Jordan Peterson & The Meaning of Life | Philosophy Tube
Thinkest. Thou that hell is but, a fable, I. Think. So still, til, experience. Change, thy mind why this is, hell, nor are we out of it hell. Hath no limits. Nor is circumscribed, in oneself, place for. Where I am, is, hell and. Where. Hell, is, there. Must I ever. Be. Lucifer. Lord, of, hell and regent. Of the damned I'm. A huge fan of Jordan, Peterson in fact. I'll go so far as to say I am the only true, Jordan Peterson fan in, the entire, world for, the damnably, uninitiated. Jordan. Peterson, is a Canadian, psychologist, author of 12 rules for life a very popular, self-help, philosophy book, and maps. Of meaning which, is also, a book he, does a lot of TV, and live appearances. And has a devoted following, both on the internet and in. Hell which. Are increasingly, the same thing, fortunately. For me there, are a lot of philosophers, down here turns, out in order to get into heaven you have to be both Muslim and trans, so there's a lot of people there but it's still pretty exclusive, and they've learned a great deal. Peterson. Presents, as a warrior battling. The forces of, Hell and, darkness, by, which I mean nihilism. A lack, of values. And goals in life and the accompanying sadness, that can sometimes go with it which, he and several other thinkers believe, is endemic, to the modern world he's. A big fan of Nietzsche who did a lot of work on the death of God which, sadly wasn't literally about God being killed but about how can you humans, live meaningful. Lives in. A secular, age how can you go on without falling, into despair in, the face of the sheer pointlessness. Of it all that's, where the self-help, aspect, of his work comes in if everybody. Sank into nihilism, then human. Society, would collapse so you've got to aim at something sort yourself out stand up straight clean, your room and all, that entails Peterson. Doesn't just think that nihilism is depressing, to live with them he also thinks that it's dangerous in his book he talks about how mass killers, can spend too long in nihilism, and come to believe that life isn't worth anything anymore there. Are other causes of mass killings if it was just nihilism which everybody sinks into occasionally, then hell would be full of mass shooters, from every demographic when, in fact they're not a very diverse bunch he, also thinks that post-modernism. And Marxism. Are dangerous. In that nihilist. Way which. Hmm. It, is a little confusing approaching, Peterson's work from the point of view of philosophy, because words like, post-modernism. And Marxism relativism. And nihilism have, technical, meanings that he tends to. Wind. Around and one. Popular, tactic for arguing against him is to explain those technical meanings and show how he's using them incorrectly, but. More, talented, demons than me have tried that before and it doesn't seem to faze him so, what I'd like to do is show why his attack on nihilism, isn't, all it's, cracked up, to be and then. Present. An alternative. Peterson, seems to use the word nihilism, as interchangeable, with. Relativism. Which it isn't really and we'll get to that but, if you follow his work you'd be forgiven for thinking that relativism, is a bad thing the, good doctor has condemned, moral, relativism, multiple, times in his lectures he went on the Joe Rogan show, to say that it was quote just wrong and twelve, rules for life contains a foreword by psychologist Norman Doidge presenting.
Peterson's, Whole career, as a counter, to relativism. The supposedly is that if we were all diehard. Relativists. And every, goal was as good as every other then, we would never truly, value, anything, hence nihilism. And societal. Collapse and Peterson's, not the only one worried about this the philosopher Stephen Hicks and neuroscientist, Sam Harris see relativism, as a rejection of science, and enlightenment, values we'll, come back to both of them former. Breitbart editor, ben shapiro has, linked it with cultural, decay and in his video the ugly truth about relativism, with over 90,000. Views x software. Salesman, stefan, molyneux, says that relativism, is part of a plot driven, by a demonic, thirst, for, power there's, also this video from weird male YouTube, which honestly has one of the best openings, since, Genesis, so, this video is going to be on does. Moral, relativism, lead to pussy worship. The. Common theme running through a lot of these thinkers is that objectivity. Which, is associated with things like reason, the Enlightenment, modernism, the West and judeo-christian. Values is, good. As has, been pointed out by an inspiring. In another video also featuring wings and a nudity many, of those terms are more complicated than they appear whereas, relativism, which is associated, with feelings, social, justice warriors the NatWest. Post-modernism, and dangerous, leftist, thinking, is bad, a lack. Of strongly. Grounded values, can leave individuals. And maybe, societies, open. To corruption, by, demonic, influences. Peterson. Actually, has quite an unusual stance. Compared, to some of those others and I'm not lumping him in with them carelessly down, here, everyone's. Punishment, is bespoke, but. It's worth noting that some of those who claim to have the answer to nihilism do, share some political, themes the question for now is how can you confront, the meaninglessness, of your life without, falling, into nihilism, and despair you.
Have A few options one, is to, believe. In God, yeah. Another, is to invent some new goals and meaning through pop psychology, and recycling. A lot of religion, like Jordan Peterson does taking, God's dead corpse, and turning it into fertilizer or, if. Magic, isn't doing it for you anymore why. Not try. Science. In. 2010. Neuroscientist. Sam Harris responded. To this alleged problem of nihilism and relativism in his, book the moral landscape, he claims that there are objective, answers, to moral questions and that science can, help humans. Discover, them he isn't saying that there will someday be single, scientific, answers to all moral, questions, but he is trying, to find objective. Values, without religion. But the the demigods are right about one thing we need a universal. Conception of human values he thinks that people are too tolerant and that this is a symptom of a dangerous. Cultural. Relativism, a theme, he shares with Petersen Deutsch, Molyneux. Shapiro, and. Harris. Thinks you should all be brave free speech warriors, and face the truth if there are facts. About morality, then. Doesn't it stand to reason that some people or. Cultures, might. Know more about those facts, than others whenever we are talking about facts, certain. Opinions, must be excluded, that is what it is to have a domain of expertise, how have we convinced ourselves that every, culture has a point of view on these, subjects, worth, considering, he's particularly, concerned, that you are too tolerant of behaviors, that he associates, with religion, and conservative. Islam especially, like, requiring women to wear veils and, honor killings, although, in fact both of those behaviors have parallels, in societies, that aren't, quite so influenced, by a conservative Islam, and, arguably say more about controlling, women than they do about religion, what this illustrates, though is that for Harris the quest to find objective, value in life is not, just for the fun of it in his book the end of faith he explicitly discusses, these issues in the context, of American, military intervention. Racial. Profiling, and torture. Apropos. At, the end of this talk a man comes onstage who. Is this guy is this Ted is this TEDTalks mrs. Theodore T talks. Anyway. A man comes onstage and points out something Harris neglected, to mention that. Many Muslim, women wear, veils. Voluntarily. I mean. Can you engage, in a conversation, with, that kind of woman without, seeing. Cultural. Imperialist Harris replies that voluntary. Doesn't really mean all that much in certain contexts, they might be brainwashed by their delusional, belief systems, and so I think we shouldn't be so. Eager to always. Take their word for it so Harris has allowed himself the possibility. Of saying, I know what's, good for you and I don't necessarily need. To ask and. It seems like he's at least open to the idea, that, those in possession of the moral facts. Can, be justified in acting violently. Against, the morally ignorant, that's. The power of having objectivity. On, your side, elsewhere, Harris, mentions, brain scans, as a way of objectively knowing. Who's happy and who's not but. How can you tell the difference between a brain scan of somebody who's really happy, according to Harris and somebody, who's merely deluded. Well. You can't, so. Even though he highly, values, the facts it seems like some are more, valuable than others and it's not clear on what basis, he's weighing them up interestingly, this. Criticism is similar, to one put forward by another thinker. Jordan. Peterson, he, and Harris agree on an awful lot but one thing Peterson has pointed out is that there are so many facts. In the realm of objective, science that you need some story, to help you pick and choose which facts, will be relevant, philosophers.
Would Call that story and ideology, but that's not a word Peterson likes and he has his own ideas which, we'll get to even more, interestingly, Harris's. Idea is an accidental, ripoff of a theory developed by philosopher, Richard Boyd, in 1982. Called, the, homeostatic, plus the property theory of matter ethical naturalism sexy. Title Boyd. Thought that words like good and evil, refer, to real properties, out there in the material, world and that therefore statements. Like murder, is bad are capable. Of being objectively. True or at, least true, in the same way as scientific. Statements, are which, prompts the question to. What exactly, do. These words refer, Boyd's. Answer, is that they are cluster. Properties, groups. Of things that tend to go together the. Example, he uses is actually the same one Harris does health. There. Are all kinds of things that we would want to include in a definition, of the word healthy. Like, your heart should be beating and you should be able to breathe but. Do you have to be a certain size in, order to be healthy do. You have to not be in pain can, you have a beating heart and be, unhealthy. There's. A cluster of properties, here somewhere, that makes up the definition, of the word health but, we're never gonna pin down a definite, list because that's just not how the concept, works, despite. That vagueness though it's still very obviously, useful, and meaningful. Similarly. Boyd, thinks that a word like good refers. To a cluster of things that are non morally, good for humans like sharing, friendship, sharing love having, fun watching, quality, YouTube videos but just like with health you're, never gonna be able to pin down a full list because the concept, just isn't like that and, here's. The big takeaway, if we. Say John. Is healthy, we. Could be talking about any number of things in the cluster of health whether, he has a disease whether he works out whether he has a good relationship with his mother all of, which are objective. But. Whether the sentence, John, is healthy, is true. Will. Still depend on what aspect, of his health we're talking about it. Will still be relative, to. The context, in which we are saying it so, this relative, objective. Binary, that people like Peterson and Harris are working with is an oversimplification. The. Theory boyd defends, is called moral naturalism, it's about as objective, as ethical theories get but, statements. About morality, will, still be true or false relative. To, the context, in which we use them, objectivity. And relativity. Can. Go together. We've. Seen that, attempts, to find objective. Meaning in life through science, can, get pretty complicated pretty, fast which. Might be a problem if that meaning, is something you're expected, to kill for, turns.
Out Getting rid of subjectivity, isn't, so easy after all Peterson, has an interesting, relationship with subjectivity. He. Thinks there are two worlds the world of the objective, and the world of experience, and that it's the world of experience with things like pain and hunger, and stories. That people really, care about, it is, such things experienced. Personally. That are the most fundamental elements. Of human life from the archaic dramatic perspective, and they are not easily, reducible to detached, an objective, you're, not objective, you're, alive you're subjective. Just as the objective, world has atoms and fundamental, particles Petersen, thinks that the experiential. World, too has, its fundamental. Elements, the, dichotomy, for which he is famous, order. And, chaos. Chaos. Is the domain of ignorance itself it's, the foreigner the stranger the member of another gang the rustle in the bushes at nighttime chaos. Is also the foremost potential from which the god of Genesis one called forth order using language at the beginning of time and, chaos. Is freedom, order. By contrast, is explored territory order is tribe religion hearth home country, it's the warm secure living room where the fireplace glows, and the children play but. Order. Is sometimes tyranny. So here we see that Peterson thinks order and chaos can manifest in different ways at different times. No. Great problem there, but. In. That talk I showed you Peterson, gives two examples. Of order, the. Walls of the city and the, uniform, of the police but. There are those for whom walls and, borders are more representative, of chaos if, you've ever traveled internationally, you'll, know that crossing the border is a moment when the unknown and uncertainty. And anxiety can confront you and of course there are many people for whom the uniform of the police is a symbol of terror so can the same thing, be, both order. And chaos. At, the same time if. The, answer is no and they really are objective. At ease and it seems like Peterson needs to answer questions like what, are they and what are they made of from. His books and his conversations, with Harris it seems like he'd rather save either features of subjective, experience, so yes two, people could experience the same thing one as order and one as chaos just as two people could experience the same work of art differently, but if that's the case then.
Order And chaos are relative. Not. Just statements about them either but, the properties themselves, although. He's trying to escape it relativity. Is actually built right into the heart of Peterson's. Entire. Worldview, there's a big tension, here between somebody, who rails against, relativism, on the one hand but, places subjectivity, and, contextual. Understanding at, the heart of most of what he does on the other one, of those fake, Jordan, Peterson fans might say he's not really a relativist, he's, a pragmatist, he's, not trying to defend a philosophical, theory he's trying to help people there's, that whole bit in Chapter nine about how it's good to order your life based on some principles, whether it's Freud young religion, or whatever the point is to avoid nihilism. But I think it's a stretch to say that Peterson, would consider any ordered. Life to be as good, as any other it. Definitely seems like he thinks some interpretations. Of order and chaos are more on the money than others which, again is in deep tension with their relativistic. Nature, Peterson, I'm sure would say that order and chaos are evolved, into the structure of your human brains according. To him your ancestors. Learned that some behaviors, were advantageous, and they unconsciously. Developed, rules for, those behaviors, which we can come to be consciously, aware of through, the telling of stories that's. Why he thinks stories, and tradition are so important, so, it's, not a hundred percent relative, it's grounded. In people's experiences. But, it's still objectively. Biological. This, is quite similar to an idea developed by Swiss psychiatrist Carl, Jung one, of Peterson's major inspirations, who proposed the existence of a collective, unconscious, to. Explain, similarities. That he observed. Between. His patients, Peterson. Came up with his version to, explain similarities. That he observed in the, different fields he studied for maps of meaning but. Anything, is similar, to anything, if you. Look hard enough, lions. Are similar to lingerie in that they're both made of atoms, judging. Two things to be similar in a way that matters, though is. Subjective. And relative. To the context, as, a zookeeper once said to me lions are similar to laws written at they're both made of atoms but this is the lion enclosure of the Central Park Zoo so will you and your girlfriend please leave take, these two images one, is in 19th century painting, by Italian artist Roberto firuze II showing, the Virgin Mary and Jesus and the other is a vast from the 5th century BC showing, the goddess Demeter her daughter Persephone and the man tripped tall Amos being given some wheat I might. Say I think, there are similarities between these they're both images of women mothers symbols, of new life but, they're also different in many ways they come from very different cultures and times and are made of different materials, to. Say I think. There are similarities here, that are relevant relative. To certain contexts. Is a statement, that forefronts, a subjective, judgment I think there are similarities that, I am telling you about for, some reason that I have. But. If I say marry, and Demeter are both instances, of the archetype, of the Great Mother which exists, in the collective, unconscious, then.
It Sounds like I'm being objective, 12, rules for life is full of this what, philosophers, call reification. Making. Something into, a thing, from. Hierarchies, to archetypes, Peterson uses, objective sounding. Language when really what he's doing is subjectively. Drawing comparisons for, his own reasons and that's, the only true Jordan Peterson fan in the world I don't have a problem with that but, it does mean that all his psychology, still can't get him out of relativism, by. The standard. He sets himself his. Attempt, to find meaning, in life fails. None of this by the way is me claiming, that science is all subjective or the reality doesn't exist maybe there really is a collective, unconscious, maybe you have similar brains and therefore tend to think in similar ways but, the point is that the subjective, and the objective are, not so easily crobat apart which, is why questions. Like who. Gets to write the stories, who. Gets to decide what, represents, order and what that's chaos are, important. And, don't. Look now but. It looks like we're. Heading into. Bertolt. Brecht, was a 20th, century playwright. And theatre practitioner, one of those horribly, pretentious, people who tried to combine philosophy. With theater for which he was damned to hell for, all eternity and, Brecht, would often employ theatrical. Techniques that drew his audience's, attention to. The fact that they were watching a play he. Called it epic theater in contrast, to dramatic theater which tries to present an illusion, of reality rather, than maintain, a fourth-wall Brecht. Would try to deliberately. Remind, his audience, that, what they are watching is, just. So. Far I've done my best to engage with Peterson's ideas on their own terms and take, them seriously albeit. In a bit of an irreverent tone, but. Now I want to take a step back I said that there's this tension there between being. Very against relativism on the one hand but actually relying on it on the other and. I'm curious about why that tension is there Peterson, does not like post-modernism. At all he, associate, sit very much with the relativism, and the nihilism that he's trying to combat and, he says that the goal of post-modernism, is to reduce everything to power, relations, there, are no real categories, like race and gender no real morality, only, power and if, only power exists, then the use of power becomes fully justifiable, it is almost impossible to overestimate the nihilistic and destructive, nature of this philosophy it puts the act of categorization itself, into doubt it, negates the idea that distinctions, might be drawn between things for any reasons other than that a raw power why so down on post-modernism. Well Peterson, does, not like Marxism. At all, he's, reviewed the history the 20th century and he thinks that Marxism leads inevitably to tyranny. And genocide. And chaos and. That's. Another topic for another video we don't have time to get into it today. That's, just his political position he then says that Marxist, intellectuals, like Sartre, and Derrida, needed, some way of making Marxism, cool again after, everybody in Europe supposedly. Realized, that it was evil so they substituted. The idea of power for the idea of money society, was no longer repression, of the poor by the rich, it was the oppression of everyone by the powerful and this allowed them to crack right on with being evil Marxists, but just change, up the lingo, unfortunately. This. Misunderstands. Both Marxism, and post-modernism. As other youtubers, more talented than me have pointed out before those two sets of ideas are actually contradictory.
And At the time a lot of the early post modernists, were writing the Marxist left did not need help it was still going strong so, this idea that post-modernism, was a PR move or a cover-up by Marxists is I'm afraid just, theoretically. And historically false and. I know where he's gotten this idea to Peterson's made a source for a lot of these claims it's a book by the right-wing force of a Stephen Hicks called understanding. Post-modernism, and unfortunately. For our boy JP, the. Book is to put it technically just. It's really getting, bad if, you want the blow-by-blow of all the sloppy mistakes then Kok philosophy, has a great video on it but Hicks is central error that then gets transmitted, over to Peterson is this idea that post-modernism, is essentially, destructive. But. When Foucault for instance was talking about how, knowledge, always, presupposes. Some power relations, the, real goal was to say oh you know knowledge. In logic. It's just what's the oppressors. Say it is and the truth is, just, whatever, so let's. Tear down the, capitalist, patriarchy. All the structures, of the West and. And. That's just not what post-modernism, is about that's all so I mentioned Brecht, a few minutes ago an example, of a Brechtian technique, might be using, title cards to tell the audience what's about to happen doing. A serious piece in a silly costume showing. Them how, a particular, effect is achieved or. Showing. Them how, the show is made to, draw your attention to the fact that what you're watching is a constructed, representation. Not, reality, because, once you see how, the story, is made to go the way it goes you, also. See how it could have gone differently, Brecht, himself was a Marxist, and he wanted his audiences to criticize, his characters, in their store as an, intro to criticizing. Their own but, it needn't be just a Marxist thing the British comedian see. The Sun has just come out from behind a cloud and it's completely changed the colour temperature in here this. Is why I hate filming, with natural light this. This is why coloured, lights are just objectively better I, mean. Of the two principles Apollonian, and Dionysian this is a clear demonstration of why the done I've seen this better Brecht himself, was a Marxist, and he wanted his audiences, to criticize his characters, and their world as an. Intro. To criticising their own but it needn't be just, a Marxist thing the British stand-up comedian Stuart Lee uses a lot of Brecht in the theatre techniques to get his audience to criticize, the comedy, industry. Which. Is probably why so many young stand-up comedians, struggling, in that same industry, try and rip him off. One. Of the best modern examples, of Brecht in theatre techniques I can think of is this TV show it's read thoughtful, it's, really cerebral, like very intellectual but a slow burner, it's called RuPaul's Drag Race the show cuts between footage, of the Queen's performing, and confessional. Footage which is shot out of drag reminding. The audience that at least on this show these, are performance is done by and large by, men and when, they perform as the Queen's they're outrageous, and campion over-the-top it's kind of hyper femininity. Which, prompts the audience to ask why, what. Are gender expectations anyway, really and do you care more, about meeting, those expectations. Or. About, looking good but, getting somebody to question, why something, is the way it is isn't. The same as getting them to throw it out Petersen. Says that post-modernism, and critiques, about how power shapes, our ideas remove, the possibility of choice choice. Has no place in the ideological picture, if men, and women act voluntarily to, produce gender, unequal outcomes those, very choices must have been determined by cultural bias in consequence.
Everyone, Is a brainwashed, victim whatever gender differences exist and the rigorous critical, theoretician, is morally, obligated to set them straight the surrounding context makes it clear there that he's talking about setting people straight through force, so again there's. This idea that it's essentially, violent and destructive, generously. Ignoring, the fact that Peterson frequently. Does the same thing he's criticizing. Their assumes. Without talking to people that he knows what's going on inside their heads and what's really good for them trans, rights he's, correct, to note that power sometimes shapes, us even on the level of our desires but. Realizing that doesn't take away choice if anything it gives us more choices because now we, can think about why we value the things we do like Brecht, the goal of post-modernism and critical theory isn't to minimize the role of choice or the individual, or justify violence, against those who make the wrong choices it's, to get you to realize that many of the things you see around you and the, ways in which you look at them can. Change if. You want them to and. Drawing. People's attention to their psychological bad habits so they can reflect on where they come from and whether or not they want to indulge them post-modernism. Is doing a similar thing just, on the level of societies, and ideas, in 12 rules for life Peterson talks about the importance of articulating. Clearly, what you want of standing, up for yourself of thinking about what you value and why you value, it of taking risks and being daring, even if it potentially risks your safety or other people's and that's all good advice but. He only wants you to do it as an individual, if. You start getting together with other people, standing. Up for yourselves, articulating. Clearly what you want thinking, about what you value and why you value, it politically. Speaking, maybe advocating, for some potentially. Risky, and transformative. Social, ideas. All. Of a sudden, that's. A bad thing because. It doesn't fit with his politics or is, understanding, of human psychology which as we've seen is pretty subjective the peterson project is deeply, relativist, deeply subjective, and deeply, ideological. And again as the only true fan, of jordan Peterson in the entire, world I don't. Have a problem with that but. I'm not the, one who built my whole career telling people that these ideas pave the road to hell. Well. Bugger, me blue it looks like life really is meaningless after all whether, we try to find objective, value through brain scans, or Petersons, ism or whatever. Stefan molyneux to peddling it, looks like we can't escape the quicksand, of relativism, and subjectivism, we. Could give religion another go but. It. Just seems like a lot of work, also. It has its own philosophical problems, which are pretty well trodden I just, want to have fun, is there any philosophy, that's about having fun well there is one idea that's a, little bit controversial, maybe. You've heard of it it's. Called try. And fucking enjoy yourself, hedonism. Is. Like snakes, it. Has a nasty reputation but, it's, actually, quite sweet it's. Associated, with Vice and, frivolous.
