jordan Peterson tried repeatedly to claim that only useful knowledge is true, and that all "bad" knowledge isn't true. If he was allowed to continue, he would use this to claim the existence of God, as he has in the past, since God has been useful to us, thus must be true.
American pragmatism is bad, regardless of Peterson throwing a Darwin coat on it to make it more European and scientific sounding.
Nicholas Thomas
>Harris sperging out so bad over semantics and epistemology
The definition of truth is not semantics. It is the one stone that Peterson's reverse pyramid is built on.
Can't expect a conversation to go well when the very first words uttered are a huge gigantic claim that unfalsifiable and unprovable.
Aaron Anderson
>It's bad because....
Xavier Jones
>definition
No one is arguing that it isn't isn't a fact, his idea of truth is that which benefits man. Truth is related to practical functionality and having science based around this truth wouldn't lead to all out energy being put in making porn more realistic.
Nathan Cox
LINK DAMNIT