Enjoyment, Social. Media, and. Seeking. Pleasure outside, of the light of Christ but, when philosophers, talk about pleasure they don't just mean the cheap and easy thrills pleasure. Can. Mean any mental. State that is desired, that means, that we can still talk about somebody, experiencing. Pleasure even. If they are physically, in. Pain and, yes there, are some pleasures. That if overindulged. In might, lessen your pleasure in the long run heroin. And infidelity. To. Name just two, components of my typical Friday night I once spent an entire Sunday, in a bathtub coming down from getting absurdly high on MDMA and. It was one of the bleakest periods of my life because my brain wouldn't, make any more of a happy juice and now, I don't do MDMA, anymore because it's a whole lot of pleasure in one go but it limits the pleasure of my whole life and a, general attempt to maximize pleasure, over your lifetime could, lead to a pretty meaningful existence and if you don't want to think of it as hedonism, think of it as. Maximizing. Your own rational, self-interest, with respect to happiness you can be a hedonist, and still, reflect, on why you want, what, you want still. Pay attention to your own thoughts as peterson might put it it's not about being a slave to your passions all the time by choosing to get off the mandy i'm sacrificing, small. Pleasures now for, greater pleasure. Overall, which, is something that Peterson also places, a lot of emphasis on believe me hedonism, is entirely, consistent, with delayed, gratification a, philosophy, of life that tells, people to ignore pleasure, just isn't going to go anywhere that's, why I'm not so hot on most major religions even. Peterson, with all of his life is suffering rhetoric, knows, this the final, rule in 12 rules for life is pet. A cat when you encounter, one on the street and what, is that if not an invitation to take pleasure in the little things when you find them I know, that in my darkest moments I find a little thing that brings me pleasure it's important to do something other than masturbate, yes, Nietzsche's, approach was, to say look a work, of art can be stylish yes and, to say that it's stylish implies, some standard, but. Stylishness, is less about the work conforming, to an external objective standard. And more, about a particular harmony. Between all the notes so. Sing the song of your life like. A work of art with. Balance and grace call. It a torrid, espressivo. Some, Forte and some pn s MO some solos and some ensemble, pieces a little bit of dueling day and probably some wrong notes especially, if it's me singing The, Clash's acknowledged, and faced up to but, presented in such a way as to make them sublime, so, that the effect of the whole is, a kind of harmony and this. Too is consistent, with hedonism, in, order to get what you desire you have to know yourself and understand. All, of your varied, wants, even. See. This is why Jordan Peterson's favorite Russian author is Dostoyevsky, but mine is Ladda, mein avakov because, the characters, in Nabokov, books understand, that sometimes the. Best response, to the meaninglessness, of life is, to just fuck your own sister the, French philosopher Albert, Camus had his own strategy for confronting nihilism, he thought there was a fundamental, contradiction between, humans, desire to seek meaning, in your lives and life, itself which is meaningless and he, gave this contradiction a name the. Absurd. Camus. Wasn't, a hedonist but he wouldn't have been a fan of Peterson either he thought you shouldn't run from the absurd try to pick goals and meaning like cleaning a room to, escape it instead, he wanted people to live their lives in full knowledge of its meaninglessness, to, confront, the absurd and go. On living anyway. One of the figures Camus, discusses, is Don Juan a legendary. Character of theater and literature, who appears as a serial, seducer, of women, he, travels from country to country often in disguise seducing.
Women Of all ages and backgrounds not, out of a secret desire for true love running, about nonsense but, for, the sheer sport, of seduction. Many. Versions of the story give, moral, commentary. On his actions some, even end with him being sent here to hell and, one of the objections to hedonism is that you could lead a very pleasurable, life but. A very immoral, one, Camus. May also have had a personal investment in the character of Don Juan in 1959. He wrote a letter containing. The sentence, this, frightful. Separation. Will at least bring home to us more than ever the. Constant, need we, have for each other I await. You full, of strength, and, passion. That. Letter was. Not addressed to his wife but. To one of his four. Mistresses. But. Camus says, that Don Juan isn't immoral per. Se, he's just a moral, morality. Doesn't factor into what he considers a worthwhile existence, how could it once, he'd confronted, the absurd and realized that life is meaningless, this, is distinct, from hedonism, because it's not just about pleasure, it's, about taking the right attitude, towards. The pleasure an argument. That sadly, mrs.. Camus, was not persuaded, by his. Second wife Francine, for had depression and jumped. Off a balcony, in part, because of her, husband's infidelity, she. Survived and their reconciled, but to me this illustrates a far stronger objection, to hedonism, sometimes. Its trailer doesn't work some. Days are so bleak that even. The thought of pleasure, and happiness just. Makes. Me sick thinkest. Thou that I who saw, the face, of God and tasted. The eternal, joys of heaven I'm not, tormented. With ten thousand. Hell's in, being, deprived, of, everlasting, bliss and, then. The water goes cold but, you sit there anyway because sometimes, hell, is. A bathtub, in Debden, but, as we've seen other. Attempts, to find meaning in life are hardly, a hundred percent effective or morally, bulletproof, either what. I do on those days is, try. And talk to my friends and then they don't answer my messages because I'm a reclusive internet weirdo so I listen.
To Music or look at art or if it's really not working I just wait, for the drugs to wear off so, that I can sing the next verse of my life and every. Single, time. I would, rather have the, snake. Than. The snake. You. Promise too. Much. So, busy, showing. Me where. You. Forgot, to switch your, feelings. Goodbye. Dr., P. Goodbye. Don't aunty. Good. Killed. Us. Goodbye. John. You. You. Does, moral, relativism, lead to pussy worship yes.
2019-04-13 18:40
The Big Bad Wolf I wouldn’t say it’s legitimate, the song is a parody. But, it’s also difficult to fight against, which is the way YouTube made it to be.
You know, I think the nudity and snakes are a revolutionary teaching tool. Usually if sitting down to listen to a 40min video, I'll boot up tetris on the side to keep my eyes and hands busy, or pick up some knitting. But here... I... I just can't tear my eyes away....
Do a video on abolishing copyright!
+Dream Delirium I do, but right wing, gun nut, loonies don't. Which is what makes it a fun aesthetic. It's a paradody within a parody.
Oh shit!!!!
+Robert Hamilton So, you have no idea what Satanism is...
+Master Adjustereification
Snakes and some nails and contacts was more than the horse?
+Dream Delirium because its a fun aesthetic and neither God nor Satan exist.
This one got me to be a monthly Patron, Olly. Well done you
+Riley Carpenter There's a url for where you can do at the bottom of the screen for most of the ending song.
Re upload it buddy. You're work deserves the cash
I'd like to add that I believe Harris's scientific objective morality stems from his neuroscience background. He believes the human brain and human society has evolved a basic set of moral ideals, that most people will tend to adhere to. Where I think it gets tricky, is Harris's belief in the lack of freewill. He knows that every human is hardwired differently, and even believes the legal system should reflect this. To me this seems to contradict his scientific objective morality. Am I wrong, or have I missed something?
I am a Nihilist, and I sort of recent what Lucifer said about my ilk. I have values and goals, I just don't believe in any kind of prescribed meaning of purpose to life. The universe is cosmically indifferent to us and our existence. Morality is subjective ( although we experience empathy in most cases, which makes us less likely to cause intentional suffering in others.)... I mean, look who I'm talking to... You obviously know what Nihilism actually means... I just hate the implications, that Peterson, and even other Atheists, will slander is Nihilists with.
Its one of your bests for sure, way more detailed then my usual 'lack nuance in his thought' I try to oversimplify it to. Also, Lucifolly is best looking olly.
Satan has a good sense of humour, but he always DMCAs. As a matter of principle... of DARKNESS!
BolshevikMuppet omg, I didn't catch on to the satire via pun! I was just thinking about our minds being blown
Ilias liakos he's literally been an actor, like I could imagine that the format of Contrapoints's, Nicki Minaj, so forth are wet dreams!
joshmbrown42 GYAL! omfg hdhdhgahdhfhdjjdhs
Liam Boyd well, this portrayal of Satan was definitely sassy. But yes, it appears that for sass to occur we have to be familiar with the characters.
Dream Delirium "The Church Of Satan" is actually a bunch of (over)dramatic humanists. sound familiar? But seriously, it seems to partly be a meme recently. Like within the past few days, Vox covered the satan themed spectacle of rock in the 1980s that led to the "parental advisory" sticker.
This happened yet again!?!
I’m not 100% sure how YouTube’s copyright claims work, but there’s a pretty decent argument that your satirical song falls within fair use in the U.S under Seltzer v. Green Day, Inc., 725 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2013). The 9th circuit is important here because it covers California.
+Riley Carpenter He mentions ko-fi in the video, can't recall the username at present.
Nothing is more pleasurable than a life spent with friends.
How does it not count as parody
Although I am fervent Buddhist, your case for hedonism is good Great video
I hope you fight it. If you don't, it's probably a good idea to take it out of the video and just release it exclusively for your patrons/ on another social media site to encourage following you there. After all the work you've put in I can't imagine having your video demonitized feels good :(
Fucking capitalism
Probably your best one to date too, incredible Work!
copying contra points huh?
I bet the out takes for this are great. How hard would it be to hold a straight face during this lol
Soooo... you're posting nude cosplay on patreon, right?
reification
Dude I loved it! And I've never donated to anyone, but your tip top In my book. So, I am considering shelling out those precious clams that choas junkies like myself sweat and bleed for. I usually get caught up by pedantic rehtoric. I am definitely just a regular joe or Bob. Therfore so grateful for a variety of perspective. You got it going on man.
+Liam Boyd ...who feels a little derivative of Kenneth Anger...
+Riley Carpenter His paypal is listed in the description
I like the style. I really do, it just feels a bit derivative of contrapoints.
I love when you put little easter eggs in the captions for us
...that dad bod, tho...
+Matthew Morris ...I mean...duh.
"Hedonism is entirely consistent with delayed gratification" Ollie likes edging confirmed.
(Sigh)...why is all of Lefttube into Satanism? I mean, don't answer that, I know why, but don't you think you're just giving the...frankly, very real, very gun-owning and very frightening Fundie conspiracy theorists all of the "ammo" they need?
+pietzsche How do you distinguish somthing that is true to all humans from somthing objective? If there's no distinction then... well there's no distinction.
Are you thinking of ever making a video about how capitalism shapes the way we think about consent? How you're being basically subjected to a form of authoritarianism by YouTube for example but because the magic right-libertarian definition of "voluntary" is met everything is fine?
"I'd rather have the Snake, than the Snake Oil Salesmen" needs to be a shirt
+zack rudinski philosophically objective things are true without respect to perspective. Something that appears true to all humans would just be relative to all humans. Truly objective things seem unlikely as the idea is internally contradictory. Scientists often use the term "objective" but that's more a function of language than a commitment to the philosophical concept
+Master Adjuster reification?
Of course Peterson is subjective. He talks about stories, fgs. But what he isn't is skeptical of everything and that IS what postmodernism does. Tearing down systems of ideas and traditions that have technically given people meaning, is what he talks about when he means nihilism. But hey, what do I know. I'm an objectivist.
holy shit dude check out the copenhagen interpretation of quantum mecanics i couoldnt stop thinking about it watching this
Philosophy Tube fantastic video
Great Singing!
You spent all the money on snakes and manicures didn't you. I bet ContraPoints is proud.
+Master Adjuster Reification.
I'm gladly gonna throw you a buck or two on paypal but I can't afford to do that every month, I'm sorry :(
I am watching the premier and wondering how some comments pre-date the uploading of this video. Excellent work by the way. If I was not a low wage worker living paycheck to paycheck I would definitely support you financially so you could continue to produce such high quality content.
I didn’t know live snakes were that expensive! Gonna go donate.
I don’t understand why there isn’t some system in place that would allow creators to get their videos checked for possible copyright issues before they are posted, or for creators to be able to make minor updates without losing all of the views, likes, and comments.
Philosophy Tube Thanks for also pointing out the tension between Marxism and Postmodernism.
Would you say that the claim was legitimate?
Hey, aren't you calling things common to all humanity relative, when what's the same to all of humanity has to be considered objective? As with your police example, yes they represent different things to different people, because they behave differently depending on one's actions and circumstances. However, the enterprise to populate other planets is universally in the realm of chaos because no one has set up a martian colony, and could be considered to be objectively chaotic. Just the same, if a thing improves the net good of humanity, it would be objectively good.
+Riley Carpenter at patreon you can, if not just unsubscribe right away
Philosophy Tube Moral Relativism and Postmodernism are awesome.
Do you guys sometimes think we're just entrenched in our particular brand of hedonism? It occurs to me that it has to be so easy to just listen to daddy Peterson's advice, so like... we don't we? Wouldn't that be the height of hedonism?
+Master Adjuster reification
I'm watching the premiere and there's like sixty bucks worth of super chats in it right now, so hopefully that compensates for the ad revenue loss. Just to check, copyright strikes don't redirect that to Sony too?
Can you please spell, don't laugh!, raification?
Is there a place I can make a one time donation?
Olly, you make great content and as soon as I get out of my undergrad and get a job (I'm about to graduate with a BA in History!) I will definitely donate to you. You've got a lifelong subscriber, keep up the great work.
Oh my God YouTube sucks!!
I'm really glad you still decided to keep your original vision and not to re-upload it with the musical outro edited out. Goodbye, Doctor P.!
I'm not gonna lie, the 'Lucifer, Lord of Darkness' look is H O T af
PT with snakes curling around all of his bear glory... my kink mine shall never run dry between this and Contrapoints. I'm always here for a good smackdown of Daddy Lobster, even if all that's there to say about him has already been said.
It may be just me being unable to stop defending my dear old Harris, but isn't 29:47 basically his Moral Landscape when extended to a group?
13:55 There's a certain irony in the fact that Olly, dressed as Lucifer, is reading a quote from Peterson that could just as well have been some flavour text in a Shin Megami Tensei game.
Nails by Contrapoints
i will have to rewatch because for some reason..... i couldnt always..... concentrate....................
Cute snek
This homo will die of aids before he reaches 40
Well hot damn, male Contra Points over here has some golden pipes on him. Top quality song there!
Great video mate! Thanks and cheers from Argentina!
Cuck Philosophy is a great channel. Nice to see it cited.
I loved the singing at end--and this is coming from someone who's pet peeve is unexpected singing! As I stew in my own version of your bathtub, this video was exactly what I always hoped you'd make. I've been a religious fan for a year now; I never commented until this treat of a video. (In fact, this is the first comment ever made.) But, I feel so horrible in my hedonism. The world seems to be against me everywhere. As dawn rises from another sleepless night, I'm reminded of more than one ray of hope. So underrated and well produced! Keep it up, gorgeous!
In the service of preventing future bathtub woes- I have found that having a cone as you’re coming down from the pingers slightly lifts you back up, and then lets you float down gently.
Logic based hedonism is the SHIT.
I hate it when my dads fight :(
i am here for the unnatural lighting!!!
One.... Don't stand so close to me. (just like that old man in that book by Nabokov) Two... Snake handling literally forced you to adopt some handeography, and tied into Drag Race via the aesthetic of POSING. Three... Body-positivity and aesthetic sensuousness is super important especially in any intellectual content on the left, bc on top of the alienation we all already face regardless of ideology, a leftist's direct confrontation with active practices of reconcialition amongst all of us can actually initially heighten the sense of alienation (though recognition and articulation of difference), and can require-- and should require-- initially reified boundaries as we negotiate new ways of relating to each other. That last point fits perfectly with your Goodbye Mr A. When we're encountering ppl from different contexts and backgrounds, we have to initially work together on coming up with common frameworks ("have all the answers") cognitively before we can really trust each other enough to connect viscerally ("but no human touch"). You're gonna get some tension for putting yourself viscerally out there and accenctuating your body and being sensuous (I'll be blunt-- I've already seen takes on you saying you're playing to sex appeal), but I think leftists could stand to learn to behold visceral, sensuous cues from strangers and separate that out from a sense of threat or violated boundaries. This squeamishness is something I see very prevalent on the left and in left praxis. (And it comes from a good place of protection and consent and respect, but becomes warped when ppl mistake passive seduction-- like what I as someone attracted to men might feel simply beholding your visceral cues-- with an active entrapment or sirening.) I like that you and other aesthetics-heavy Breadtubers are inviting viewers to mix the intellectual with the visceral, and these flare-ups of squeamishness need to be encountered with something more than the bipolar response of indulgence (like ppl shipping you and Natalie, which I find squicky as a process) or repugnance (like ppl saying it's wrong for either of you to show off your beauty). How else can we traverse the absurd? Thank you for your vulnerability and for more great content. Please consume more Drag Race. Drag makes men better men, and stronger men. Even just beholding queens interacting. Queer masculinity is healthier than tradmasc and always has been!
i am here for the tiddies! the chest hair! the makeup! the look!
Oh. And these days when I think about "order", I can only think about John Bercow...
Great impression of Peterson.
Oliver how dare you look so pretty in this, I keep getting distracted because I’m thinking about drawing you.
A delight as always! :D
I'm drunk.. Also I ship you and Natalie. You guys should get married and adopt beautiful philosophically informed children. Also sexy shirtless Lucifer is hot. Keep doing the things
Was that Mary Daly reference?
This is the day we say yes today Satan
What works for you, works for you. What works for everyone, is an environment/society that allows you to do what works for you. Thanks for the video.
Could you, in the future Lucifer, keep snakes out of your videos. It's kinda dissstracting.
Man, you've absolutely nailed the 1970's Satanist look; though your production values are a lot better. Snakes, how the fork do the work? Some days, even Hedonism doesn't work, "Even smiling makes my face ache."
Loved the Peterson accent.
The ContraPoints influence is Thick. Speaking of thick, goddamned Olly is sexeh.
oo the lighting in the 13th minute !!
I love how the aesthetic of this video mirrors contrapoints' one
Beautiful counterpoint to the austere bedroomist labyrinth of semantic distinctions..shower me with your bisexual uterine shreds...oh those furry nipples maketh me lactate.
Because I'm an idiot, I'm gonna write some ambitious response comment to this video that no one will ever read, what am I doing, someone stop me from wasting my time and effort. Ok, so around the 8min mark you're pretty much making excuses for religious patriarchy and oppression? Religion has a faith-based epistemology, thus it has very little in the way of a filter of what ideas can and should be obeyed and preserved, thus it can act as a way to keep bad ideas alive and protected. Sure, the typical modern-day internet fedora-tipping, "I'm-an-atheis-debate-me" douchbag(basically me) can often be kind of a stubborn casual misogynist shitlord, but it's not as if religion has some great track-record of being pro-woman, or or other societal issues. Yeah, sure, lots of religions have cultural ties to bad practices, and bad practices aren't always religious, but religion helps provide a kind of flexible magical world-view that I think makes it at least a bit easier to justify and keep alive bad ideas. Sure, we should point to bad ideas outside of islam, we should point out when islam is being criticized unfairly, but in this video I more get a sense that you're being dismissive of these islam-directed critiques more in general. Yes, anti-islam narratives can be toxic, but I think the solution is to constructively promote more nuance narratives, not just take pot-shots at the supposedly overly-critical narrative, that just comes across as partisan. Or maybe I'm interpreting you uncharitably? Feel free to say. Regarding Harris and whether or not veils are voluntary, I think it's absurd to characterize it as being purely voluntary or involuntary. I mean, come on, maybe I'm just completely mischaracterized you, but aren't you the kind of person who's generally very quick to talk all about how society has all these complex and subtle nuances to it that affect how we act and think about others? I think it's probably true that a lot of western women have some amount of undue pressure to put on makeup and dress sexily, and I think it's probably true that a lot of women in islamic(and other) cultures have undue pressure to wear veil, etc. I don't know exactly how one would go about determining what the "truly fair and optimal" societal attitude on this matter would look like, but I think it's fair to say that that kind of "modesty-culture" probably isn't the best answer to be content with. So regarding the idea of having "fact-based authority" in social question, I think people are interpreting Harris too uncharitably, I don't think he's literally saying that he wants to rule the world with an iron hand and use his infallible logical authority to absolutely tell everyone what they can or cannot do, it seems more like he's making points against relativism. I think it probably is true, that if you got enough people together, and you made them perfectly aware of all the arguments on all matters and perfectly aware of all the facts and possible outcomes relating to the issues, they would probably converge on a relatively narrow range of answers to social and many types of philosophical questions. Of course, that's very, VERY theoretical and speculative, but I think that it's probably the best we cans strive for as an ideal, it doesn't mean we shouldn't try to be very cautious and humble in how we go about it in practice. At least to me, that's the sort of thinking I read into the stuff Harris says, I assume he's just trying to promote discourse where it's possible to frankly discuss ideas that are socially uncomfortable. But maybe I'm projecting my own thinking onto him and am being to charitable? Who knows. I think Sam Harris is the thing that the dog-whistlers pretend to be (a person who is "just asking questions", "discussing ideas boldly", etc), which in turn makes him look like what they truly are, when they use those pretenses as excuses to signal concerning messages. I lean towards thinking Sam is an honest and respectable guy who wants to promote sane discourse, so at this point I'm really tired and sad over the amount of uncharitable criticism he gets.
6:18 "Yuck" was excessive. It made the video less subtle and worse.
Superb. Thank you for this
I’m glad Philosophy Tube, unlike Contrapoints, does not completely misunderstand and misrepresent Nietzsche.
Nice Bill & Ted reference!
Hey Oliver, beautiful video but as i have pointed out to you before i think the philosophical works of Charles Taylor could´ve added an interesting perspective here. I would highly recommend to you to look into his works "A Secular Age", "The Ethics of Authenticity" and "Sources Of The Self". I would be really interested in your opinion about Taylors work especially because the themes in this most recent video of yours are very related to it but still offer a bit of a different perspective on the topic.
Like all of your most layered and complex videos, I had to watch this one a few times to see how all of the points and themes build on and interconnect with one another. Simply brilliant. You may yet inspire me to start my own channel.
I ship oli with contra so hard
Came here looking for Kermit, left with the devil and the Hoosiers. Thanks m8.
Those snakes can fuck off. There's a fact verifiable by science.
"YEAS."
I see you've finally accepted your place in the world as a discount contra. I appreciate this, patreon dollars will be sent
I'm sorry, what was all that? I was watching the snakes.
This is your finest video so far. Perfectly timed and structured. Hail satan!
I know this is a weird compliment, but fuck it... Oli, you have good body hair distribution.
I almost didn't click on this video, because holy fucking shit that thumbnail is creepy! XD Glad I did though.
This was my favorite look in Rupaul's Monster Ball
9:10 me too, snake
Sometimes JP looks less as a philosopher/psychologist and more like a W40k real world AU fan.
That moment when you realise you were actually a marxist in denial all along. Damn! I couldn't stop laughing for a solid minute xD
32:00 Stupid question but... Does anyone know what's the name of the painting in the background, and also the music?
+L H Peacock oh wow that was fast. Thank you so much!
Hieronymus Bosch “The garden of earthly delights” don’t recall the date
Look at those little cuties
So where does the misogyny and lobsters enter Peterson's work?
I'm fond of Gert's work in The Moral Rules.
This MFr stays not wearing a shirt
Where can I read the full Jordan Peterson Kirk/Spock slashfic?
Make up and NAIL CONSULTANT - nice
v scary peterson impression olly....
Thanks for another great video philosophy daddy! I would love some ideas on something I have been thinking about: I recently listened to an episode of the podcast Invisibilia where they discussed the generational shift regarding empathy. Should you be empathic to everyone (older generation), or should you reserve your empathy for your own team, and/or the victim (younger generation)? Is there a cost to being empathic to all? The story discussed was a man who at 14, out of jealousy, had shared naked photos of his girlfriend. He then joined the Incels, but later realised that women are actually just people. He no longer has bad acne and can just go get a date. So he left the Incels, and is happier now. In the story, Journalist 1 is making us empathise with his pain and why he was mean to his ex. He used to be bad, but has become better! Whereas the younger Journalist 2 made us empathise with the victims of his women-hating phase, and claimed that the empathise-with-perpetrator style becomes a form of "Him-pathy" that undermines the victim. (This could be generalised to neo-nazis for instance). After hearing this story I can't make up my mind about whether empathy is too costly to just be given to everyone. Or if empathising with the ex-incel man is the only way to connect and create a better society? Again, thanks, this is by far the best side of youtube! ^_^
gosh, i had a few other videos queued up before this one, but they keep talking about some fabulous nails in the comments and now i have to see this now
Your Peterson sounds a little like George Lucas.
I recommend Digibro's video: OBJECTIVITY DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST
Holy shit this is most garbage philosophy video I have ever seen.
I'm worhsipping pussy and dick....am I good, bad or just sexually frustrated?
Pussy worship. I'm dead.
Man, there's nothing worse than youtubers who speak at the "don't wake up mom" volume and don't bother correcting the audio levels.
Ah man I don't think you get it
The Richard Boyd / Sam Harris comparison was almost worth seeing you in that outfit.
GOODBYE DR P !!!!!!!!!!!
You look very nice in natural light ;)
When he took off the mask at the beginning I audibly, out loud, said "Olli, no!"
do the people you buy costume pieces from watch your channel?
People like Peterson and Consorts needs to be silenced.
I love how were're all low key horny on main for Olly
I wonder if we can call religious Paradise the perfect hedonist's dream?
Why didn't i get notifications???? This video is everything
Börtold Brekkt. I cringe every time I hear an english speaking person say sth in German.
13:25 That impression is on point.
so the big takeaway from this video is that olly could definetly do a Kermit the frog impression. rainbow connection when
since watching this YouTube wont stop recommending petersons videos to me
Will you two just reproduce already and bring forth the Antichrist? Jeez.
I have to stop at the hedonism bit. Sorry. Your hedonistic pleasures are made possible by the labor of suffering. If the post modernist sjw want to deconstruct every angle of contention, then your pleasure is only possible by the exploitation and neglect of those whom labor to make your pleasure manifest. Think of hedonism as selfishness and negligence.Again I suggest Nichiren Buddhism and the concept of three thousand realms in a single moment of life for illumination on the duality of being in both heaven and hell simultaneously. The meaning of life should not be thought of as hedonism rather as altruism. How can I make my life better by helping some other life to be better.
No anime philosophy? I thought that was permanent. Feck off Olly. Unsubbed
Lucifer is illegally sexy wtf man!!!!! Also. Snake babey. I love them
also, I could listen to u sing for ages!! Lovely
ALSO TO GET INTO HEAVEN U HAVE TO BE MUSLIM AND TRANS, god I love u man
Oliver, I love your videos and I'm always so excited to hear from you, but my terrifying phobia of snakes makes me impossible to watch this vid. Sorry, still love you tho!
A crtique,He is not in character as Natalie , Oliver is more like he is a just Oliver in Satan make up. Nataline becomes the character.Other wise thumbs up
I have to wonder what their problem with pussy worship is. Like, have they *seen* pussy? *chef's kiss*
Oh wow, I get why you were set on keeping the credits song in even when it's being demonetized. That is just so god damn unfair that people can steal the revenue that you deserve for including an amazingly covered song; your performance of it is what is amazing, not the song itself taken in some faux objective context removed from your presentation of it. You picked the correct song for the context, and you performed it well; the song author would get a taste in a fair system, but the effort invested by you in reifying the Platonic form of this song into existence for your credits would get the lion's share of recognition deserved. Also, I love how the bigger snake kept trying to strangle you.
God damn it; I hate when YouTube fucks up the "show more" with a single word. Why can't the editor line count be consistent with the actual formatting?
sheesh, these youtube pseudo philosophers are trying to peacock now.
also I'd like to volunteer as a snake for any and all future videos k thx bye
Chaos is the archenemy of mankind.
Bravo!
I LOVED SEASON 2 OF THE MIGHTY BOOSH GOD BLESS
I have a friend who had a pet snake when she was 8-9 years old. She loved it and took it out of his cage to put it around her neck. One day the snake stopped eating, so she was really worried. After a few days, she and her parents took it to a doctor. When the doctor saw the snake, he immediately threw it in its cage and told her to get rid of it immediately. Turns out the snake had stopped eating because he was PLANNING TO FUCKING EAT HER. Moral of the story: never trust snakes. Great video by the way.
ollie + snakes = heaven
just reupload it with the music edited a bit?
Brave free speech warriors lmao The SJWs vs the FSWs
+The Humungus The wavelengths of light absorbed by, and translucent to, Earth's atmosphere remain the same relative to the composition of that atmosphere, however the meaning of 'blue' can never be objectively verified as no 2 sets of human eyes or optic nerves are precisely the same. No 2 historical experiences with 400 nanometer wavelength light are the same. Every consciousness is as valid as the next. Objective perspective is either a myth, or hypothetically possible if experienced by some form of god. If that argument doesn't win you over? In my universe it's a fact that objectivity doesn't exist
The sky is blue. It doesn't matter if you're color blind.... it's still blue.
+The Humungus Wait a minute... what if... he's complaining because he used the copyrighted material as obvious satire... and they nailed him on copyright anyway!
Considering that you are a paid left wing communist shill... I don't know why you're complaining?
dlive is an upcoming platform
+Aaron B Lingwood Ah, so that's how it works.
+Robin Evans Patrons get it early.
+Mark B Not exactly. There is a subtle difference, I will explain: Peterson is a pragmatist (could be from his university training) and pragmatists do not have a set of ethics of their own (not even Dewey's imo). Its basically a parasitic philosophy that relies on another code of ethics, but then evaluates parts of it to see if it fits its use. Peterson is (rightly) claiming that society now - which is mostly pragmatic - is dependant on ethics from religion. Meaning, atheists are connected to religion in the west as long as they remain pragmatic.
That manicure did look particularly pricey ;)
I am sorry for the demonetization of this video.
Olly will you be doing a chill comment stream about this video? Would love to hang out and hear more about the making! x
+
+Jonathan Ⓥ what peterson really hates is atheism because he believes in a subjective made up God. He just won't admit that publicly often.
+Robert Hamilton Yeah, fun for YOU, when they aren't your neighbors. Enjoy your "not in a Conservative area" privilege.
+Riley Carpenter PayPal, check above or an earlier vid
Do you guys sometimes think we're just entrenched in our particular brand of hedonism? It occurs to me that it has to be so easy to just listen to daddy Peterson's advice, so like... why don't we? Wouldn't that be the height of hedonism?
JP never actually says anything though.
Going full contra I see
D A D D Y
Make up & nails consultant Nathalie Wynn.
'Other Youtubers, more talented than me..." Of whom there are very few. Bravo.
Yay Contrapoints' (hetero?)life mate uploaded again
I will build my religion around... season 2 of The Mighty Boosh.
Jesus I just left like ten comments Hey philosophy tube, old time fan just recently started seeing your videos again keep doing what you do, I'm having a blast criticizing this video lmao, so thanks for that also for all the awesome points and visuals in the video
Peterson's not looking for objective value but he's definitely not looking for subjective value He's looking for intersubjective value Which, us all being western humans, to some degree there is and to some degree he accomplishes that goal
27:30 Acch fair point I mean I see why he's really opposed to it, people can "get together in a damn mob" as he say, just because they're resentful for bad reasons, find themselves deserving when they aren't or want to hurt and destroy when they shouldn't I think I and he would say that you should collectively get together, but it should stem from your individual moral agreement to participate
Stupid sexy Oliver!
25:57 Jordan Peterson, yelling this at you from the carpark of a Jacksonville Hooters OMG i am DIEING
Is the music gonna be a regular thing now? Because I love it. Reminds me of overly sarcastic productions.
Look sure, the stuff he says about "this is the mother in the collective unconscious" is a subjective claim but it's not relatively subjective in some way that any other subjective claim about the collective unconscious would have equal authority or validity maybe its not scientific, that depends on your philosophy of science but the thing is that, assuming evolutionary theory applies to humans, the context of the subjective experience of many humans has being a human as a constant Hence you can have inductive arguments about the collective unconscious that are more or less cogent edit: but nvm you said that a couple seconds later lmao
It ain't a lefttube video if it doesn't have color filtered lighting
17:25 Judging two things to be similar in a way that matters though is subjective and relative to the context Yeah but we're all human. So some parts of the context are the same in each case. Hence not "anything is similar to anything if you look hard enough"
good job ripping off Contrapoints. also your tits are amazing. subscribed
Eh 15:00 On the tao part, it seems like jordan peterson talks about intersubjectively objective things rather than claiming that subjective things are objective At the beginning of his book "maps of meanings" he gives the example of a child coming up to you and saying "I saw a scary man" He says something like "The man part is objective, but we all know what the scary part means" Of course its relative, different people would have different reactions to the word "scary" But yet those differences seem smaller than the similarities. I imagine the majority of people would have a very similar reaction Maybe I'm giving him too much credit
Camus eventually gave up on absurdism rebelling against the absurb is just an unfounded imperative than anything else
This was great
Am I a satanist now?
11:11 I am taking ancient philosophy and health is the exact example that aristotle uses in metaphysics when he talks about
So with this one you're officially coming out of the occultism closet right
holy shit dad
So, it _is_ lobsters all the way down! Pardon me. I'll be right back with a very large cooking pot and some butter. We have to do something with all these stupid ocean cockroaches. I was ready to argue against the concept of objective good... until it came to the example of _The Mighty Boosh_ Season 2. I can't find my way around that one. Very well played!
Jordan Peterson sounds like Satanism with more, unnecessary, biased steps.
Talk about ghosting that snake!! So rude, beggin for you attention it is
wow, I love you
You actually have a good new wave voice
Didn't see the singing at the end coming! You should consider writing and performing a musical. I think philosophies are a bit like building equipment. Sometimes you need a trowel, sometimes a shovel, sometimes a hammer. The obsession to find one tool that will do everything is the problem I see a lot these days. I love Peterson for some things, and obviously I love you Olly for some things too. So can we all just hold hands and get along :)
The biggest thing I got out of the video was life is short have fun. That is why I'm going to a three day beer festival on Easter weekend instead of church lol.
If uniformity is threatening to you, then you yourself are chaos, and your lack of initiation to a societal constant makes you anathema to it.
Tell me about the mouth feel.
Order and chaos are relative to the individual. He's a clinical psychologist. He argues that they should be brought into balance with each other for the individual by the individual relative to their individual goals, fears and circumstances. Your conflation of his position against nihilism as one that precludes any positive engagement with relativism was lazy, boring and cheap. Also it appears you haven't researched Peterson's position on the contemporary presence of post modernist theory in academia and it's self contradictory relationship to Marxism. It's pretty specific and quite easy to parse. Try the post he wrote about it on his website. Happy hunting!
I liked peterson until my dad surprised me and said "you should read this book 12 rules for life" since that day I've found peterson to be a total convoluted douche.
Goodd stuff
I love how much thought you put into all of your videos.
ex breitbart writer, ex software sales man can you list all of the jobs you did in your life, so someone can mention the least related one to discredit you, everytime they mention you?
I have never seen a video with clearly so much time and effort behind it. You are absolutely brilliant and I aggressively want to drink tea and talk about life with you
1- sexy; 2- really sexy; 3- eudaemonistic ethics for the win; 4- no, really sexy; 5- existentialists answers are nice too.
Can philosophytube and contrapoints stop fucking around and just meet and make a video together? I NEED to see them talk face to face pls
Wait, as a trans muslim I get a free pass to heaven? Finally it has all been worth it!
Fun little criticism of Peterson.
Doesn’t life require taking objective stances, if everything is relative then you really cannot be justified in standing for anything?
Olly is now ranked with such legendary figures as newsreaders and the lady who works at the deli in that my experience of their professional ouptut is permanently derailed by the question "are they actually wearing pants?"
pussy Good/ Genocide Bad. Live Towards Paradox..............
Excellent footnoting (head-noting?)
Beefcake
n_n Dressed with HP sauce, no less.
Now why couldn't Neil Gaiman and Steve Dillon render Lucifer so vividly in those Vertigo books?
I think you hit the right balance of respectful nuance and irreverent humor here, without descending into the smug condescension that has irritated me in previous videos. Thank you and keep up the good work!
Nothing better than breaking the 4th wall by singing the LAMEST MUSIC EVER at the end of the video, wearing one really cool tshirt. The whole thing was beyond genius.
can you name other cultures besides Islamic ones where women are stoned for the crime of being raped?
that's not happening in America...
6:30 You can try ssss... -satan- .. science There are so many good jokes in this video
Y'all remember when he used to do A level philosophy vids?
35:30 until Olly does us a solid and uploads his cover separately
nice explanations -- kinda creepy makeup, though [edit: oh! i see, you've got NW helping. Nice song at the end. Who is on your shirt at the end?]
Goodbye Doctor P. starts at 35:21
I tried to pay attention but couldn't help focusing on the Sneks. I enjoyed the video all the same. :)
I am rather concerned with this man’s intake of soy
You actually articulated a few issues about Peterson et al, that were foaming and sloshing-about, unconscious, just below my threshold of waking-awareness to consciously apprehend and consolidate. Well done.
Hey Olly, I've watched the video only 1 time so forgive me if I'm wrong. Aren't you confusing relativistic with subjective in this video? When something is subjective that doesn't automatically make it relativistic. Cheers
@contrapoints
Excellent opening shot!
Oliver. You can't keep doing this to me.
Moral Objectivism being considered more scientific cracks me up. As if any morals or philosphy happens outside of the human brain.
the Hoosiers, off their album the meaning of life! and the lyrics fit? What a good pic
i immediately recognized the opening chord to goodbye mr a and YELLED...first why we build the wall and now this, how is olly catering to my exact music taste
This is the best ContraPoints video not made by ContraPoints
Danse macabre in the background! Well played!
Jordan Peterson reads like discount Heraclitus
If objectivity and morality dont exist, why are you making this video? if you think truth doesnt exist, it means everything else you do is manipulation. Just because Peterson or Harris are wrong about objectivity, doesnt mean objectivity dont exist. And being subjective is not wrong, its just that you cant use ur subjectivity on others.
Olly killing the nails and the snakes... And everything else ... Plus that knowledge pouring from your lips
Contra is in the credits
Goddamn I'm queer af
Eat, hump, snort, and laugh all you want, you will gain a world with no appreciation, devour everything in your path and you will FEEL NOTHING, AND HAVE NOTHING. You will never be satisfied and congruently ironic that is the true Justice.
Nah, you'll get together and force people to ration 12 gallons of water per day, y'know, equality. Then you'll starve regions and differing groups en masse over ideology and religion.
Olly: "I. Lucifer." Me: I don't see no Judas in yo mouth boi.
0:45 >Heterosexuality has left the chat
sooooo how sure are you that it was MDMA.... if it was in the last 20 years it probably wasn't real MDMA unless you were somewhere between lucky and very involved.
Song with Violins at the beginning is Danse Macabre.
Of course Natalie helped with the nails
I'm assuming you commissioned the wings immediately after the "Natalie as Venus" portrait surfaced. Good show, sir.
I love all of you. These fucking videos and everyone in the comments. Jesus Christ, I thought the whole internet was a massive right wing populist movement. Thank you everyone, I fucking appreciate every single one of you
Saaaammmme.
You really didn't address the core of Sam Harris' claims about morality.
His shtick is contradictory in a million other ways too. One such way is his opposition to collectivism and exaltation of the individual, while he whines about the decline of the collectivist entities he places above the individual e.g. "the West", the traditional nuclear family, the nation, etc. The guy's lack of respect for individuals preferred pronouns stems from his preoccupation with the societal effects transgender people have. It's always the collective above the individual with this grifter. His lip service to individualism is a joke.
This channel is becoming less and less formal university straight forward inspirered and more and more theater inspirered. I see that the teather format gives some more freedom with showing perspectives and you oviously are having a lot of fun with, but i think i personally actually preffer the more simple older videoformat without all the "purple light scenes". I find them a bit distracting to the topic, even if they are relevant
It starts out like a season in reverse! A way to set your mind above and over words. Attached means identity, erases things so why should we? Distress call code-word is "I wanna live"! He makes it up as it goes, IT GOES AWAY TO PLACES HE CAN ONLY HIDE IN OTHER PEOPLE'S MINDS! HE MAKES IT UP AS IT GOES!
I love you; this is fantastic. Aesthetic and message on point.
You've just earned a new subscriber
Well done. An invaluable reminder that everyone, even Mr. Peterson, who claims otherwise, is working from a subjective framework.
Idk if i agree with the content of this video, I'm to captivated by the devil's clavicle/chest hair... I'm good with more videos like this btw, I'm good with the snakes, the makeup... whatever, just more top less vids
Ending song is best at 1.5x speed. yw
"Moral Omnishambles!" lol!
POPSTAR OLLY
Daddy.
This whole time I was thinking, did Natalie do his makeup? Then the credits omg I knew.
Damn that contour is poppin’
Strawman over 9000
There are zero strawmen in olly's arguments.
Mighty Boosh and Pussy Worship. The Far Left platform, summed up.
deprogramming complete
What is decent about a "decent video" that fails to utilize the possibilities inherent in the medium? I know someone who used to have similarly unnecessary reactions to certain videos. Reactions that couldn't be explained by content or a criticism of anything substantial in the videos. Once it became clear to him that the connecting thread was the presence of a shirtless man or a noticeable bulge around the crotch area, he was able to explore and come to peace with the source of these internally conflicting, irrational impulses. It's a rare circumstance where psychotherapy proved effective in arriving at a solution. Irrationality stemming from childhood mistreatment or improper conditioning can be an almost genetic inevitability if not nipped in the bud with an effective freudian analyst. +SquidCaps
+The Humungus oops... thanks lol
Pretty sure you meant "red" +Crossed Wires
SquidCaps - You do realize that it is not necessary to leave an explanation for why you unsubscribed. Buh-bye!
Reported.
Unsubbing. Unless you can make a decent video without fucking gimmicks about the subject, don't fucking do it at all. Huge disappointment, who did you think you will reach with this shit?
BanJaxed not quite. There are a lot of different ways to practice Buddhism but it’s not compatible with hedonism. The core teaching is that life is ultimately about suffering despite the good things. (Daoism is more compatible with hedonism) to escape suffering, one must achieve nirvana, often through deep meditation. Nirvana is essentially a state of perfect satisfaction and peace. We also believe in reincarnation. But many of us do try to alleviate suffering on the world, in any way possible. A common small example is in Asia, where Buddhists often buy live fish caught from the sea and release them before they die. We generally believe that all life is precious and try to minimize the harm we do. There are many different Buddhist sects that vary across regions
* Use copyrighted music * * complain about a copyright claim * God I hate communists... haha
+Gehenna's Fire I don't know much about Buddhism, but isn't it based on trying to end suffering? In which case it would be totally consistent with hedonism.
ollie + snakes = heaven brecht, sigh i can actually hear kermit in there
+The Humungus The wavelengths of light not absorbed by, and translucent to, Earth's atmosphere remain the same relative to the composition of that atmosphere, however the meaning of 'blue' can never be objectively verified as no 2 sets of human eyes or optic nerves are precisely the same. No 2 historical experiences with 400 nanometer wavelength light are the same. Every consciousness is as valid as the next. Objective perspective is either a myth, or hypothetically possible if experienced by some form of god. If that argument doesn't win you over? In my universe it's a fact that objectivity doesn't exist
+Riley Carpenter PayPal.me/philosophytube
The intro put me off. Bye.
As a Peterson fan, this is a great critique. All views are welcome.
Judeo-Christian isnt really a thing. It's christian values, judaism has some overlap - like most religioins have some overlap - but are still different!
21:15 “Is Pepsi okay?”
Why is satan queer-coded?
Why is no one discussing or expanding on this video? It's like everyone in the comments has missed the point
Is your voice pitched up during the bookshelf parts?
Its good to get different counter points to JP. I like listening to different ideologies and gaining insights. This was quite entertaining, not that I understand all the technicalities within different Ideologies.
"Because the characters in Nabokov's books understand that sometimes the best response to the meaninglessness of life is to just f**k your own sister," Spoken like a true Tenchi Muyo fan.
You motherfucker make me question my sexuality! I love it..
Jesus, Olly reads the parts from Jordan Peterson in exactly the same tone and accent the Lobster King himself uses. I'm impressed.
omg even I cant watch this? this is like the episode where you wore a Henti Tshirt I reccomend you to anyone anymore? I mean if you didnt know this channel, would you honestally watch past a few secconds of this?
Since being trans mean I couldn't count the number of people who told me I'm going to hell already I'm totaly on board with Hedonism. But there is one thing that isn't compatible with my vision of it and that's hurting others. Because for me hurting others does diminish my pleasure and well being (be it physically or morally) and thus is going agains't my own hedonism. Only exeption being hurting those who maliciously hurt other. Because uplifting other people who need it is also contributing to my pleasure and well being. I embrace my own nihilism by seeing the optimistic approach of it. If nothing have a purpose or meaning, might as well make the best of what we have.
Morality and meaning are different things, are they not? I didn't really understand your ideas on sam harris. I dont think he is open to violence, cause violence is objectively/intersubjectively bad from his perspective. Morality is about what humans should do, and meaning is about what I should do.
me: "What is he holding? Cock rings?" No, a snake. Also nice nails! I hope you enjoyed wearing them! E: also nice snakes! I hope you weren't crapping your pants with that big one going up in the middle of the monologue!
Well, this was garbage. Why did youtube recommend it? What the fuck youtube. Why show me this complete and total garbage.
I have a question relating to headonism. Does Headonism address moral issues that don't negatively affect you, at least directly. If you participate in something that brings you pleasure but might be questioned morally such as buying R Kelly's music knowing you are supporting a terrible person. An argument where Headonism can address this (IMO) is that it triggers guilt which negatively affects my overall happiness therefore I should do such acts. However I'm not sure if guilt is a natural response or can be rationalised and reasoned away. Anyone have any ideas?
Hedonism is degeneracy and it leads to societal collapse. It should never be celebrated, at all.
Are you Contrapoints' lover? Or her twin/brother? :D
This is a prime example or pseudo-intellectualism masquerading as philosophy. I want my 40 minutes back.
Agree 100%. Absolute trash.
I've always viewed nihilism as "yay life has no meaning let's have a party and get absolutely wasted because it doesn't matter"
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EXPOSING PETERSON! I been saying this from studying philosophy, Peterson doesn’t know shit of what he’s talking about. The bases of his arguments come from the Bible that god gave us purpose. He twists Jung and Nietzsche work to fit his own agenda. And I been caught on to this. Thank you philosophytube, it be so great for you to interview Peterson and expose he doesn’t know shit.
WOULD YOU GET A LOAD OF THOSE FRIENDLY NOODLES
thank you
I watched the entire video but I have no idea what the video is about, I feel like I was hypnotised the entire way through, I couldn't look away. HOT DAMN.
The dad energy is too powerful
A HOOSIERS CIOVER IS THE LAST THING I EXPECYED FROM THIS VIDEO BUT IT MADE SOMETHONG ALREADY AMAZING THAT MUCH MORE FANTASTIC—EYE—
i think this is my fave so far, but maybe, maybe i just feel that
Plot twist: 'Petting the cat' secretly a euphemism for Pussy Worship.
So, Olly, for a while there I felt you were getting a little smug and narrow-minded in your approach to the philosophy of politics in a way that honestly made me really uncomfortable. But... this video has restored my faith in you more than a little. I really like the personal approach you took to it despite the goofy distancing effects, and the jokes landed more often than not. It was really charming! As a believer in embracing the Absurd myself, I really appreciated the Camus shoutout at the end; and while, as an anarchist and, yes, something of a postmodernist, I still *really* can't get on board with the strident Marxist stuff, it didn't feel too intrusive or condescending. In other words: Great job. Resubscribed? Resubscribed.
Swipe right.
Those snakes are cute.
i love how you refer to Contrapoints video, who publicly speaks out against Peterson, i've watched that video and the ones where she mentioned him again. And noticed she used Jonathan Haidt's work to explain something wrong. She also misused his work because she does the exact same things , Contrapoints is such a hypocrite.
I deeply appreciate the jokes in the subtitles.
So when you makin a music collab with Zoë Blade?
The part about MDMA comedown in a bathtub had me rolling
Metamodernism
Mmm. Oh, yeah. Hail, Satan...
@14:29 music from Lazy Masquerade channel lol
Is there enough literature on environmental philosophy to examine whether this can provide a basis for a meaningful existence? I'd love to see a video on that.
Hmm, Hedonism becomes even more popular as a personal philosophy
Thanks,for giving a perspective
that cover at the end..................wow.....goodbye mister p indeed
holy fuck. what is this amazing thing?
Just adding a random comment to boost the video cause I thought it would have 500 000 views by now.
Goddammit why do you have to be so handsome?
When I look at you. I have a feeling that you're trying to pull me to the dark side.
holy shit this is the best philosophy video I've seen on youtube.
honestly looks like u drew those nips on with kylee jenners 'butterscotch' liquid lip shade
What the hell Ollie? Where’s the lobster in the JBP summoning ritual circle? Your content is always of such an exacting quality and you’ve let me down.
Thumbnail gives me major contrapoints vibes !!
Cringe
Love the video, but that part around 30 minute mark where you cut away to the guys talking startled me lol you speak really soft during the video and I had the volume up. Supposedly I have this setting on the computer to automatically adjust volume but doesn't seem to work.
I literally cannot stop laughing at your peterson voice. its perfect.
Snakes catch mice and rats, keep those populations in check, and generally won't bother you unless you bother them. Can the same be said of Snake-Oil Salesman? Exactly why you should rather have snakes than snake-oil salesmen.
Peterson is false.
What’s that classical piece towards the beginning? Thanks.
I am, of all the many many people in know, the only one whose chest hair is reminiscent of a goat's head, to the everlasting amusement of my friends (and me). But now that I have gasped upon the glory of thine bosom, I finally know that I am not alone - although your goat chest is not quite as obvious as mine. Actually, your chest looks more like an angry bull minus the horns ... or maybe a boar. Or a hellhound ... or something. Hm, I am increasingly confounded. Any interpretations? oO
Huh, apparently people attracted to men found him attractive. If I needed more confirmation that I'm not attracted to men, these comments are pretty convincing.
Way to be the Devil's advocate, or rather, actually the Supreme Overlord of the UnderWorld Himself
Part 5 reminded me of lorem ipsum. I'm not one to read philosophy, but I run into random trivia. Lorem ipsum is currently thought to be a corruption of a passage from Cicero's "On the Extreme's of Good and Evil".
Is most of Left Tube anti-state?
Timothy Stinnett Majority usually Yea, we don’t take too kindly to tankies
Danse Macabre!
Harris is fucking stupid
the video some of us deserve ty
Oh Fuck just have to convert to Islam now.
I'm too gay for this shit
Good video
Olly are you gonna mind if I jack off to this because I am hopelessly aroused by you when you're clothed. Let alone when you are nude and have beautiful makeup
Olly looking at the camera dressed a shirtless demon, causally running a snake through his fingers, and saying in a deliberately deep voice "do you care more about meeting those expectations (voice lowers in pitch) ... or about looking good?" is my everything now.
"And author of 'maps of meaning'... which is also a book" LOL
Philosophy is masturbation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weiz9wbIcGQ
Woah you got hotter
That fuckin snake curling around your neck gave me nightmares dude good vid tho
I choked laughing on the Theodore T. Talks part
Anyone feeling really gay rn
better the snake than the snake oil salesman. Love it!
Ooh Olli you're so sexy when you talk big words and wear Satan costumes ;3
Your arms probably more tired than mine after watching one of contra's videos
Oh how fun I’m going to heaven being a Muslim Trans Woman. Thank you Oliver/Lucifer.
Boy, Johnny Depp's really been on one these days...
Playing the Devil's Advocate?
"I would rather have the snake than the snake oil salesman." Well said.
Appreciate the videos, but I'm starting to feel that the constant "I'm gonna talk about Marx without actually talking about Marx in such a way as to make it hard to apply my ideas to an actual politic" is a borderline psyop. Marx is good. Just fucking say it you sarcastic British weirdo.
32:00 Oddly enough almost completely identical to the philosophy of that guy from Ecclesiastes. I remember that sticking with me as a kid, because it was such an antithesis to everything else the bible taught. And frankly, a lot more realistic.
Gawd, i'd let you fuck me dressed like the devil while discussing postmodernism, I can imagine myself cumming trapped in your claws as the ideas of Foucault on power dynamics flow from your gasping steamy mouth and your red eyes pierce my soul deconstructing me into everlasting leftist non-heaven.
I don't really get his logic of "if this nihilistic/materialistic/etc worldview is true then only power matters and that'd be terrible!" yet he claims to be a christian, which is entirely based off of obeying a higher *power* whose sole justification for holding authority is holding the biggest stick withwhich to punish you for not obeying.
So cringe
Maybe you could ask Peterson to interview on your channel and we can all see how you go ..
So what your saying is Peterson’s real philosophy is finding ways to make people who are inexperienced in education part ways with their money?
One point about hedonism that you did not bring up: it's clear that Peterson fans, like all humans, follow the pleasure principle whether or not they acknowledge it--Peterson fans, to a man [sic], always have a gleam in their eye and a smirk on their lips when they "own the SJWs." Why is Peterson so popular with these men? Because he makes them feel good! He's so delightful to those who love him that we on the left have to wear costumes and show a little skin just to generate the same hit of dopamine.
Bloody brilliant video mate, super well constructed and informative. The lucifer costume and snakes were a lovely touch too. You looked ravishing to say the least :,)
Thank you for pointing at the Patreon and PayPal prompts, and then for giving a thumbs-up to the names scrolling on the left. It definitely clued me in to the fact that you consider these to be important and good things (within the context of the video in which they are presented) and made ME feel a sense of goodness about them as well!
I also thank you for establishing hedonism as an alternative and, if you will, an antidote to the snake oil of Dr. Peterson, which in the greater cultural context seems to be nothing but venom. I had long ago decided that hedonism was the fulcrum around which the world turned, and that a good life would be easier if we all acknowledged this and embraced it--but in my depression, I had forgotten. Thank you for helping me to remember.
This was possibly the best video of yours that ive seen. Its very personal and beautifully subjective while being objective in the sense of compassion and humanity (in my opinion) and it also showcases just how crazy talented you are (at everything..)
I’m only 1:04 in and this is already the best thing on the internet. I would fuck that intro so hard I’m not even kidding, if that’s a sexual orientation I’m that now.
I would love to see you do a video about Epicurean Gravity
11:48 Season 2 of The Mighty Boosh
Little snek is cutest snek.
Its funny, you mention that postmodernism and marxism are contradictory (22min). Your entire video is a deconstruction in the post modernist sense simply critiquing every aspect of (to you) someone else's ''subjective'' truth (of which you do not share.) Whilst at the same time having absolutely no solutions proposed as counter points to anything, apart from when you start advocating for Marxism. The irony. I think part of what JP is trying to articulate here is that value structures are essential to functioning in the world, and one of his critiques is when you throw away a broader ''spiritual'' belief system and fall into the postmodern/nihilistic sphere of thinking, people tend to lean to simplistic singular axiomatic ideologies like Marxism or Capitalism to accommodate for a guiding value system. An incomplete worldview in his opinion. A Phrase pops to mind watching this video, ''It's like a termite gnawing on a temple" Theres just no utility in criticising for the sake of burning everything to the ground. criticising is a tool used to improve an all ready existing structure or usher in a new improved model. But I guess all of this is subjective if we view it through the lens of relativism. hmmm so perplexing. ;)
19:41 Who else saw "failed comedian" and thought he was going to talk about Dave Rubin?
23:00 You say "Postmoderism isn't meant to be destructive" after calling out JP for conflating PoMo with Marxism. When the REASON Hicks and JP call Postmodernism "Marxism in Disguise" is because they perceive it as destructive to "quality philosophy", and they believe it was intentionally designed to be so, by marxists to confuse intellectuals about how "objectively bad" marxism is. According to JP & co, it's a marxist tool, a marxist weapon. It obviously isn't "marxism itself", but calling it "Marxism in Disguise" is perfectly apt if you buy into the presuppositions, of PoMos destructivity, and the intent. But you make no argument! You make no argument how it's not destructive, you make no argument why it's not intentionally destructive, you make no argument why PoMo isn't an intentional subversion of intellectual standards to allow for the continued prevalence and dominance of communists in academia. No argument. You're creating a false equivalence pretending Hicks & JP are saying PoMo *IS* marxism, when that is not what they are saying, and chastise them for their supposed lack of intellectual rigor. That is dishonest. You are not dealing with their argument, you're dealing with a straw man that you yourself set up. All you're saying is "It isn't meant to be destructive" - According to whom, according to you? You didn't create PoMo. Can you read the PoMo-creators minds? If they did "mean it destructively", why wouldn't they lie about it? JP and such have concluded PoMo is an intentional attack on academic integrity, led by marxists, with fairly straightforward reasoning. And your response is basically "Nuh-huh"
@Riley Carpenter: Up there in the description: just go to PhilosopyTube’s PayPal.me web address. You can make a one time donation there. Note the default currency is in British pounds.
I enjoyed your video and presentation. I do feel you have mischaracterized many of Dr. Peterson's main points.
+F W *freeze peach They don't like actual free speach.
+Liam Boyd well she crewed this video so that might be why
You can try, but you can't beat Natalie! Good attempt tho.
So what does it say about me that I enjoy the objectively worse low-effort natural light part much more than the incredibly involved theatre part?
I sympathize a lot, however, with the rejection of a particular brand of relativism that some people employ to seem oh-so-worldly-wise, where anything's as good as anything else. No it's not, it's called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights because it's fucking universal and it's one of the great achievements of humankind, so shut up about it being imperialism. Of course, none of this is a reason to go all alt-right on anyone's ass. The truth is as always somewhere between the extremes.
All of this video is sexy, well done
Modern Capitalism and commodity fetishism is, it might be contended, precisely what fosters 'relativism'. Money renders everything - in principle - as exchangeable, and so everything is relative to the caprice of exchange...(*including belief-formation, value(s) etc.) 'Relativism is a popularised materialism ; thought gets in the way of money-making [...] The reactive modes which relativistic doctrine holds to be particular to each individual are pre-established; they are never far from the bleating of sheep, the stereotype of relativity in particular.' (Adorno, Negative Dialectics, p.36) Interesting that the so-called 'Cultural Marxists' that Peterson claims to be the peddlers of relativism, are precisely the critics of it. Adorno even went so far as to call it a 'limiting of consciousness' where 'individual consciousness is taken for the ultimate and all individual opinions are accorded equal rights, as if their were no criterion of their truth'. This 'flatly anti-intellectual posture' is one that Peterson embodies rather than critiques.
I'm trans and once when I was really dysphoric I smoked alot of weed and once it wore off I was still dysphoric but my friend cuddling me, holding my hand and stroking my head made me feel far better than the weed ever did
I've never done MDMA but sometimes actual human experiances are far better than any medication or drug ever could be
It is so tragic that Peterson appropriates Nietzsche; he is entirely AGAINST the kind of bile that he writes.
It really was a mistake of Sam Harris to ever associate with Jordan Peterson, he just makes him look bad.
It was all amazing, but the song at the end brought me _so much_ joy.
THERES A SNAKE
Why u copying contrapoints
Sees Ollie doing weird shit in the thumbnail. *Buckles my seatbelt*
9:10 Boop the Snoot? Plz?
I'm having the female equivalent of the why-boner. 3:12 It's a little confusing haha
But isn't telling us not to listen to people telling us what to do creating an infinitely regressing loop of absurdity that is... exactly the thing you were trying to tell us about?
Now that I'm healthier, why am I so turned on?
I'm a big JBP listener/appreciator and I thought this was great and advances the conversation tremendously. I wasn't very convinced by ContraPoints' video but I think that your pointing out that these fundamental binaries of life such as Ob/Sub or Order/Chaos are constantly circling and intertwined with each other, and in ways that are inconvenient to crystalized arguments incorporating them is crucial, and dare I say, O B J E C T I V E L Y true. Even though I love Peterson, I understand that he, even with all his intelligence and confidence, is just another dude with as many epistemological and perceptual blind spots as the next fella. And I'm happy that he and you and all of us are contributing little bits and pieces to this weird fucking hollow fractal puzzle we call existence and figuring it out. Good shit, cheers.
My wife yawns at aquaman but wants to drill you like an oil deposit which would potentially frustrate me if she wanted your bar-groomed uncle-bod half as much as me what's up mother fucker meet me
What does pussy worship entail? Asking for research.
Imagine a temple..
okay but why does every line in Goodbye Dr. P also apply to my ex? spooky...
I didn't know that Sexy Luciferian Book Tapping was my ASMR trigger, but DAAAAYYYYUUUUUMMMMMMM
i love u olly
5:02 Yes, yes it does. Definitely, no arguments there
Your claim that order and chaos is subjective and relative is a major stretch. A wall is objectively order. You might feel differently about it - if you feel anxiety about it then it is tyrannical order, and if you feel safe when looking at it then it is protective order. But either way, it is order. You said crossing the wall is chaos... well, if you're crossing it then its not acting as a wall anymore, is it?
If a wall can create four years of chaos, would it represent order or chaos?
You've got me on "Season 2 of The Mighty Boosh"
Nobody is gonna talk about his fail Peterson impersonation? OK. Great video nonetheless.
I miss the days where you were next to a bookshelf and just explained stuff. I appreciate your videos, but I hope you don't get swallowed up by the theatrics of this
The ContraPoints jumped out and I kind of love it !
"Down here, everyone's punishment is _bespoke_" - Satan, 2019
I might be showing off my pretentious side but i really feel like optimistic nihilism is the ultimate philosophy impossible to argue agaisnt, it has a bit of everything, hedonism, moral relativism all that. Nothing matters therefore do what you want and be happy, have no worries but still put in the effort so you can make the most of the feel good chemicals your mortal coil provides. But its still more than hedonism because death isnt bad, death is nothing and nothing is well nothing, null, not bad or good or anything at all, death is probably better for the individual over all even if it the friends and relatives are overcome with sorrow, but it ultimately doesnt matter so its just your empathy holding you back, something that wont bother you once youre gone but that you should still follow if you are in the process of building your happiness majority because it would bring down that happiness. To not be born at all is probably the best outcome because you wouldnt have any of these desires and so it would be just perfect peace but since you are alive you should try to have majority happy life so its worth it. Everything we do is to try and up our happiness, through fulfillment or distraction, etc. so every obligation, every desire, every investment. Its all about your outlook on life, we’re all hedonists at our core, its built into us. And all of this makes up optimistic nihilism, its objective that nothing matters, god has no god and therefore any goals he would set for us would have no higher meaning and would always be meaningless, death isnt bad, might even be good depending on your potencial future life but its never bad, its not on the good/bad spectrum, to die is to lose desire and therefore to become neutral and not even care about sadness or hapiness, you cease in every way so it cannot be bad for the individual only for those who wrongly interpret it on the side of the living and finally you should try to be happy whist you have those desires until you die and so you need to put in the effort.
Sexy and funny i love you :~O Also all these philosophical cults are ovcourse wrong and anti life. The only reason for any life to exist is to preserve its own genetic material as best it can , this includes humans. Any philosophy that promotes anything else is just a religion.
"Makeup and Nails Consultant: Natalie Wynn" I fucking knew it
"Turns out in order to get into heaven you have to be both Muslim and trans" HOLY SHIT, THAT'S ME!!!
What is "pet a cat when you see it on the street?" I call that grade-A pussy worship.
you look and sound SO GOOD. My Halloween costume is set for next year... can't copy that accent though god damn.
ugh! ssssssssscience. This is so smaht fucks sake.
When you said that you're the only true JBP fan in the world, were you saying that as Ollie or as Satan?
different?
Yo, are the snakes real? I was worried they might bite him or something XD
stop ripping off contrapoints
Great Video!! Thanks now I have arguments I can argue with Peterson fans around me . Appreciate your content and your sexy being Oliver ,what a hot philosophical hunky devil you are ❤️.
Still better than Dialectical Materialism
your snakes are so cute
love the face you're making in the thumbnail. it say's 'im contrapoints now, guys!' Glad you've made the /trans/ition ;)
There are some good videos on this channel, but this one's a real stinker. Especially that whole, terrible "gotcha" section starting around 25:32 There's so much unearned, self-righteous college smugness crammed into 2.5 minutes that it's physically difficult to watch, but that last bit about wanting people to "articulate clearly" "but only if you agree with him" stands out as the worst of this especially bad fanfiction JBP never argues that trying to create social change is always a bad thing, he argues against the METHODS people use to do it, and the psychological conditions that should be kept in check to prevent them from becoming corrupt based on his studies the most murderous governments of the 20th Century. For example, he states repeatedly disaster happens when people divide themselves by social identity and ideology (like in nazism and fascism as defined in the video about antifa), or categorize the general population as loosely defined oppressors and oppressed with to justify violent, murderous revolt of anyone with slightly more than you (dekulakization) His point is that regardless of the inevitable tragedy inherent to life, the best change happens when you improve your community by improving YOURSELF FIRST by your OWN DEFINITION. Fight your own demons so that your effect on the world isn't tainted by your own corruption. Learn to take care of the community around you before you tell the world what to do. Encouraging people to take f themselves is literally the least harmful advice possible fight me
...You not addressing the video or Peterson Claim. This isn't about Your not taking responsibility of yourself but who gets to choose what count as improving yourself. Every form of politics is social identity and every conflict in human history have been about an identity group vs another identity group. Peterson is part of an identity group even he doesn't acknowledge it, that is exactly what he is doing. How do you expect people to improve if they are constantly been push down? Black people don't get their right until the get-together and fight for it, Women were treated as a second class citizen until they got together and fight for it. Where is Peterson mythical western civilization without class conflict and people were free from the start to achieve any goal they wish without restriction? Because the last time I check the USA fight for their social identity against the British.
What are the snakes names?
Wow
Didn't think that gay would be contagious untill now
YOU ARE A FUCKING GENIUS. I am in no way an expert in satanic philosophy, however, in my first (and currently only) pass through the satanic bible I have found many parallels between it and the arguments presented in this video. Full disclosure I stopped halfway through the satanic bible because I was turned off by the idea of the rituals. Regardless my point is playing this video from the perspective devil, as what I'd interpret as a clever nod to satanic philosophy, was absolutely genius.
Is he fucking Contrapoints or not???
My god,
Jesus Christ, Olly. What the actual hell.
Atheists, rise to our national anthem
You should put the ending song on Soundcloud!
I watched this two times, but I find the video hard to follow. And eventhough I understand it now, I still think it would be really helpful to add some sort of summary at the end of your videos. Looked great btw!
But Lucifer is cool, why'd you have to do him like that :(
I'm ace and sometimes find sexually suggestive stuff with men uncomfortable, so I was worried I might have trouble with this video when I saw the screenshots on twitter. However, you succeed in creating a character camp enough that I didn't find him sexually threatening, which was nice for me. I'm not sure you were intending for a gay character? Maybe my sub-consious fear of sexual aggression has some internalised bi-erasure? Either way I enjoyed the video.
bro oh my god. bRo this. this is. a look oh my god oh my god
Wow, spot ON Jordan Peterson impression. Damn.
That Jordon Peterson impression was so accurate, I was so funny.
Damn i like lucifer and I don’t even believe in a religion sksjsikssksk
This entire video made the phrase "philosophy daddy" come to mind.
Hey, big fan of your content. Thanks for a small step towards taking Nietzsche and the existentialists back from the right. Lots of leftist circles and liberals have in common that they believe any philosophy of enjoyment is directly related to capitalism and right wing values. While readings of marxist literature, sociology and my usual studies are of an utmost importance towards becoming more critical and effective, Nietzsche has helped me through the toughest of times. And I am aware of his frequent outbursts of protofascism and his misogyny. But personally, the sublime within him has shun a brighter light than any materialism could ever do for me.
Wow please be shirtless more you sexy otter!
oh my gosh amazing aesthetic and the snakes??? you have yourself a new patron
Fair use, Parody isn't a thing anymore?
I swear creationists used this same twisted logic to ply their theories. They find valid holes in what we know, use those to infer we don't "really know" about X. And then slap in what about "insert crazy idea with no backing here." See 1. Is it falsifiable? 2. What is it's prediction accuracy? 3. Can anyone reproduce it? Is every pretend intellectual these days into style over substance?
Not distracted by snakes while talking - WHY
Left handed?
sneks
Oh, edgy edgy boi.
Me watching Contrapoints in her fairy outfit: This is so creative and cool. What a cool way to add visuals to, what is inherently, a lecture. Me watching Olly in his satan outfit: Oh........ oh my.
You're too good for this world.
So are you turning into ContraPoints now?
Apart from the lighting, they're pretty different. Although he's less mocking, I see a LOT of hbomberguy in him
Will you do a video on Baruch (or Benedict de) Spinoza? Nobody seems to know who he is, and this comment will probably be buried, but I'd really, REALLY like to see your take on him.
The left is getting good at memes (and it's making the right nervous)
Jesus christ, 1 minute into a video about refuting Jordan Peterson, and you have a bloke with bitch tits and his finger nails painted. FML
high-minded
My question is why do you care? Who gives a shit what hes wearing and why does someone playing a character make you say "fuck my life"? Pathetic wanker
You have attracted me as your subscriber. REJOICE!
Good video. I like Jordan Peterson but I also like good critiques of him. I want to say, though, I think that your concept of hedonism is similar to what I apply in my life, but I find Peterson's idea helpful to achieve that. That's what everyone wants to figure out, and I think one thing anti-peterson folks often overlook is that he himself often admits he's still figuring things out on a lot of questions, which is why he may seem to contradict himself. I think he is not unaware of the contradictions. Funny enough that's a common criticism toward contrapoints, who I am also a fan of, and how I found out about Peterson in the first place. It's almost like people can't stand people not having one singular answer to all life's questions.
That falsetto though!
I've been arguing for a while now; Peterson should be called the father of "postmodern conservatism". Partially because it's not nearly as bad a contradiction as "postmodern marxism" is, but mostly because it pisses lobsters right off.
why do i keep getting these wierdoes in my recommended feed.
I can see the contrapoints influence haha
Ok nice so your like if contrapoints was a guy.
This is probably one of your weakest videos yet, and I'm not saying that because you dislike Jordan Peterson. If you put half enough effort into writing your script as you do setting up lighting and doing your make up you could probably make some valid arguments. Instead you just appease to your social liberal fanbase by saying the things they need to hear and giving them fanservice by objectifying yourself, like you're just trying to imitate ContraPoint's shtick because you can't do this on your own. Amazing how you fancy yourself a socialist yet you give into this asinine YouTube cult-personality capitalism. Even more amazing that you call yourself "Philosophy" tube. This isn't a love for wisdom, just pure ideology.
+Marf forgive the joke milord, if you would prefer a diatribe to the same effect, I'll have to delegate to a braver soul.
+Nick Barker If that's all you have to say it would be better if you didn't say anything at all.
add a "scotsmen don't exist" subscript
BREAKING NEWS: SOCIALIST MAKES MONEY DOING SOCIALISM AND SO IS NOT A REAL SOCIALIST
This is good beef guys keep going
+DeoMachina "Leverages capitalism"? Is that what you call it? No he's giving in to capitalism, he's doing the bare minimum to sell you on the ideology that you already believe in to accumulate social capital that he then converts to financial capital via his Patreon. He'll even objectify himself and get catcalled from anonymous strangers on the internet if it'll turn an extra buck, or do you think he just enjoys that? Whether you think he's doing it to "maintain housing and food for themselves" is irrelevant, this is how capitalism dumbs down education for the purposes of profit. Yes, real socialists do something else, they build socialism. They educate you on the works of Marx, Engels, Kautsky, Lenin, Paul Cockshott, Huey Newton, Hal Draper etc. They educate you on how you've likely been propagandized not just by the right, but also by those who call themselves the left. They organize collectives. They strategize. They do more than just faff about on YouTube telling you about some boomer psychology teacher that nobody gives a real shit about while taking your money convincing you that you're helping their struggle. "And things must be pretty bad when I need to cite a mere dictionary" Yes, they are pretty bad, because you're appealing to definition instead of making an argument. Just like how things are pretty bad when you need to switch out the word "arguments" to "statements" to make your refutation look better. You don't need to pivot away from an argument, you can just leave it alone.
+Marf But you question the political leanings of somebody who leverages capitalism in order to maintain housing and food for themselves, as if "real" socialists do something else. I'm just using your logic here, so if what I said sounds stupid, well... And things must be pretty bad when I need to cite a mere dictionary to respond to you, but uh..the word 'refute' does actually mean 'disprove'. Can factually valid statements be disproven? Actually, let's leave that one on the table for now.
+DeoMachina I didn't at any point say that people who work for capitalists cannot call themselves socialists so I don't know why you tried to imply that I did, unless you made this comment purely to argue in bad faith and make a strawman out of what I said. "He also pays taxes in the UK, which fuel a conservative government and enable them to enact far-right policies So he's not even a liberal!" And who is saying this? Did I say this? Or is that what you're saying to me? "If the arguments weren't valid, you'd be able to refute them" No? People refute valid arguments all the time. Watch Christopher Hitchens and Michael Parenti debate the Iraq War, both make valid arguments and both refute the arguments of each other. "But you can't, can you?" I don't know, can you make a sensible comment instead of posturing like you're some teenager who's "figured out how the world really works"?
"Call yourself a socialist? Hah! I bet you WORK for a living like some capitalist DOG." Oh wow you sure got him there But wait it gets worse He also pays taxes in the UK, which fuel a conservative government and enable them to enact far-right policies So he's not even a liberal! AaaaAAAAA Here's the thing Marf If the arguments weren't valid, you'd be able to refute them But you can't, can you?
+testest I don't have a Patreon nor a profit incentive to make one that drives me to film myself half-naked whilst pandering to your progressive sensibilities, so frankly I'm not arsed what you think of me.
he strikes a balance between pretentiousness and shitposting. you, on the other hand sound like a pretentious bore.
+Peter Prime Just ask PhilosophyTube, I'm sure he knows.
How do you use many words and yet say absolutely nothing?
I really hate this style of production. The over dramatization, with the goofy costumes and lighting, just distracts from the actual ideas being discussed. Though, I did enjoy the attempt to try and make the theatricality of it into something more meaningful, with the 'epic theater' rationale.
Real snakes? Okay.
Damn, I just found this channel but bruh you looking like a snacc definitely made me subscribe. I mean... no homo.
Edit: I live in Edmonton, Alberta, where Peterson is originally from. Your accent is perfect
*Natalie Effect !*
Meh, smells like commies and degeneracy. Cool schtick I guess?
Mynd you, lions Kan be pretti seksi...
you have the dad-iest of dad bods, hot damn.
*Did you blur your nipples?*
I've watched ContraPoints too, Olly
WTF?
Waiting for yours and ContrPoints wedding.
I love your covers
This was such an excellent video. Much needed reconciliation between these two polarizing sides. I am happy that JP's misunderstandings are being put out there. I actually enjoy JP when he is not attacking the left in a cheap way.
Unsubscribed and unfollow, and block(so i cant see your shit anymore)
+LouisSC2 hes a weirdo
Why
Try 5-htp it really helps with the comdown, your welcome!
That is so sad. If I had money would give it to you. I think drank it all.
What an intellectually empty video.
Objectively this video is pretentious trying to combine show and philosophy. But, subjective to my facination of philosophy but lack of happiness and a hint to turn it around, this videos is FUCKING AWESOME GUYS WTF THIS IS ALL SO GOOD, WHY DO I LIKE THIS SO MUCH, I THINK JUST TURNED GAY FOR SOMEONE. Well played, 10/10 would share on Reddit for upvotes.
I don't need to read the comment section after this. 10/10 summary, will share on reddit
Wow! JP gives subjective interpretations and claims they are objective! He states that there are similarities in different things just to prove an argument and has personal beliefs!.. How ironic.
This is a video that definitely wasn't made to be merely glimpsed at between trying to finish school projects, but I may have done that. And am now intellectually and sexually confused.
As informative as this video is, it ultimately is just telling something that I already know which is Jordan Peterson is a f**king hypocrite. But with that being said I do think it's time to move beyond post-modernism because as much I as defend post-modernism there is a lot wrong with post-modernist thinking that are unavoidable. As long as philosophical alternatives remain insufficient or under the radar people will continue to flock to the psudeo-intellectuals like Peterson and their fascist mysticism.
If someone thinks a policeman is chaotic, then hs has to be chaotic himself, in the same way someone who lies has something to hide, I don't think that's subjective
How can I ever concentrate on your arguments when you're flaunting that hot body. It's like the perfect balance between order and chaos, fit-bod and dad-bod
Came for the philosophy, stayed for the amazing bod, became fully gay and thoroughly enjoyed the video. Subscribed
i'm now one of the many lesbians attracted to olly thorn, it finally happened!
Awesome work you gained a sub
Subjective reality supercedes objective reality, in Peterson's words. It is subjective relativism which he rebels against, not objective relativism. Objective relativism can be a symptom and a cause of subjective relativism, however. Hence the necessity of the collective internal. To some extent, all narratives are dependent upon the observer to be created. Then, the question becomes how well-constructed and substantiated said narratives are. Peterson has gone at great length to illustrate the scope and depth of the existence of these archetypes. Ideally, the stories which resonate the most become the most prominent. A voluntary system ensures this. Nihilism and postmodernism level the playing field to the extent that any ideology becomes equally palpable (apart from those they subjectively deem to be free from the harm and oppression which otherwise materializes [see:marxism]) and at that point, the most vicious will helm the charge in favor of their own ideology. The mechanism by which nihilism raises questions and causes individuals to engage in free thought are there to make people entertain the idea that society could look otherwise, all while ignoring large swathes of the way in which this society has come to pass in the first place. It's besides the point. Perceptions can change... yes... but which system of perceptions do you end up with? Postmodernism is intrinsically value-laden, and henceforth lulls the adherents into a particularly dangerous form of marxist ideology. The perceptions one receives as a consequence of following advice such as "clean your room" are necessarily different from "capitalism is built on exploitation". One produces an individual who takes the responsibility they otherwise wouldn't, while the other transmits a revolutionary ideology which ultimately renders that individual, the society and the world at large in a worse position. In particular, one must also consider the *CONTEXT* in which his work is written. Arguably, society is tipped towards unsorted revolutionaries instead of sorted maintainers. Obviously, having more sorted people would make the society in question less in need of a revolution. Individuals would be able to incrementally introduce fragments of their personal beliefs unto the world on such a scale that it serves no harm. Of course, his evaluation of society as looking this way is to some extent subjective, but only in the same way that all similar types of evaluations are. He doesn't necessarily find societal cooperation taboo. He simply states that one ought to begin with the individual and emanate outwards from there. Funnily enough, that entire snippet around 27:30 could be ripped straight out of the Nazi videos against him; seemingly then, both left and right alike seek to minimize him to be able to level the hindrances to the full expression of their infantile revolutionary instincts. Hedonism, if squirreled enough, can contain some of the benefits Peterson speaks of, but loses out on the philosophical profundity which to many is a grand motivator. I don't think the instances of strawmanning are intentional to slander Peterson; I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt. However, seldom have I found a refuter of his to be in profound understanding of his rationale.
sorry if this looks str8 to the viewers but hot DAMN
Contrapoints much?
Considering Natalie helped out with the video and did his nails. Well, dur.
Are those snakes yours, Olly? Do they have names? They're lovely!
So is your voice in the section out of costume meant to be your actual voice when you're not performing? Very different. But still cool.
Philosophy Tube album when?
Men with snakes are even better than men with dogs. Wow, you gorgeous human.
Jordan Peterson is my dad
Those are some good sneky bois
I was very confused when I saw the thumbnail, I thought it was Contrapoints because of the dramatic lighting and costume.
Theodore T. Talks
Um no it's a bad thing when people join together to control others using political means. It is objectively bad you can't vote to steal, murder, rape, or to dictate the actions of others. It is objectively immoral! Try me
If you believe in nothing you shall fall for anything
It's actually pretty objective and its called the golden rule treat others how you wish to be treated. This put to murder rape assault control over others and theaft In the category of evil and true crimes. That's not subjective at all it's a plane as day fact just like any other scientific fact. Try and challenge that it can't be do it is infallible logic
+Felix Meister lol really I'm a linguist so not only can i tell you their meaning (objective judgment not based on fillings or opinions rather on facts yes facts are real!) Subjective (judgment based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions facts don't care about these) but I can also tell you their etymology of them. So are you going to debate the facts or are you going to continue making yourself look foolish but trying to paint me as ignorant? Murder rape assault theaft and enslavement of another are objectively evil because A) no one wants these things to happen to them and B) the moment you want any of these things to happen to you that category of the action changes. Please delete or go educate yourself!
+Disposable Email yes I did or I wouldn't have commented. Can you actually debate my point or are you incapable? Rape, assault, murder, theft, and control of another is objectively wrong. There is no subjective reasoning or way around those facts. Because the moment you agree to any of these categories they cease to be in that category. Rape becomes sex, assault becomes boxing, murder becomes suicide, theaft becomes giving, and if you of your free will follow the command of another then that's still of your free will so slave becomes assistant. Refute that objective truth
Do you actually understand what objective and subjective mean?
Did you watch the video?
This was good. Thank you Oliver. I needed this more than I knew.
LIGHT YOUR BACKGROUND
The collective unconscious is a metaphysical belief that can not be proved objectively and requires a subjective interpretation to make sense. It’s a ridiculous theory that has little psychoanalytic value nor can it be measured objectively.
You can value only objective things? Many scientific theories are to be proven. Does this means they are not important? Something can be significant in many ways.
I have been avoiding watching these videos, because I absolutely do not have any time to be envious and in love with anymore people I have not met. And Yet...
OK BITCH THIS IS A FUCKING LOOK
Where can I get that chaos shirt?
awesome video man please make more.
God Damnit, here I was telling myself I was a fucking Nihilistic Hedonist with some level of irony and here you come just describing how I feel exactly. I just feel invaded.
Yeah, this is great and all but um why did you put your shirt back on? :( :3
Wow I haven’t thought about The Hoosiers in years
Philosophy tube? More like philosophy lube am I right
I came away from this video with the impression that Peterson was an atheist, but from your livestream it's clear that he's not.
ive started watching all of your videos twice after a break between, and damn does it help a lot. knowing where you're going when you start is really helpful in consolidating ideas. whenever i finish a first watch i always think "that definitely was profound but I'm not entirely sure why" and then after the second watch i think "damn, that was hella educational and i have more tools to do good thoughts with now." thanks for making me smarter Olly!
Philosophytube x contrapoints Change my mind
this video is a thirst trap
This video awakened me sexually
14:27 i never thought the word "but" could give me a reaction like the one i just had... dammit oliver
I'm a Peterson fan but this video was very funny and enjoyable and I did find Olly's delineation of the subjectivity of order and chaos to be interesting although I'd be surprised if Peterson disagreed with that claim. Regardless, thank you for the amusing video. The song was also very catchy and I look forward to future videos.
so the main point is tha nazism is just as valid and should not be questioned got it
This is great content, keep doing what you're doing :)
Is that a Mexican Black Kingsnake in the intro?
Why you so hot as Lucifer though?!
I think you're dishonest and a total sh$t; but this was very interesting and enjoyable just the same. just a quick note: there is a difference between forcing yourself into a different circumstance, perspective, whatever, and doing it to other people; I hinted at the difference, I'm sure you caught it. ETA: pretty sure you said tword the end 'everything in moderation'. It took you while to get there but it's a fine sentiment.
“Rooples Drag Race”
The dualistic asylum we are subjectively experiencing can be meaningless. How does one convince the insane that they are delusional. They have barred the door on love, and the brief moments of love are negated and interrupted by all their negative emotions. Non duality is the truth. Only love is real and meaningful, everything else is unreal and illusion. I speak as one inmate of the asylum to another. Jordan and Harris are both trying to help the inmates function better within the asylum. Nothing entirely wrong with that.
Ollie's Satan and Natalie's inner terf would be the ultimate Hot Asshole Couple.
what about bulgakov bitch
The Dark Professor
Mighty Boosh season 2 is best season.
How did I get here and what am I watching????
PURE. LOBSTER. IDEOLOGY.
More shirtless videos please
You're a crap Satan. And Satan sucks.
did this guy just break into contrapoints' place to film this video? looks like he raided her wardrobe too...
She broke into his place and redid his wardrobe. (and did his nails while he slept)
Jordan needs to reread Ernest Becker. A healthy dose of nihilism would make him less neurotic
What is this degeneracy?
Fucking hell you love yourself.
Oliver is by far one of the most original and creative youtubers yet, I like his videos so much that, sometimes, I avoid watching them on release date just so that I can do it when I'm feeling down knowing that they can cheer me up. I wish you all the best and thank you for everything.
If we just got a bunch of internet comrades, we could have more socialist music and spread it across youtube. Perhaps GETchan could get involved aswell, the original songs he got together are pretty good.
I CAN'T STAND THIS ANYMORE, THIS CREEPY FACE HAS BEEN STARING AT ME ON THE FRONT PAGE FOR FOUR DAYS NOW I HAVE TO WATCH THIS AESTHETHICALLY PLEASING AND UNSETTLING VIDEO
titties
Peterson doesn't battle a lack of values. He battle identity politics. You literally fell on your own face in the first minute. Congratulations. You failed. Miserably. Take a lap.
Dartyus Peterson does not attack Moral Relativism in an objective way. He attacks Identity Politics because it teaches people to forgo individual responsibility in favor of blaming their shortcomings or failures in life on the way society treats their group identity as a whole. I can tell that you have absorbed everything you think you know about Peterson and his views from this guy's video, and you've taken his cherry picked, weak and biased argument as a good summary of Peterson, which is isn't. And you've also taken his word that his argument against Peterson is an accurate and proficient one, which it also isn't. This is very closed minded circular thinking. And here you stand, trapped in a loop of your own ignorance. Like a goldfish swimming around a tiny bowel thinking you're in an ocean.
Okay, but like, if he does battle identity politics the way he does it is by attacking moral relativism in a seemingly objective way. This video debunks JP's argument by pointing out that it presupposes relativism and therefor must be subjective. Even if JP battles identity politics, he doesn't do that with an objective eye, no matter how much he reifies it. Did you *watch* more than the first minute?
I hope every leftist youtuber starts to wear fake nails and extravagant costumes in their philosophical mini documentaries
I’m a lesbian ..... but like .... homeboy could get it
such a contrapoints-y video, love it, subscribed!!
You're such a good good lefty boy I'm so happy we have you
me: oh! it's a live danger noodle in his hand! a moment later: oh, he has another live danger noodle! where are these danger noodles coming from??
Please put this song on Spotify
This is what happens when Contrapoints is crossed with the Burger King
you may all be here for the Oliver or the commentary. But I'm just here for the snek.
Wow!!! Just wow!! Amazing!! A great indictment of Peterson’s half baked pseudo-intellectualism. Bravo!!!
Ha! Right on time Ollie
Although I have disliked this one, I like you. I follow your videos.
When will Communist Liberals realize that their ideology leads to the destruction of all that is good and holy? When will you realize your ideology leads to a reduction of freedom and order? When will you realize cultural Marxism will never win? When will you realize that Gender roles are good and produce good societies, When will you realize that Diversity is not our strength? When will you realise that white people can also take pride in their lands and that the White genocide in South Africa must be stopped and the boers given their own white state
A wild crypto-nazi appears!
+Alan Klassen The only people who see the existence of white people as harmful are anti white cultural Marxists
What if what you see as good and holy others see as a needlessly harmful status quo? What if the things you call freedom and order in perfect harmony, others will see as subjugation and authoritarianism? Maybe our different conclusions about the world stem from a differing of foundational values? But to answer your question, when you lot actually make the case without using false equivalencies and bunk science.
Rather have the snake than the snake oil seller
Epic 0w0
Peterson is fine with relativity, just not nihilism.
I get some strong ContraPoints vibes from this one, and I love it. Olly, you handsome little freak!
The whole 'dominance hierarchy' thing the guy's peddling should make anyone stop to pause and think of what the end game of such a society would look like. The guy says it himself : the whole rationale is predicated on fucking lobster behavior. (lol) If people start behaving like animals, they'll find themselves treated as such; just by the nature of the game they are playing. There'll always be a bigger fish. It's delusions of grandeur one needs to avoid....THAT's chaos. That's having the mindset of sitting inside the event horizon of a singularity while the world wraps itself around you. You, You You You. Insanity and paranoia doesn't leave much room for respect or empathy.
what is the hedonistic rationalisation for self sacrifice? or is self sacrifice bad?
+Dartyusit cannot bring you pleasure if you are dead because of it.
A lot of people gain pleasure from self-sacrifice. People are presupposed toward duty and it naturally brings most people pleasure.
You keep misunderstanding jp.
Yes I knew you were related to Contra points! Finally a daddy to my other mom
Can't shake the feeling that Natalie has somehow possessed Olly in order to make this video
olly your voice is amazing if I were british I would apply to play in your band
Peterson: "Pet a cat when you see one in the street" Onion headline: "Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made a Great Point"
You're beautiful...as is the snake.
Learning things turns me on.
Came for the philosophy, but now I'm just aroused. Thanks for that.
Love the Jeff Goldblum shirt!!!
Life is all about moderation. Everything in moderation. That's how I life my life anyways. Sometimes it's alright to indulge too.
That was an oddly good impression of Peterson XD
"Lions and lingerie" is my new band name.
biting contrapoints hard as fuck lmao
Pussy worship!?! What is that even?
right off the bat you can see natalie wynn's influence and i'm loving it
+Riley Carpenter Paypal.me/PhilosophyTube
I watched the majority of this while shopping in the whitest, most suburban super market, and people stared at me in horror while I laughed out loud in the bulk isle. Fuck all y’all, these brazil nuts are hilarious
Between you and Natalie, Peterson is starting to seem positively erotic.
In trying really bad to mock Peterson's accent, he ridicules the Canadian's accent in attributing them to have a retarded accent...It is rather racist/nationalist.
Hot devil. Sexy .
The first time I discovered JBP I thought "this guy is more postmodern than he thinks". But yeah, I still like him, no one's perfect
Doctor P should watch this !!! anyone knows him in person; send him the link
I just realized that Jeepster has a very simplistic view of what constitutes chaos and order and what it means for how he interacts with the world. "Chaos is the domain of ignorance… order is explored territory". So anything he doesn't know about or understand is inherently chaotic? Wouldn't that immediately devolve into tribalistic thinking? "I don't know that guy over there… he's not one of us… bit chaotic." And if we're all knowledgable about different things and have different fears, etc. how do we decide what's really chaotic? Also JayPee just doesn't understand women by his own logic, but I understand women (given that I am one I'd hope), so am I really that chaotic? Or am I missing something here?
My problem with hedonism isn't about delayed gratification, it's just meaningless. It's like having a moral system where the only instruction is "do good"...okay, but how do I go about maximising pleasure? I'd also dispute that the things which bring about the most pleasure are meaningful, if the feeling of having sacrificed for duty is different from pleasure (which I think it is). More practically, I don't think our nature allows us to make proper assessments of risk and pleasure, we can try to be perfectly logical all we want but it's just not how our brains work
Is this just what we’re doing now? The whole satanist aesthetic? I’m not mad, I’m just confirming
I love you JBP voice XD
Yo, I'm getting into heaven!
When you've been obsessed with a certain dutch theme park and the first music you hear in this video is the song is the music from their haunted house attraction.
Yeeee nope, Jordan is not a good source for anything unless you want unfactual crap or if you're a trumptard moron
the fun thing about being a philosophy student at the university peterson works is listening to all my profs talk shit about him in lecture
im so turned on rn
This feels like I'm watching a ContraPoints video. Nice.
We of the Spirk Fandom do not recognize Jordon Peterson as one of ours.
This video has taught me a valuable lesson. Moral relativism does in fact lead to pussy worship.
Damnit stop making me even more attracted to Satan
Former snake dad with an incredibly important question: how many times did you have to cut a shot to clean off snake poop
As an JP fan, I like to take a moment to share with ya'll one of my favorite little points that JP has made on an earlier JRE. I forget the exact language Jordan used but he was talking about a discovery made by the computer scientists of the 1980's when they were trying to solve the "Computer Vision" problem. They discover that you can't really write a program to take can interpret the a picture because there's an infinite number of ways to describe a scene. I believe people can run into the same problem. So one person's interpretation can be different from another person's interpretation even if their describe the same scene. Here's the issue: Any person can get into an argument with another person and that argument can last an infinite amount of time because there's infinite number of ways to interpret a picture... and what is a picture... it's just a snapshot of reality. So what I'm really saying is that: an Argument is a Logic Loop. Now, the programmers will let the know you that you need an "exit statement" at the end of your logic loops and I think that's an excellent philosophy to adopt.
great video. This channel is as good as your french accent is bad ;)
in my infinitely objective opinion may i point out the pussy worship in this was insufficient?
You look actually very fuckable. You remind me of contrapoints, well like a gay spin off.
Ah shit I gotta convert to Islam real quick
I didn’t know you owned snakes! They’re very cute. What are their names? Wub!
"Your hands are not tools, they're ornaments at the end of your arms" thanks for this research.
Not sure if this is an homage or a parody of Natalie Wynn. I didn't find it very tasteful either way. I think it detracts from the otherwise good content. The fact that she didn't bother to comment tells me that she didn't appreciate the pastiche.
Um...she was the nail and makeup consultant? And they are friends in real life? Not sure why you’d think she’d hate this.
I think the take away is that objective/subjective breaks down the closer you look at it
Yep. I’ve been stuck in existential angst for the past 2 years. I wish I never clicked that Sam Harris free will video because it got me into philosophy and now after reading the majority of the most respected philosophers, life feels really dark. I don’t have a worldview anymore because none can be justified. I feel like I’m in a different reality. I love and hate philosophy.
Holy shit your voice is amazing
1:19 I'm straight 1:20 Shiiiiiiiiiit
Me thinking: I hear this Philosophy Tube guy is pretty good, and I love hearing about how much of a twat Peterson is, so I'll start with this video! 1:02 ... i have made a good choice
Hey bruh for real, how am I supposed to pay attention to what you're saying when you're looking like that? I'll hear like 5 words then drift off to a different fantasy. Anyway ---
as I started this video, my bad k-pop habit suggested 'Daddy went full Taemin' to my conscious self edit: that little 'Kirk/Spock slashfic' addition, OH YOU ♥
So Natalie and Olly will be vocals... Wait, does Harris Bomberguy play guitar?!! Have we been receiving clues of the Contra-Tube-Guy cinematic universe?!! (Hope is not strong enough a word for my hedonistic desire to see this happen) Thank you again Olly for being just what I needed on this otherwise inane day. Sincerely, a hedonist fan.
Oh shit, we ContraPoints now
oops this is my kink now
This is a genuine question in good faith. I'm a slightly right wing person but like any reasonable person I do like to take in info from the other side philosophy tube, contra points and such. I don't understand the hate toward him and his followers. Speaking for myself I would be dead without his philosophy. His philosophy certainly isn't for everyone but neither is any other. There is a strong call to simply write him off as a pseudo intellectual so should we write off all the work he has done regarding alcohol addiction or cognitive behavioral therapy? All I'm saying is I have met tons of people including lots of women and even trans folks who say he and his philosophy of life are the only reason they are still alive. Hes also no enemy of the left he often talks about how the society needs the left to point out and fix the problems within society, yet he gets accused of simply wanting to maintain status quo. He gets labeled a racist despite the fact he has done TONS of work within the native community in western Canada and as such is highly respected in the native community here ( hes an honorary member of a couple of tribes and that's no easy task). I get disagreeing with him hes a conservative guy if you are a more liberal person you will likely disagree with a lot of his beliefs. I disagree with philosophy tube an most everything that being said if someone told me how his philosophy helped them get out of depression and improve their life I would not discourage them from pursuing that way of thinking. I just don't get the hate toward the people who's life has been improved by him. JP Fan" I was suicidal and depressed and now i'm not" JP Critic " lol you loser you need a lobster daddy to tell you how to live you are a weak loser" As a side note on his politics he is from Alberta from what I have seen of the world I think Alberta is likely the most conservative part of the western world. This was a ramble I know but I just don't understand the hate. Maybe it's just a response to the more toxic JP fans being dicks? I don't know.
+1999 I don't think a lot of his supporters do that. The man has a huge following of course he has a few of those types in his audience. If I make critical statements about a sports team I will be flooded with fervent sports team zealots. He has said many times he could be wrong about things and acknowledges very openly there are many other legitimate philosophies that can lead you to be a happy productive person. He regularly goes on about the need for the left to not only exist but to be in power as often as the right. I can only address your second point anecdotally. I am from a very christian backround in the most christian part of my country and Jordan's thoughts on Christianity are not uncommon among Christians. Very few Christians take a literal reading of the bible. There a Christians who attend church and go to bible study that don't think Jesus was a real person who existed, but find his story "true" in that it provides the best framework for a good life. More and more christians these days have a more Buddhist type view of the religion. But the fundamentalist types you are talking about hate him. Like absolutely hate the dude loads of fundamentalist Christians think he is literally antichrist. The point with Sam Harris was True ceases to be true if there are no humans to make it true. Sam Harris believes truth transcends our existence. I think both have a very strong case for why they are correct and it would be pretty arrogant to claim there is an obvious answer for what "the truth" is. I line up more with Sam but to play devils advocate with the nuke. If the math and theory behind the H-Bomb are "true" h bombs will work and they do so we can say it's true. Now if we drop all the bombs and we wipe out life on earth that theory and that math is now just nothing it is no longer true because it no longer exists. If your wife cheats and you kill yourself. You kill yourself you no longer exist. How do you cheat on a person if that person does not exist? To you at least (the no longer existing person) It would not be true that she cheated. Again though I tend to lean more to your side on that and over the 15 or so hours those two have spent on truth they are both willing to admit the other could be right. The debate those two have had has been going on for a few thousand years. Have you ever done Psychedelics? And if so you really can't see how they might make someone more inclined to believe in things outside of our sensory ability? I think the man has saved countless lives. He is of course not above criticism but there seems a willing blindness to any of the good he has done. His work on suicidal ideation alone is incredible not to mention pretty much all the data on alcohol addiction we have comes from him. I think CBT and DBT are both really good things and we are all luck he (along with others) did what they did. If you ever go to a speaking event of his and start talking to folks you will hear a lot of "I was going to kill myself but now my life is good". It's also a pretty diverse range of folks from all walks of life and all sorts of political leanings. The mans been a rockstar psychologist for 20 years now and his following is overwhelmingly non political but "I don't like his stance on compelled pronoun use so everything he has to say should be disregarded outright! And anyone who gains anything from his philosophy is evil or stupid!"
fairs89 If Jordan Peterson’s philosophy has improved your life then I’m happy for you. Sadly, a lot of his supporters don’t share your nuanced view. They talk about his philosophy as if it’s some objective truth and then they use that pedestal to shit on things like Marxism, postmodernism, etc..., while failing to realize that Jordan’s philosophy is just as subjective and arbitrary as the others. Another problem I have with him is that he’s very dishonest when it comes to his religious views. A lot of his Christian audience is under the illusion that he actually believes in god and therefor they use it as a sort of “hey look this intellectual is Christian too! Therefor it must be rational!” When in reality whenever Jordan is pressed on whether or not he believes in god he responds by saying “I act as if god exists.” Or if you ask if he believes that Jesus was raised from the dead he says “I can’t answer that question.” He’s a closet atheist. And holy fucking shit the way he changes the common meaning of words is annoying as hell. In a discussion with Sam Harris he said that his definition of truth is “that which promotes human survival”. So if the formula for the atomic bomb ended up wiping out humanity Jordan claims that therefor the formula wouldn’t be true. That definition of truth leads to absurd conclusions like for example if your wife cheats on you and then you commit suicide, then it wouldn’t be true that she cheated on you since it resulted in your death. He also misrepresents science. In his discussion with Matt Dillahunty he tried to claim that psychedelic mushrooms were evidence of the supernatural and he cited a study which didn’t even support that conclusion. Just annoying things like that. I could go on for hours.
6:18 thank me later
You can argue the whole way down to everything being relative because we've got subjective experiences on those objective facts and that you can't prove that how we see blue really is the same, but it doesn't make it useful to define things as such when we can't even agree that the sky is blue. There's also how objectivity can get us stricter definitions to things if we want. Blue doesn't have to be simply vague consensus: it can be the limited area on a spectrometer which doesn't rely on shared experience, but the tool measuring it. More importantly: the definitions we choose don't have to be strict: they have to be useful. Which is why no one uses the exact emission values of matter, because we'd have to whip a spectrometer out every time we'd discuss it. And generally generalities are more useful than broader, vaguer interpretations. And that moves the scale towards objectivity. Which is why I don't approve of the early implied premise of the objective/subjective dichotomy being binary, and if you can reduce something to being subjective - and boy, can you, ever - then there's no point in trying to move the needle. I'll just argue that global starvation, genocide and extinction aren't bad because they're experienced subjectively, because you literally can't prove me wrong with the logic you applied.
No lobsters? Am disappointed.
On the topic of wearing veils, technically everyone makes their decision willingly, otherwise they'd make a different decision. So how much disincentivization is required before you'd consider it unwilling? Not when an entire culture has written it down as law and enact it, huh?
Dat Danse Macabre
This video is propaganda.
you have very odd nipples.
I hear that same tune used in The Arcana oh boy oh boy
Love the song
Like many criticisms of Jordan Peterson's philosophy, this video misses the mark and argues against an idea which is not representative of Peterson's actual stance. To put it simply, you vastly overrate the importance of objective thinking (and anti-relativism) in Peterson's ideology. Relativism is not one of the great demons he rails against. In fact, since Peterson is an existentialist, it can be said that he is a highly subjective thinker. If you want to quickly understand why he is not as anti-relativist as you make him out to be, watch his live response to William Lane Craig, who tried to rebuke him for being relativistic. Peterson acknowledges that religious truths might not be objective, and does so with only minor resistance. However, like many other videos on left youtube, I unfortunately get the sense that this video was used more as a reason to dress up, than to give a precise criticism of Peterson's beliefs.
Fuck Yeah.
Fantastic work, Olly. Informative as always with just a *pinch* of philosophical sass. All with a Contra-esque flair to boot. Love it!
The most vile part of Peterson's philosophy, from a theologian's perspective, is that he doesn't seem to actually believe Christian dogma. He reduces it to a tool for getting along in the world, when the whole point of the Cross is that followers of Jesus ~cannot~ "get along" in this world. Their citizenship is in another world incompatible with the injustice and mercilessness of this world. So the world kills them, and Christians rejoice when that happens.
The second the intro ended first thing I noticed was the snake and went "aw it's plastic..." Then the little guy moved! I love snakes and am glad to see you taking the Satan look to eleven.
Those snakes did great for the camera! I wonder if there were a lot of takes involved. I'm trying to concentrate on the philosophy but I get easily distracted by animals. And Ollie, of course, but that's normal for this channel.
monkey brain: wow what a fascinating analysis of the way Peterson interacts with the concepts of subjectivity and objectivity in relation to his preconceived viewpoint and his methods of perpetuating it human brain: oooo snek :))
“Maximizing your own rational self-interest with respect to happiness”. This smells a lot like Ayn Rand.
“turns out to get into heaven you have to be both muslim and trans” so about that whole “no gods no masters” thing...
To really get at Peterson's ideas, I think a more comprehensive exploration of Nietzsche's moral genealogy is necessary. Peterson's reading is clearly unfaithful, and I'm sure you have a much more thorough understanding of his work yourself than what you've delivered on here, but precision is key, I think.
"Jordan Peterson, standing up for the rights of Online Gamers" wtf? when did this happen? did it happen? as im saying this a giant sentient fedora has materialized in my room and it assures me it did happen
Sorry I'm trying to pay attention and learn about philosophy but I'm distracted by how hot Lucifer is as usual.
Every time you mispronounced Camus I shivered and passed out.
God-damned! This channel deserves some of my money. I hope he spends it on Molly.
Moral relativism is what Christian Apologetics use to explain why Yahweh embraced slavery and little children as war plunder/whores. Oh what a tangle web we weave . . .
Know what, as a Muslim I'm glad you actually voiced the one thing that's always pissed me off whenever 'smart' people talk down to me about religion: 'I know better than you about your own religion OR I know what's good for you, which your religion isn't (same shit, different flavour as far as I'm concerned).' AND I'M A DUDE!
Contrapoints? Is that you?
Disliked at bullshit about defending veils. Yes sure, they wear them completely volontarly, and if they dared refuse to wear them they would be "brough in order" by their "caring family".
I wanna see a video of JP watching this video
with the little i know of JP i thought his life rules made sense to a certain degree but not for everyone. his philosophy is also a bit condescending and judgmental. i feel like he's good at cherry picking bits of science and psychology to fit his ideas, and pretty good in debates deflecting the criticism while staying calm - which drives mad the people he dismisses as wrong. an unpleasant man who takes himself too seriously altogether.
You should try to watch him yourself without going in with the preconceived notion that he's a smart ass. He does teach some valuable lessons in his lessons.
Your arguments make sense for the most part, but there are parts where I feel disagreement. I just don't know how to articulate them.
Half the comments I've seen are calling you the male Contrapoints. You've made it pal *high five*
I want to see this character in Tekken 7's 2nd season pass.
What's the font at 6:37? Thanks.
Youtube recommended this video to me and I was so confused for a good 5 second about what the hell happened to Natalie, then I realized that this is not Contrapoints...
Jordan Peterson is so full of it.
the piano piece about 30 min in sounds alot like don't go chasing waterfalls... great video just thought that was funny.
Lol! When did you become the male Contrapoints?
Reminds me of contrapoints and I love it
Channeling some Michel Onfray, I see #hedonism
This video is so @ContraPoints
hello contrapoints
One of the best vids on "the Dr" I spent the whole first 20 thinking yeah all well and good but this is just a charlatan selling modern day elixirs then you flip reversed it and made that point. Bravo, be able to "destroy" him logically if needed but sometimes you just have call him out for the fraud he is.
I'm sorry to bring this up after all the effort you put into this video but I think you might be conflating terms on this one. Relativism and Postmodernism have a few different meanings when it comes to art and philosophy. I believe what Peterson is talking about is moral relativism which is different than simply perception and your border example. Moral relativism is more along the lines of Slytherin's motto "Those cunning folk use any means, To achieve their ends." He's referring to those political movements which do anything to achieve a utopian ideal which may cost the lives of millions (the downfall of both Nazism and the USSR). In Postmodernism I think he means rejecting most catagorization and science itself as a useful means of perceiving data in the world. You use the example in meta-theatre or comedy which is basically deconstruction of the genre or medium. While those two concepts are related one is useful for expression and analysis the other is usually unhelpful or sometimes disastrous. For example what good is getting rid of established engineering principles when your only job is to build a 747 that won't immediately crash.
I thought I was straight! Damn you Oliver!
Oh hey Contrapoints is rubbing off.
THANK YOU for pointing to the critical difference between Christian belief and Peterson's race-war theory.
Great Movie as usual, comrade!
Your Peterson impression is spot on oh my days
bro you try really hard nice
Whose precious noodle did you borrow? What a cuddly baby. Devil neck warm, feel good Edit: or is it Your baby danger noodle!? Even better
Soooo the final meaning of life is to indulge in whatever gives you pleasure until you kill yourself... Cool
Steven Hacks and Ham Sarris are not philosophers.
For a moment I thought you were doing a Zarathustra-in-Hell performance piece - but there's no eagle, only a snake.
I'm worried that most Lefties/Progressives/Liberals seem to be falling behind Conservatives in how they approach their audience. It's pretty obvious to me that long-form discussion is the future and it's being discussed almost exclusively on one side. The only exception I can find is Russell Brand. In other words, what I'm saying is the only difference between how you and Sargon of Akkad (although on polar opposite ends of the spectrum) approach content is that you tend to be slightly more theatrical. I think it is more substantive to have discussions the way that Joe Rogan, Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson do than through a comedic, entertainment lens that YouTubers and late-night comedians use. I would like to see you sit down opposite of Jordan Peterson for 1-2 hours to have a respectful conversation to see how it falls out.
I don't think he'd want me to, as it would break his own rule 'Tell the truth, or at least don't lie,' by which he means be true to yourself more than literally only speak true things. I couldn't in good conscience shake his hand or sit respectfully with him because of his repeated erasure of trans people's agency and his contributions to discourses about them that gets them killed; it would be dishonest of me to pretend like that doesn't matter. Of course if he ever faced up to the harm he's done in that regard, then I'd see, but right now, no.
Even as a pussyworshipping marxo-modernist myself this still gets a dislike from me. It doesn't say anything that hasn't already been said (and said better) and for the most part it seems as though Olly is just para-baiting his audience.
More people need to take off their tops and be inspired by Contrapoints
"ex software salesman" lmao i love it
(Pst, your Contrapoints is showing...)
Like, wasn’t the first thing they did after eating the apple was put on clothes? I mean, I’m proud of my chest hair too but I’m pretty sure the devil would be super into fashion. Seems up his alley.
usual fashionable socialist nonsense, all style no substance
I clicked on this because I thought it was a contrapoints video.
An issue I have with most people who discus philosophy, ethics, religion, etc, is that they seem to either be not very good people, not very functional people, or both. Why should I consider Natalie, who has more issues than a bag of cats, who uses ideas from Marx, a useless asshole, on issues of politics? If you don't have your own shit together, why should I trust your ideas of how we should get our shit together. My neighbor doesn't know much, but her life is consistently not a dumpster fire and she's a good person. That seems a better source one ideas for organizing society.
no video is worth having a snake in my neck...
Been waiting for someone to make this exact critique of Peterson. Was a big fan of his for a while (still am just in a different way) until I slowly came to many of the same conclusions you outlined in this video. Good shit.
This season of Lucifer is weirdly educational.
To be fair, "Is pepsi okay?" is a really loaded question.
Healthy, fleshy, strong, masculine voluptuousness. An ideal male body. Delicious.
Is the snake friendly?
Your Canadian accent was so good, I actually mistook you for PM Justin Trudeau.
LOVED how you’re still the Devil even when you’re in front of the bookcase
The fact that a sentence about an objective moral or state of being is only relative due to the English language. "John is healthy." due to the English language this can refer to a great number of things but that doesn't mean that John doesn't have homeostasis or that John is without pain or that John has, in fact, obtained a certain set of conditions that were predetermined. Your argument against their metaphysical systems of beliefe has been epistemological. If you want new terms or for them to be defined better that is fine. However, it doesn't make their arguments any less true. Granted I haven't done as much research into these people claiming objective morality and so I cannot make a determination either way. I'm simply pointing out that thus far, I've watched to 12:49, you've made an argument that a metaphysical claim is untrue due to the limitations of the English language. While also saying that these very words you are objecting to are useful. If the words are useful then the philosophy that uses them has the potential to be useful. I won't say that such philosophies are useful as not every philosophy that has epistemological usefulness has metaphysical usefulness is useful and again because I haven't studied the philosophies in question.
I do have to retract. The remainder of the video addressed every one of my concerns. Took a bit of patience but overall an excellent critique of this man that my friends see as messianic.
I can't stop laughing at your impersonation of Peterson's speech. I just can't.
I've watched this video a few times and I like the section on hedonism less each time. I'm on board most of the way through, but I don't think you deal very seriously with the "hedonism can justify immorality" point. You say, of Camus inducing his wife to attempt suicide, that "this illustrates a far stronger objection to hedonism: sometimes it just doesn't work" and it gave me real whiplash because it really seems like the strongest objection to hedonism you could derive from that example is still "in the pursuit of your own pleasure, you could hurt other people". Also, I see how hedonism /can/ be a philosophy that promotes the pursuit of justice, if you take pleasure in fighting for justice in solidarity with others, but if you don't currently take pleasure in fighting for justice in solidarity with others, I don't see how hedonism gets you to the pursuit of justice without reference to a standard beyond your own pleasure. No less than Peterson clearly prefers some sources of meaning to others, you clearly prefer that people seek certain kinds of pleasure, like the pleasure in pursuing justice. But how do you persuade anyone that they /ought/ to pursue justice and what forms of justice they /should/ seek without appealing to a separate moral standard? Either you can't, in which case you can't really think about or change your values, or there remains some external and putatively correct standard that we should presumably use as the basis for determining right action, rather than hedonism. Also also, looking forward to further covers from The Trick to Life in your next Brexit video ("Worried About May"), Cosmonaut II ("A Sadness Runs Through Him") and the failure of the criminal justice system in the aftermath of the financial crisis ("Cops and Robbers").
*reading about Nietzche* "The Death of God" ooooooh! "The Gay Science" ooooooooooooooooh! *actually reading Nietzche* awwwww
You are a genius olly ! I envy you for being so intelligent , funny and creative !
Your definition of hedonism sounds like epicurianism
Drinking game : drink a shot everytime you have to pause the video and laugh
Not sure if more jealous of Olly's brilliance or those sneaks...
mmmm the male version of ContraPoints
Interesting video, 3rd best critique of Jbp I've seen but still has several flaws.
Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving, and revolving at 900 miles an hour...
Great video and editing. You looked cool af in that purple light. My major criticism is with your Peterson impression. The voice is perfect, but your inflection, pace, and sense of ego are completely off. You could be a true ground-breaker with your impression if you really put effort into these aspects.
I don't care about Peterson, Politics or any of the shit you talked about. But this video was trippy asf and I loved it
Wait, you're not Contra.
FUCK YEAH I'M GOING TO HEAVEN!!!!
The idea that answer to the question of meaning of life is hedonism leaves me very sad and empty. I really want to be there something more to it...
I lost my faith a few years ago, and was also struggling with the possibility of hedonism being a true goal in life, until I started thinking of it this way: the body experiences pain because we evolved that response to stimuli as a warning that death is possible if something isn't done to *stop* said pain...whether that's taking our hand off the stovetop, or seeking out medicine to stop the discomfort of sickness. So, in a way, pleasure, as the opposite of pain, could be seen as life-affirming...even as a birth right. And, experiencing pleasure is good, but *also* good is trying to create a world in which the most amount of people possible can experience whatever victimless pleasure they seek out/consent to....which would include the well-being and granted agency of those people, since great mental pain can be experienced when someone is oppressed, abused, or otherwise denied healthy self-expression or freedoms.
I love that you put bibliography, not many people do that when they make some political/philosophical claims. I guess my gigantic list TORead.txt will get longer again...
26:20 is the only part of the video I disagreed with he isn't trans rights he is against the hindrance on the right to freedom of speech
Im confused, Philosophy Tube. I like your videos, but are ypu suggesting that Jordan Peterson was wrong for claiming that people shouldnt be forced to speak a certain way under the threat of legal sanctions. I would certainly use someones preferred pronoun myself, but I would bever agree with using violence and force to coerce other into speaking a certain way.
I really enjoyed this video... I have only seen about a half dozen JP vids and figured him for a power-worshiper. I have to say that I think you are wrong about life being meaningless... it isn't. That's the whole point of consciousness! I hate to cite a mid-westerner when I myself am a mid-westerner (no I don't), but ... Galapagos, by Kurt Vonnegut.
Absolutely support the distinctly thotty direction this channel is taking but that jordan peterson impression when you read the quotes STOLE THE SHOW
I keep scrolling down and wanting to like it but I already did so I have to consciously stop myself from accidentally unliking it
"Makeup& Nails Consultant: Natalie Wynn" -- of course. I mean...who else?
Nice video Contrapoints.
Can someone give me the title of the book that has the words "make" and "right" that Olly messed with? I can't see the title and it's not in the description.
+W. G. Kay thank you and yes.
Layla Williams If you’re talking about the bit I think you are, it’s “Why Marx was Right” by Terry Eagleton (that’s why Olly moves it when he’s talking about Marx)
only muslim transpeople in hell?????? WHY ART THOU DISCRIMINATING
Is your question a joke or genuine?
+Jelle Hondelink ok,same thing in reverse then.
Phobe Laxu watch again, he said there are only muslim trans people in heaven, not hell
Don't mind me, I'll just be fanning myself in the corner for...absolutely no reason. None at all. Nope. ....god Oli is hot.
that dad bod tho
Too distracted to listen..
I think I have a very serious Satan/demon fetish
I gotta say Olly, seeing you shirtless is making me feel some feelings. I promise I'll pay attention to what you're actually saying from now on
Please date me
Its not his snakes he just borrowed them
"Makeup & Nails Consultant: Natalie Wynn"
+1999 Have you tried Zen?
There's playing Devil's advocate, and then there's that astounding bravery necessary to properly play the Devil in order to unmask a powerful fraud. You have my undying support and the meager 2$ a month i can provide. I've also shared this across ALL the Political channels in my Discord servers list, as-well as with a few friends over PM... and i honestly hope more people discover your amazing talent and the quality, thought-provoking work you do on this channel.
This video was boring as shit. most exciting part was the snakes. i wanted to see one of them bite the shit out of you, which i feel bad about, but not much
im almost sure he and natalie have already had/have a thing
you gotta work out more Lucifer
Fantastic
Here's a comment I deleted but shouldn't have. It's wrong to delete comments when others have responded. (copy and pasted without alteration) Highlighted comment Ex Veritas 18 hours ago Don't underestimate the power of objectivity. It is ALL facts. Whether one understands the world accurately or not, we proceed only on what we believe to be the truth. So if we're wrong about our facts, then we are flying blind, and there is nothing virtuous about that. It is reckless to make up a 'story' to solve the ignorance problem. We have intuition and it works pretty well, but look closely and you will see it is rigidly deterministic. Everything is objective - get better facts and have a better life. Acceptance of, 'objectivity' induced nihilism (a neutral state BTW) is nirvana. federico amadeo 18 hours ago Listing facts of a given issue or scenario doesn't give you a meaningful understanding of it. The sense of something relies on articulating the facts: which are important, whcih are completely superfulous, which are more imortant than others, how they relate to eachother and why the preceding calls are made. All of this is an intellectual exercise and, as such, lends itself to critical scrutiny: facts are only meaningful within a certain theoretical framework of which there are different kinds that can compete with eachother. There's no "objectivity" outside of that. That's why "stories" become relevant. Read more Ex Veritas 18 hours ago @federico amadeo Nobody is in control in any way... so how are our stories anything other that objective facts fed to us by nature, that we become aware of post-hoc? federico amadeo 17 hours ago @Ex Veritas I'm stuck in your premise... why do you mean "nobody is in control"? ThreadbareStudios 17 hours ago I disagree. Even if all things can be objectively described, our decisions to act on those objective conditions rely on our own subjective understanding of them. Humans require prescriptive premises, or 'should' statements, to act. I can organize a completely logical array of objective premises, but even that would be subjective as I chose how to arrange them. Ex Veritas 16 hours ago @federico amadeo Everything is deterministic - no free-will - objective existence. federico amadeo 15 hours ago @Ex Veritas Firstly, I never accepted the premise that determinism wins the debate. Presenting your stance on the matter as if it were a settled issue begs the question. Secondly, that discussion, in any case, is 100% tangential to what we're talking about. What sort of meaning we assign to the world (whether or not it's "objective") has fuck all to do with whether or not we have free will. Ex Veritas 14 hours ago @federico amadeo Well, I gave my position and premises. We can talk about pragmatism, but I think it takes is away from the truth which is in this moment and nowhere else. I'm too far down this road to talk about stories. They're a land of confusion. Comprehensibility and simplicity are better than 'meaning'. Common animals get along fine without meaning. I'm not a philosopher, but an artist looking for truth, and not of particularly high intelligence. More fruitful debates might be found with respected public intellectuals such a Dr. Peterson. Ex Veritas 14 hours ago @federico amadeo I'm going to think about this. I process information slowly. Perhaps I'm limited in my beliefs and could benefit from clearer understanding. Thanks federico amadeo 14 hours ago @Ex Veritas I'm baffled that the word "meaning" throws you off (and even more so that you put it at odds with "comprehensibility" and "simplicity"). I'm just talking about how we achieve understanding (i.e. grasp the meaning of something). Ex Veritas 13 hours ago @federico amadeo Building a house is comprehensible. The 'culture war' is 'meaningful' federico amadeo 13 hours ago @Ex Veritas I don't know what you're saying, bu that's not the way I've been using the word. Ex Veritas 11 minutes ago @ThreadbareStudios We derive our values from facts, not the other way around. 'Intuition' is the all the facts we've accumulated guiding us pre-consciously. 'Should' is informed by the facts. Subjective experience is a perpetual post-hoc rationalization for why we do what we do; an illusion of agency and control. There is nothing morally important about making a distinction between objective and subjective decision making. We are objects navigating objects, our values should follow quite naturally.
Love you snek, is it your pet?
I didn't finish the video at this point, considering most of my ideas with this guy come from articles online, including from him. I'm at 18:00 now, but I thought I'd type down some of my thoughts already to get this thing around. The thing about Peterson's idea of order and chaos is that these are just two sides of the same coin. The truth is that one cannot exist without the other. Human beings will always crave both in their lives in some kind of form. Order is needed to be able to find a sense of commitment, purpose, drive, safety and direction in life. Chaos is needed is to be able to find some kind of wonder, adventure, creativity, change, serendipity and even a sense of open-mindedness in life. The thing is. . . that too much order will always lead to chaos in the end. Give people too little freedom, and naturally, they end up rebelling against you. Give people too much chaos, and naturally they'll end up forcing you to adapt to the status quo. If anything, it does remind me of one of the 48 Laws of Power. Some might prefer one end of the spectrum really, but no one goes through their life not keeping certain beliefs and also never learning new ones. That it's best to actually bring change by adding some sense of familiarity into people's lives, and in reverse, that it's best to keep some traditions by adapting it to the modern age. Just as we manage to celebrate Christmas or Halloween differently before, with all the gifts of TV, the internet and technology in general. It's a misunderstanding in the belief that order and chaos are done for its own sake. If anything, order and chaos is actually based on the simple human need for happiness. If you bring the philosophical ideas of a sense of purpose such as from existentialism or absurdism (The belief that the purpose of life is what you make it and that there is no purpose, but it's still worth it anyway) is that whether you're religious or atheistic, it still matters. If there is no God, then you can find some sense of purpose even when there is no set purpose given for everyone. And for theists, why does God not just keep all of us in Heaven? Because essentially, we need some sense of chaos in our lives. Because in a realm where everything is perfect, nothing ever changes. And humanity can never be satisfied with a place like that.
you and @contrapoints should make a porn
Your “summary” of Sam Harris’ response was SO INCREDIBLY DISHONEST AND MANIPULATIVE.
Awesome video, i've listened to a lot of Peterson and he has a lot of good idea's. Although I disagree that life is ultimately meaningless and prefer to attempt to follow Stoicism.
Camus is the only philosopher who I agree with more often than not and he lays out his ideas in a much simpler, more understandable fashion. I think some philosophers in academia don't actually want to be understood just so they can bend their ideas (or have others do that for them) to whatever crowd they're trying to play. That and to just seem smart and self gratify. Because all philosophy is just white guys jerking off :)
Is this contra points?
No idea what's going on. I just stayed for the pussy worship.
I'm a huge Moorcock fan and he uses ideas of "Law" and "Chaos" as a metaphysical system. Akin to ideas of Order and Chaos like Peterson in name but so damn different. Moorcock also has rad politics...
what is your neck noodle's name?
Contrapoints is proud.
Is his voice pitched up slightly in part of the video? Is that a brechtian technique, making the viewer conscious of the "video-ness" of the video?
“Ex software salesman, Stefan Molyneux” lol, shaaaaade I finally had 40 mins to watch this and it did NOT disappoint!!
Yo why'd you say "neuroscientist Sam Harris" tho
reminds me of that bright eyes lyric 'and if you swear that theres no truth and who cares, how come you say it like you're right?'
so ...maybe this is because i'm from a culture that isn't predominantly protestant but to me most of that sounds like typical protestant moralism but without the believing in jesus and god part? i think a lot of atheists have this really reductive idea that 'religion = believing in a literal sky dad' and they don't get that most of what makes christianity a thing is not about that. so they keep trashing the whole concept of religion while still acting just like your typical protestant christian but they take these oddly puritan and calvinist values and use scientific language to mold it into something that looks separate from religion. (that's how i see it at least). ps: tenchi in tokyo is obviously the superior tenchi series and if you don't agree you can't be a true tenchi fan.
two things I noticed: -Peterson has frequently addressed the relationship between Marxism and postmodernism and talked about how he's aware they theoretically couldn't work together. I believe his stance was that he merely observes that most people who align with a neo-Marxist philosophy also believe in postmodern ideas and don't really try to resolve that tension. -From what I understand Peterson doesn't really have a problem with groups of people believing and defending the same set of ideas, his criticism is aimed at those who act as if its existence and preservation is more important than the individuals making up that group.
Oh my god! This is the first video of yours I've seen, and it's amazing! Excellent work!!
Great video. I think you could have dumb it down a notch though to speak to a broader audience. (maybe because English is not my first language) I got lost a little bit. I despise Peterson, so I'm glad to find people out there who counter him. But I feel like the ones who follow him would be as lost as me when watching a video as smart as this one.
You nailed something.
Isnt the whole cluster thing just Schema Theory?
"And every single time I would rather have the snake than the snake oil salesmen." Epic!!
Those cheekbones - do you watch you some SailorJ?! :)
I think I'd listen to a lot more audiobooks if Olly was the one reading them
Could someone explain the need of costumes? I find them confusing and distracting. Is it a sort of clickbait?
As a non-native English speaker and (most likely) heterosexual girl I have to admit I had rough time keeping up with a train of your thought. I was constantly distracted by your seductive... eh... language and smooth baritone philosophy and... and your snakes. Gosh, i'm going to hell, aren't i? Anyway, my point still stands. Sometimes a message might get lost between feathers, lighting and langue difficile. Please, don't forget you have an international audience. Swear to God, I've lost about 50% of what you were saying because my brain wad switched off by all of the smarty-smart words and I was just drooling over your hands and nails for the rest of the video. Talking about hedonism
Peterson still can't admit that he lied about the contents of C-16 despite overwhelming evidence and even a statement from the people who made it happen. What exactly could any of us achieve by talking to him? There is nothing to gain from debating with people who do not wish to actually arrive at a solution and who cannot admit fault. Rogan, Harris and Peterson have all associated with violent extremists and nobody with a conscience should afford them any credit by treating them as peers.
+Eric Taysom If it is logically invalid, it does not work by definition. You say you have neither the time nor ability to judge ideas on their own merits. By your own admission, you're unable to work out the correct path to take in life. That's something you admitted to me. I am extremely skeptical that marxists have a substantial effect on your community, given how small of a minority they are and that their institutional power is zero. At the risk of sounding harsh, your "I only believe things if people I like say them" maxim is not something any healthy adult should live by.
Whether it is logically invalid or not doesn't much matter. What matters is if it works, and it mostly does. People I want to be like have ideas I want. People I don't want to be like have ideas I don't want. I have neither the time nor, to be honest, the ability to understand the logically merits of all ideas. I can't afford to check out every idea someone puts forward and weight on its own merits. At some point I have to trust a person and move ahead using ideas they suggest which I don't fully understand. I don't like marxism. I have issues with the ideas, but my main issues are with marxists. I don't like them. I don't like their affect on my community. If your idea attracts and is upheld by people I don't want to be around. I don't like your idea, regardless of its logic. To use a simple example, as you did. There's something wrong with my house. I know it. You know it. Being a licensed plumber won't change my house, but it would definitely change whether I would let you disassemble my pipes to fix the problem. It affects my trust in you. And if you are telling me how to fix my house, my trust matters. To summerize: Ideas only exist insofar as our actions make them exist. The personal qualities of a person are the rubric by which the ideas of that person are judged.
This is logically invalid, and I will explain why. If I said something simple like "There's something wrong with that bus", would it matter if I knew how to drive or not? Does my ability to operate a vehicle change the physical condition of other vehicles on the road? Would the bus suddenly change if I got a license? Of course not. My own personal qualities have nothing to do with it. Was Marx really a useless asshole? He had a job, he raised a family, is that dysfunctional? What do you need to do to be considered functional? Likewise, Natalie makes a living by writing, filming and editing videos. Is...that a problem? She's obviously taking care of herself, what is it you expect of people that they apparently lack? To summarise: An idea is not good or bad because of the personal qualities of the person saying it.
Lmao people are coerced into “being straight” in many many countries!??? I’ve literally never seen anyone be coerced into using the correct pronoun! I hate how white men have had the control over how other people perceive the world and suddenly when folks who needa take space are taking the space and demanding to break the norm they’re like “omg I’m coerced” stfu
+Orb BiTe yes, i know. faux-shakespearean = fake olde englishe
+Phobe Laxu im 16 and from poland so i dont even know what faux-shakespearean is, but philosophy tube made that joke because both muslims and trans people are often discriminated against and because only very little muslims are trans and vice versa, so only very few people go to heaven.
+Orb BiTe i don't normally use faux-shakesperian when i speak
reification+Master Adjuster
19:00 "His attenpt to find meaning in life fails" Checkmate. But now after I watched the whole video you seem to object to the idea that there is meaning in life. If you aren't open to another dimension of our existence. If you arent open to the world that transcends the material reality then you will never be able to find longlasting meaning in life. You will find yourself endlessly confused by the countless -isms. Life will not form a narrative. It'll remain a series of disconnected events in which you'll eternally try to seek pleasure until you can't find it. I now feel ashamed for philosophizing in the YouTube comments.
What was the opening monologue from?
Im here just because you beautiful and I love the makeup. But cant understand a world kkkkkkk
I want snakes on me too now!
philosophy tube? more like IDEOLOGY TUBE!!!!!!!!!!!!
All I've taken away from this video is that everything is relative. Yay!
Isn't the moral point of hedonism also found in being other-regarding? The idea that if you value your happiness, you value the arguments that you create you feel create the greatest possible happiness in general. For example, leaning over the fence to have a chat with a lonely, elderly neighbour who recently lost their spouse of 40 years. You do so because you recognize you personally would wish someone sparing you a thought. I don't like the idea that hedonism is simply pleasure seeking while ignoring every egoistic philosopher has written volumes on how one becomes an other-regarding creature. If we accept the basic fact that evopsych is garbage, that environmental forces shape us more than any ridiculous idea of genetic prediction in terms of our personal comportment... Clearly egoism is by morality found other-regarding, not for its own sake but for the sake of the happiest society we can create. We know from horrific Rhesus monkey experiments that even love for our children is socially reinforced withi gregarious primate relationships. Evopsych is provably wrong compared with environmental forces on our behaviour... and yet why is the discussion of egoism and hdonism always boiled down to some facile idea of pleasure seeking when it should be cosidered in terms of collective prosocial engagement that leads ultimately to creating the best possible society? Over 90% of depression is anxiety related. Entirely psychosocial in design as all anxiety is... why is this still a question that hedonism and its morality must be found in self-authenticity, liberty of self (sex, gender, etc), and being an other-regardinng creature to recognize why these things are good and social nourishment only comes from prosocial engagement and thought?
Cringey how you're trying to be like Contrpoints so hard.
the jordan yeeterson impression made me shit
This is amazing. Subscribed!
I always knew The Devil was English
This was a contrapoints video.... and I loved it.
Totally agree on the basis of Jordan peterson's unfounded assertions and moral posturing. Disliked because this video is mixed like shit and if the sound of my razor cutting nubs of hair off my chin is louder than your video at full volume, regardless of content you've made a 6/10 video already
I'm coming back to watch it again a few days later- the first time I didn't absorb much because I was distracted by the snakes. It's not that I don't like them, I just am not used to seeing snakes curl around somebody's bare chest.
The logic was airtight. Loved it.
Not going to lie. I gave this a like as soon as I heard the Jordan Peterson impression.
Peterson sees Nihilism as something that needs to be cured. No Peterson, Nihilism is the cure.
Why is nihilism the cure? (Not trying to be rude, just genuinely curious.)
Great, thanks
I can't focus on the video I keep staring at the adorable sneks
Quick question for people more familiar with Philosophy Tube, when he says of course we shouldn't go back to God and there are numerous arguments against that idea that he does not want to get into, what specific ones are he referring to? I know many that are out there in philosophy and this video seems to skirt around the major question of God. Does he have other videos where he covers his thoughts on the question of God's existence? Thanks.
I started watching Philosophy Tube regularly only a few weeks ago, but I've watched the odd one for some time. Each time, it reminds me of Tim Minchin, and it's taken me Too Long to work out why. There's some similar idioms. But the main thing? Teeth. Yep. Really. Sure, very white and straight, but it's something in the way you both talk that really shows off the BOTTOM teeth, including lil fangs. So I find myself staring at those lil fangs in both cases. I guess I don't have anything of real value to add. Just a thing that popped into my head while watching.
Also, you are a sexy, sexy boy. In general. Extra so in this video. Oh my!
I wasn't even surprised when I saw that Natalie was your makeup consultant
fun fun function is that you ??
Hey Ollie, don't forget to WASH YER PENIS!!!
I couldn’t tell that you were doing a Peterson voice at first
Work is the meaning of life. Not slaving away for someone else but working to create something and add to the world in some meaningful way.
As a Canadian I’m not that sure about your accent there bud.
The fact that you're criticising one person pretty much destroys your entire constructive importance.
Damn. You’re sexy.
Long hair, sooo 2015.
I hope you and your girlfriend took photos in the lion enclosure of the central park zoo!
every day we stray further from god you just reached a new level of cringe and gay
I am sexually aroused by Oliver Thorn-as-leftist-demon
I’m feeling lust
Spooks... spooks everywhere...
"I mean, say what you want about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos." Jordan Peterson
I know he's quoting Mephistopheles in the beginning of the video, but is he quoting it as it is written in the book it comes from? Or did he take several different parts and say them together in his own order? And I think he altered the quote from "For where we are is Hell" to "For where I am is Hell". If anyone can clear this up for me I'd appreciate it.
Something about that smile at the start just slays me.
you've been watching too much contra.
I didn't know that was a thing you could do too much of.
This is a weird coming out video to send to your dad Jordan Peterson but ok
are you gay plz be gay it would make much more sense
I usually think that the meaning is to live in love and care towards yourself and others. And believe that altruism empathy egalitarian and individualism will bring about the greatest hapiness between and for all of us. Also, I agree about religion however, spirituality is magnitudes greater than religion. The truth is, we are all connected. Humans animals the trees nature earth and the universe exist as one. In harmony. So let's honor that unity and live in love and the beautiful parts that form this greater unity.
Just say you wanna be contrapoints and move on
Damn dude. MDMA is nothing to play with.
You trying to rip off contrapoints?
And it turns out Peterson doesn't even understand what Marxism is, in his recent debate with Zizek he admitted the last time he read the communist manifesto he was 18 and barely remembers it as well as he never read Das Kapital a far more influential book on modern day Marxism.
Honestly, even with the sexy demon, I think my favourite part of this is the captions at the bottom of each of Daddy JP's quotes
Do Ben Shapiro next
Every time I get to thinking about the problem of moderating Hedonism, I think about the kind of rules that are used in Kink. Might hedonism work much more effectively if we were a culture that holds consent and communication as not only important, but indispensable? If Camus' wife had had a clear say in whether or not to share him, might their troubles have been avoided? OR, since jealousy can exist even in consenting polyamorous arrangements anyway, could a greater focus on checking in with each other more regularly have warned him that, hey, his wife is going through a rough patch right now, so it might be a good idea to slow down and spend some time working it out with her *before* it got to the point where she'd jump?
The sultry look and voice when Olly says "we can still talk about someone experiencing pleasure even if they are physically in pain..." NUT
Yes daddy!
*comment about the aesthetic and not the actual content*
I love the sources for Jordan Peterson quotes. The Pepsi and Online Gamers quotes had me rolling.
The left incels arise.
I realy wondered when you would talk about Camus in the Context of Nihilism in this video. And in the moment i gave up, boom The Absurd. I would love to see a video on camus and the matter of suicide once. Camus work saved my life when I was suicidal, and I bet it could safe someone else's life too.
I think that when we make a claim about similarity, we’re making a claim about two things being similar compared to a background level of similarity other things have in the same context. The lions lingerie example is deliberately silly, but maybe it’s helpful to think about why it’s silly. Lions and lingerie are both made of atoms, but so are a lot of things, so why the lion enclosure in particular? Why not the penguin enclosure? Why not the kitchenware isle of a department store? Not to kinkshame Lucifer or his girlfriend, but are you sure there isn’t something else about the lion enclosure which appealed to them, besides the lions being made of atoms? In the interests of being fair to Peterson, I think “these two things are both myths and both of them contain a prominent female character, and in both cases this prominent female character is a mother who is presented in a positive light” is a more significant claim than “these two things are both made of atoms”. The pool of things which are made of atoms is much greater than the pool of myths which contain a prominent female character who is a mother and presented in a positive light by the story. If I tried to quantify the difference, I’d be pushed into the question of whether all “things” are made of atoms, which would push me into the question “what even is a thing” which is the kind of question that put me off A-Level philosophy. But I hope if we come at this in good faith you can agree there’s a difference between the two claims?
"I would rather have the snake than the snake oil seller" Best Phrase ever
so in the end 35:14, it is just about what you rather have.
ok maybe cosplaying as lucifer and being seductive with snakes wasn't a great idea because i just kept looking at you instead of listening to you talk oh god is this what it's like to be a cishet man?
The Mighty Boosh!
So at the end of it he's just fash who's bollocking around. Can't polish a turd but can cover it in multisyllabic rhetoric to make white middle class het fellas feel comfy about themselves and their shit opinions
This was a weird video to serve as my introduction to your channel. Buuuuuuut...I'm in.
To avoid the problems of hedonism that we see with Chamu's wives, could we expand the goal of maximising happiness to include more people than just the individual? So the infidelity would be less favourable because while it might bring pleasure to some people it would reduce the happiness of the people who are being cheated on. I think in some cases humans have a bit of this built in, you've mentioned that when you're having a bad day you like to do something nice for other people, and that helps you to feel better. It might be complicated to decide where to put the boundary of whose happiness to care about, but maybe that's a question worth asking? If we wanted to maximise happiness for all humans, we might encounter the problem of there being no ethical consumption under capitalism. Maybe you'd like that as a feature, but some people might find it impractical.
Is the thumbnail a Contrapoints reference or?
Is this whole video produced by Contra? I'm so confused. This is their style.
In the livestream, could you talk a bit about the aside at 23:59? Was that unplanned and spontaneous? Could you talk a bit about the two principles you mentioned?
Can or do you want to make a video about the Zizek and Peterson "debate" ? :D plzzzzzzz olliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
You should definitely take more direction advice from ContraPoints. I like how the macabre vibe made this video seem less slick than the others.
Okay I'm kinda dumb, but reading through this I'm trying to figure out which facts Sam Harris values over others? My comprehensions a little lacking unfortunately so I think I'm just missing it.
watching your videos makes me want to be smart but i have no idea where to start learning this kind of stuff.
Contrapoints has taught you well, young Jedi.
Are you the devil?
Sorry Olly I can't take u seriously when that little goode boye wants a smooch (3:20)
Olly: saying some smart guy stuff Snake: hello I'm babie Me: ooHOOHOOHOO!
This video is stupidly good. Some things I do agree with Peterson, I used to be quite ok fan of his, but I always felt weirdly about his religion stuff.
You're pretty great
I really want to read Jordan Peterson's Spirk fic now.
Well I'll be damn, every video leaves me in a hedonistic state of knowledge swishing and swoshing within my skull. The bliss of the student of knowledge and life.
that is one cute snek
This
olly dressed as lucifer is now my sexual preference thnx
You negated the philosophy of the valid suicidal.
Watched this this cause Dan Olsen from folding ideas retweeted that this came out. So happy I did! Subscribed the moment you made a joke about season 2 of mighty boosh being in the good cluster.
I clicked on this video without my glasses thinking it was some sort of contrapoints video. I was wrong but not disappointed. Keep up the great work you’ve got a new subscriber
Love the vid, gave me something to dwell on. That said I have one issue. Should have worn a black feather boa to cover up those straps ;)
While i don't agree with Peterson i have a conflict with Nihilism, i think that the universe is inherently meaningless and pure chaos in it's more neutral form. Basically a blank slate, a playground. And since is a blank slate we have the opportunity to mold it and change whoever we please, not to fight against it but just merely to have something to do as an species. To mold the universe you need to give meaning to the meaningless. The fact that human species has this ''power'' is incredible to me, not a curse like many believers of Nihilism think. The power to shape and change ''reality'' itself is true freedom in my eyes. Whatever the current shape of the world is, is what the human race adopts as ''order'' no matter how arbitrary it is. Yes, this eventually leads to problems, so what? Humanity is an empire and like all the empires they're meant to fall and rise, to shape and reshape the chaos, give new meanings and lost it in other things. Seems like the natural reaction of the brain to existence. And this cycle will continue until the end of times. (Or until we find another sentient species out there wich i think is the only think that can actually make our race self reflect)
+Tasty Loaf The systems that govern our actions whether they be moral, political or religious bind us (enslave us) to them. Nihilism is freedom from Values and meaning. I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing. If you read the Camus Novel the Stranger/Outsider he beautifully illustrates how the main protagonist is able to free himself from the social norms of morality (particularly in his dialogue with the priest toward the end). While believing in nothing often evokes despair and hopelessness in people it also provides freedom from the systems that bind us. Petersons great fallacy is in thinking that Nihilism is immoral or leads to immorality (In 12 rules for life Peterson tries to link Nihilism with mass shootings). This is nonsense - it's amoral not immoral. I don't claim to be an authority on this subject by any means. But Peterson is just plain wrong in his interpretation of Nihilism.
+DeoMachina no. Actually i am speaking directly to him. And it is an opinion.
Is that a critique you made about one person? Because buddy do I have some news for you
How is your face so smooth. I shave and I have a 5 o'clock shadow by noon.
Postmodernism on its own is only a tool. When coupled with Marxism, it becomes a tool that eats away at the individual using it.
YOU.ARE.AMAZING.
I was so confused because it looked like contra points but it wasn't contra points :(
Why is he wearing a crown of crosses? I thought he was playing Satan.
35:22 80's. And, not in a bad way, kids.
Yes, and Hugo and Jake's dissembly of 12 Rules. So, yes this. and also that.
As a guy who was deep in the JBP hype way before the Cathy Newman interview, this is a brilliant critique, a great mini-film to watch for plllleasuure ;D and a really high quality youtube video. Times like this where I wish I could rate a video instead of just put my thumb up like PTSD hitchhiker. Great video!
Also I came out of a mental come down a couple days ago and it's also true in that respect
Daddy vibes
Subjective is actually the objective way each of us view said thing, based on the objectively true feelings that we have. Objectivity is the only reality!
This was excellent.
I love your noodles! Introduce them to us! Tell us their names!
I think it's unfair to lump Sam Harris and J. Peterson in the same pile. Sam Harris is 100% full of shit. Peterson's analysis is at least superficially relevant. My militant atheist edgelordness led me to Haris' TED talk, and it took me 2 minutes to see he's full of shit. Peterson on the other hand is quite articulate, and an honest debater, you need to understand that it's his premises that suck, not the deductive logic.
After watching it through, you seem to be quite fair.
Peterson is Kermit the frog
I feel like this video takes a petersonian approach to Peterson, using lots of words but not saying much... but with like... A E S T H E T I C C
Nabokov hated Dostoevsky btw
I prefer the approach of optimistic nihilism. Essentially, they idea that existence lacks meaning means we are free to choose our own. Freedom (or chaos as Peterson would most likely consider it) can be frightening, but it is also the surest way to be true to oneself.
Oliver's Canadian accent gave me cancer.
Old libertarian demigod stefan has long been thrown out from the olympus of the intellectual dark web
Sweet snake babies ewe
Nice nips.
You're very generous to assume Peterson actually knows what Marxism is (It's doubtful he's even read Capital).
Your Peterson impression is bang on.
Oh no, another person that doesn’t understand peterson and needs to tell people. Cingefest. Your arguments fail because they’re too simple and poorly thought out.
Every time I get to thinking about the problem of moderating Hedonism, I think about the kind of rules that are used in Kink. Might hedonism work much more effectively if we were a culture that holds consent and communication as not only important, but indispensable? If Camus' wife had had a clear say in whether or not to share him, might their troubles have been avoided? OR, since jealousy can exist even in consenting polyamorous arrangements anyway, could a greater focus on checking in with each other more regularly have warned him that, hey, his wife is going through a rough patch right now, so it might be a good idea to slow down and spend some time working it out with her *before* it got to the point where she'd jump? Same for the women Sam Harris so readily dismisses. There ARE cases where a person is brainwashed into particular behaviors and lifestyles -- heck, as someone who is now an atheist, but who was raised a devout christian, I *KNOW* about the power of brainwashing. Yet I know of muslim women who are fully *aware* of the various social and hierarchical contexts involved in wearing the hijab, and who choose to do so not as a sign of their submission to men, but as a sign of their submission to god. And their lives reflect that, they have and practice agency, making similar decisions in other areas of their lives. I may not agree with their view per se, but these women *have* made an *informed decision*, and so I would say that their consent to the practice is valid and should be defended. It's a reoccurring theme in the topics this channel has discussed, I think. For instance, if Brexiters say that they want a second referendum because they didn't have all the facts, and it *has* been discovered that, indeed, misinformation campaigns were strongly in play, then, hey. They did not give *informed consent* when they voted, and should be allowed to change their decision.
+Madison Hutto Olly is inspired by and trying to impress (his words not mine) Natalie (contrapoints), but he's not directly referencing or trying to copy her.
The videos further back on this channel (2015/16) are in a simpler style and explain some of the concepts in a way that might be easier to understand.
+Aleksander When you speak of the universe being inherently meaningless you are talking about Absurdism which is really metaphysical Nihilism. As far as creating a new reality is concerned one must start with the proposition that it needs to be created, which in turn requires a belief. I would say it is Human nature to destroy and create.
11:45 mighty boosh represent !
I know this is late but what exactly has JP said about trans people? because you only referenced it in this video and the livestream. Not trying to start anything here, I genuinly don't know, since I've only seen jordan peterson debate once on a completely different topic.
I will be needing more of this satan chatacher
As a trans Muslim I appreciated the joke about me
Could you do one on Dugin? He's downright terrible, but he has a lot of real-world influence today and is (unfortunately) extremely relevant.
oh no he's hot!!!!
Hey Oliver, I've appreciated your content for quite awhile and was able to finally get myself to make a small donation. Thank you so much for creating and sharing the content that you do. From my perspective it brings value.
Could you pump up the sound a little?
Destiny got destroyed in this debate
Okay, obviously this wasn't the point (or was it?) but damn you look hot
haha i live in jacksonville, weird reference to spot.
The presentation is brilliant -- but the volume is too low ....
You've done it Ollie, I now n e e d to have at least one snake in my life
In the Leftist Utopia of the future, Olly will be the Demon King and Natalie will be Fairy Queen
Jesus Christ shirtless Olly is doing things to me
First of all, watching Lucifer!Olly is the most erotic experience I've ever had, voice is dripping with raw sex, the most rocking body i've ever seen, holy fuck just take me now. Second of all, that cover of Goodbye Mr. A is slapping. Third of all, you're amazing and I stan. Love you!! xxx
*People who aren't Muslims keep making shit up like they're experts on the religion and know more than we Muslims do. It's pathetic and quite hilarious. This is just hegemonic values being forced upon us.*
+The One and Only Michael McCormick Well said.
Umar Uppal And I say that as a reformed Christian. Which is to say, I’ve been reformed of BEING Christian.
+The One and Only Michael McCormick Agreed.
Umar Uppal Christians sanctimoniously claiming to know what’s best for non-Christians? Yup. Tale as old as time, friend.
I love you and I love this video but I WOULD really like to see some acknowledgement on the left that Muslim women don't always (and possibly in the majority of cases) freely choose to wear hijab. Even in informational videos that are framed as positive you can often see a lot of women who are clearly doing it due to indoctrination. I don't think acknowledging that is somehow claiming they're too dumb to make decisions for themselves. (Obv once someone makes the choice to wear a hijab, they can. Bans are unethical. But so is coercing someone to make that "choice".)
The Jungian archetypal mind via Chomsky; objectivity is there to be found.
Imagine being so intellectual you have to redefine the entire dictionary
im not into men but like....... alright
what do you even mean by this
Spartak Muho Was Satan not an angel?
Elmo NW Not quite. I’ve watched far too many videos of Jordan Peterson spouting absolute nonsense, misunderstanding pretty much EVERYTHING he talks about, and attempting to circumlocute his way out of coherently stating anything. He is a hack and a fraud. He does not deserve the benefit of the doubt you seek to give him.
kissfan7 It’s because it sounds like Jordan Peterson. You should avoid hearing Jordan Peterson’s voice at all costs.
I Would Prefer Not To At his “debate” with Zizek he made a big show of declaring that he _meant_ to read The Communist Manifesto but didn’t have time. He’s a disgrace.
FullMentalComplex Elaborate.
peterson can't state a single position clearly so that's p rich
John Coursey Nope. Not remotely political, that Dr. Peterson. Not. At. All. Don’t be ridiculous. He’s such a fucking hack.
+Riley Carpenter Paypal.me/PhilosophyTube his paypal is here for a 1 time donation
You rip off Contrapoints aesthetics or does she rip you off?
heh. I'm a hedonist. I just don't think it applies to the individual alone, but also to those around them. So more like an area between classic hedonism and utilitarianism. Or maybe it's more of subjective utilitarianism. Idk. I just like to reclaim the term hedonist from ancap types.
God this is the horniest video I've ever seen
Firstly, excellent production value on this video. I think moral relativism does inevitably lead to a kind of nihilism--i.e. fgm is wrong for me to do but okay for you because of your culture. If you really believe that anything can be justified, it's the same as not holding any convictions. Context doesn't have to be erased to say that certain things are absolutely one way or another--it is unhealthy for me to breathe water but healthy for a fish to do it. JBP has also addressed the incompatibility of Marxism and postmodernism--he understands the contradiction, but unlike yourself it seems like the proponents of these ideas largely don't. There's a lot more to say but it's difficult to put it all into a YouTube comment. Interesting perspective, thanks for at least taking these ideas on seriously, even if I don't agree with your conclusions.
I had to run off and pause. When I came back it was only 3 minutes? I think you're wooing me...*goes gay to hell*
wait it was contrapoints wooing me again too? wtf I got sniped
Is this Philosophy Porntube?
This guy should exercise more if he's gonna be shirtless for twenty minutes
Idk where to put this but I just wanted to wish you happy birthday!!!!!
Amazing job with this video. Entertaining and educational.
you sing like straight from the alternative 80s, thank you for this cover and please release it as a standalone song!
Watched this video while absolutely beaming - this is the way to learn! Thank you Ollie!
This was incredible! Thank you for putting so much time and love into everything you make. I'm really digging this longer format, though I often have to put off watching it for a while. If you ever have projects that work with shorter formats they'd be more than welcome too!
try watching the Channel 4 debate
This is really good!
They're not his, he borrowed them https://twitter.com/PhilosophyTube/status/1116790323861049349
+Elmo NW You might be interested to watch his commentary on 12 Rules for Life https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbSn5rS8hKI
I find the question "what is the meaning of life" to be f#cking absurd. It's like what's asking "what is the meaning of rock". Same thing with "what is the purpose of life?" It's just stupid to even ask. "What is the purpose of hydrogen." People need to stop asking such stupid questions.
+Riley Carpenter you can subscribe on patreon and then immedietly cancel your subscription
You know you've watched too much Snake Discovery when you give the snakes cute little subtitles. "I hides in the wings, is Lucifer now" "I climbs on your face... oh never mind, I climbs hand"
A big help for me in finding meaning in life was through the process of adopting a personal identity relative to a tight nit community. I explored various counter cultural movements throughout the past few decades like punk and hippie and have found lots of other like minded people who share that aesthetic. Even some religions that are compatible with relative worldviews like Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca and Paganism are tons of fun to explore as a practice regardless of your personal beliefs about reality. Also, after exploring my sexuality, I found out I was bi and found other bi friends through the LGBTQIA community. I think regardless of your personal views on individualism and collectivism, it's no secret that we are a social species, and that we need the validation and security of small tribes that fit our niches to bond with in order to have a sense of belonging and fulfillment. It's no solution to every form of suffering in life, but it beats living my life based on the conformities of someone else who thinks I should be something I'm not.
your makeup and lighting is lovely but i can't focus on the video so i'll just tab out and listen to it while i play minecraft or something. the edits are great btw, love the snake
Hey Oliver, if you want a post-modernism that is anything but nihilistic, come join us on the Levinasian side! It's stock full of ethics over here! Prepare for a lot of doorholding, apologizing and awkwardly finding new words for retrograde gendered descriptions of fundamental interhuman relations ;p Heck, even Camus joined the resistance, right?
When I was towards the end of highschool, about 8 years ago, I started to really think about the meaning of life. I hadn't been raised religious so obviously the concept of an afterlife has always been kinda of an afterthought. I basically came to the conclusion that the meaning of life boiled down to one of two things, either furthering mankind's abilities so that future generations were better off because of your existence(Ex: curing cancer) or striving to find happiness in the mundane. Its really interesting to hear about Hedonism because It feels like its the same way i've felt for so long. I have to say I really enjoyed the video, the humor was on point and I think it posed a lot of great things to digest.
People judge women for wearing veil or hijab without realizing that western women has to cover themselves more than men in public and in many countries could get arrested for taking their tops off (which is more or less acceptable for men)...and I'm not complaining about it all all, don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly happy to wear my T-shirt...I'm just saying that sometimes if you are told to wear something from early age and it's considered polite it becomes cultural thing. Going to Muslim women telling them to take their veils off is like going to western women and ask them to strip in the name of their freedom
can you uh....can you dress as Lucifer for every video...?
Why does he act like a gay person?
How did you perfectly embody my mental idea of what Satan would look like?
HEDONISE WITH ME
"Lions are similar to lingerie..." pure gold this channel.
Wait a second. So you start off by making an unsupported claim about Jordan Peterson being a moral objectivist, then turn around and use convoluted mental gymnastics to explain that he's in fact a moral relativist and therefore a hypocrite? This entire video is just one big whataboutism!!!
0:38 Y tho? Y THO?!
Loved the video, especially the Foucault impression
I think your defintion of hedonism is too broad. If hedonism is being defined as desiring pleasure over pain, with pleasure and pain being defined as more subjectively preferable mental states and less preferable respectively, then there are NO non-hedonists, since whatever mental state one desires is, by definition, preferable. And since there are no non-hedonists to contrast oneself to, the claim that one is a hedonist has no real meaning. it adds no information about how you are different from anyone else. And the label of hedonist becomes useless except to say you are the same as everyone else in this regard. When any definition becomes so broad as to encompass what would be colloquially considered it's antonym, it looses distinction and becomes impossible to use in any meaningful sense. You're a hedonist? So you want to get high all the time? no? you just want what you want and don't want what you don't want? well get in line behind everyone else then. you're not special. you're absolutely mundane and mediocre. It is only by defining what we want in more concrete terms, excluding specific things, that we can label ourselves with anything meaningful. but that's your goal isn't it? to degrade the meaning of labels so that we all become one indtiguishable and undifferentiated grey mass. to degrade our desires unique and shape us according to your own tortured soul comes up with.
Get dressed, Oliver. Don't be a bimbo.
Welcome to ContraPoints lite
No, Oliver. His anti nihilism comes from Nietzsche. His anti relativism is a reaction to postmodernism.
God damn (sorry satan) I legitimately cannot tell if you're doing peterson's voice or if that's an actual soundclip
I don't understand the issue with having feelings. All humans process the world through feelings. That's how we fucking work. So why are these guys saying being "rational" is the only valid way of processing information, when that doesn't apply to anyone?
I am obsessed with your voice
You's a smart thotty Ollie
very sick to play the devil as a nut.The Devil,Satan is a smart one who hates the human race.
"Does Moral Relativism lead to pussy worship" Me: [Spits out my food] WHAT?!?!
Your canadian accent is actually really good bahahaha
Amazing video, Olly!!! I hope to see you and Natalie do an onscreen collab sometime :D!
Because it makes YOU feel tingly on the inside.
+federico amadeo Uhm... kay?
+BTIsaac Lol. Should of known you were just after the last word.
+federico amadeo That's what i thought.
+BTIsaac Don't know what to tell you. If there's hidden premise in your request, there's not much I can do about it.
+federico amadeo You said it's a narrowly defined narrative that for most part falls back on bare biology. That's hardly an explanation.
+BTIsaac I believe I did. I don't know where you got lost.
+federico amadeo I asked you a question. Can you explain his worldview in your own words or not?
+BTIsaac A good illustration is his acknowledgement of the inadquacy of "scientific facts" as a meaningful account of the world. He points out the need for a narrative in order to sort the facts out in order for that meaning to be conveyed. His worldview, on the other hand, ammounts to a very narrwoly defined narrative that, for the most part, falls back on bare biology. An dubious move that is not fully accounted for.
+federico amadeo What are these assumptions and what is his worldview. Please explain them with your own words.
Peterson gives frequent talks targeting postmodernism as a relativist endeavor. It's not a stretch to interpret him as a moral objectivist. In fact, it's as cheritable as you can be. He wouldn't have a leg to stand on otherwise. The problem isn't that he's a hypocrite, it's that the assumptions his worldview rests on lack a strong enough basis.
+The Sin Of Nemesis everyone pursues the mental state they believe they will prefer, whether they are correct when all is said and done is another matter. if they happen to be wrong and find that they would have prefered a different mental state, they are no less a hedonist, they are merely a hedonist who was mistaken. they were still persuing a mental state that was prefered at the time of persuit. desire necessarily has both an attractive force and a repulsive force, you desire to eat delicious food, just as you desire not to eat feces. the positive desire is the pleasure to persue, the negative desire is the pain to avoid.
I disagree, there are people that don't pursuit their preferred mental state, desires, because of fear or ignorance. In fact I'd say that a good portion of people belong to that category, the non-hedonist category. This might be a little bit of a nit pick but I don't remember him saying anything about pain. Correct me if I am mistaken, but he said something about a hedonist that is also in pain, I think that he was referring to the fact that a hedonist could put himself through pain for the pursuit of his desires. He defined hedonist as those who only seek desire, he never said anything about pain. If that was truly the case then his definition could hardly be described as broad.
+Iris Garner absolutely. And I love her videos and am glad there's more like those!
I tend to think they've rubbed off on each other, really. Olly has certainly incorporated more A E S T H E T I C into his videos, that's true. Yet, even if it doesn't really get mentioned (presumably because the change is less visual and therefore more subtle?), Contrapoints ALSO has progressed in HER videos -- becoming a few touches less frenetic and more succinct in the framing and presentation of *her* arguments. I believe that it's been good for them both...and, obviously, good for us, who are privileged to enjoy their works!
I wouldn't say that anyone who takes on a relativist view thinks the bad things happening in another culture is ok. It's just the belief that no culture is intrensically superior due to the implications that arise from applying superiority to one's own group. After all, Saudi Arabians probably think they are better than us on the basis that they have a devotion to good and their traditions, while westerners are godless degenerates.
After the Zizek debate, this is prescient.
Did I hear Heandels Sarabande in the back?
This is an amazing piece, but mostly I need you to know this is really hot.
The ContraPoints influence is so strong in this video xD
it feels like you are mistaking objectivity with superficiality
Bless Natalie for bring me here
"In order to get into heaven you have to be both Muslim and trans..." I'm dead. lol
Calling Sam Harris a neurocientist.... lol
good vid btw!
Why not?
Makeup and Nail Consultant: Natalie Wynn. No ripping is occurring. It's called collaboration.
Idk, I'd kill to look like olly. yum.
He doesn't think they're valid and doesn't want to use the pronouns they ask for. He went on tv to say that if that law got passed that he thought would force people to use peoples pronouns that he wouldn't do it, and if he got fined for it, he wouldn't pay, and that if he was put in jail, he'd go on a hunger strike.
+SomeoneBeginingWithI hopefully. Everyone needs a pet, I think. Animals are better company than people.
+Abigail Jarvis He's currently renting, so not allowed pets, but maybe one day
+SomeoneBeginingWithI noooo! He needs some noodles. He doesn't know it but they're the best dogs 10/10
The Python is Tigger. Watch the blooper video its great. Tigger tries twice to silence him while he's talking.
You make a handsome devil.
I like the way you articulate yourself, and you're clearly a fantastic actor and performer. I do however feel your presentation is better than the argument itself, which seems to be at odds with your seemingly earnest manner. My only caveat is the whole Brecht thing was brilliant and I wouldn't trade that for the world. I feel the "irreverent" tone kind of detracts from your core message. The comments section alone tells a story of what people are really paying attention to, and it's not the content of your speech, it's the way in which it's presented.
That peterson voice is on point.
Quality is over 9000
Don't look at the snake, he just uses it to visually trick people into looking at it skither up his gay naked body.
Great,, now I'm gay.
pussy worship is a perfect duty
Sssienccce
They were right all along. The left is turning me gay... The thing their wrong about is that its bad.
How is anyone supposed to concentrate on this probably very informative video when a snake is slithering up this gentleman’s nipple?!
Amorality sounds like a reasonably valid idea in a thought experiment kind of way until you actually meet someone who's amoral. And then it's like... yeahhhh no that's not actually very nice to be around, I'm gonna go stick to actual friends and nice people.
What's the t-shirt he wears in the end?
i wish there was something like this about that horrible Olavo de Carvalho
Why is this guy just the cis-male version of Contra Points?
+Simon'sFine I prefer to make up my own mind. That being said, this is the only criticism of JP I've seen so far that's not trying to paint him as saying objective reality doesn't exist.
@BTIsaac this little conversation perfectly prove your point: strawmanning is the only thing this video does. If you want better criticism watch Contrapoints
LIfe is a song with no score, so why not make it a symphony?
SSSSssscienccCcce
The male contrapoints
Uh, does he take his shirt off every video?
not sexy
very sexy
Aesthetic is narrative tho lul. People just like masturbating while watching philosophical/political videos
Brenna Booth this is exactly my point. It detracts from the quality of the argument. But I will check out that other video!
He actually decided to take Peterson seriously for this video. If you watch his stream where he goes through 12 rules talking about it he says that he felt Peterson was very earnest and thus decided to be earnest himself. So the irreverence you're feeling may be just a product of his arty presentation.
Jennifer Griel Breadtube owns the aesthetic now
it feels like you are mistaking objectivity for superficiality
+Simon'sFine If it "perfectly proves his points" I'd like you to point out exactly when and how I'm strawmanning.
Someone please make subtitles in portuguese already, I want to show this to my mom, she loved your Steve Banon video Actually, can I make subtitles? How do I do that?
Sam Harris and Judeo Christian values? You're grasping at straws buddy.
God damn, man. Your Jordan Petersen is on point. Well done, sir. =)
Boyd sounds very Plato influenced.
Big Faustus vibes
The song is a banger
Grinding but well worth the ending. "I would rather have the snake than the snake oil salesman". Bravo.
For as much as I disagree with you on your philosophies on your channel I have to admit, you do have a cracking Peterson impression
nice torso
Why doesn't he have a shirt on? Why is he playing with snakes? I don't get it.
Christian Okoye A E S T H E T I C
Olly (some time back): "I try to avoid clickbaity stuff that's potentially objectifying" Also Olly: *makes video where he is such a sexy chad that he instantly turns all his previously straight male audience bi/gay*
Great, now I'm gay.
man, ripping off Contrapoints' bag so hard
four minutes into the video I realized I am watching a naked guy with hairy chest, devil wings and a crown holding a life snake discussing the philosophies of Nihilism and Relativism to debunk a Canadian psychologist author. the internet is a wild place.
Epicureanism.
To pass through the meaningless shadow of hopelessness and get to the other side: a well formed philosophy. Then, to experience the peace which comes from that philosophy is true meaning.
Your natural, non performative voice gives me life. I have a big booming voice, but I usually speak in a higher register because it feels less threatening. It's so nice to see someone else speaking like that.
420,690 VIEWS FUCK YEAH
I feel like Olly’s seeing all of our lecherous comments and just upping the sexy until we eventually give up
I'd rather have the snake than the snakeoil salesman. Very nicely put. In the end, there is no conclusive way of living, no collective answers on how to find meaning.
1:48 i am losing my shit
I can't focus.. is that snake gonna go for it.. or are you about to die game of thrones style..
+DeoMachina Uuuh, on it! Thanks!
Press the settings button on the video, there's an "add subtitles" option. Good luck!
This Copyright policy is such bullshit. No one in the industry owns up to these flaggings, random videos get demonitized, even if it's under fair use, and even though you linked to the original artist and prompted people to buy the original, it still gets flagged. Even though you are essentially promoting their work... Madness.
Love the Hoosiers cover at the outro. Great record
Contropoints called she wants her style back (Jk jk I loved it)
So turns out Olly dressed as Lucifer, shirtless and playing with a snake, debunking The Lobster King, is my kink
Hell awaits trump and his demons.
"...and 'Maps of Meaning ' which is.....also a book..." XD
Finally, you got to know what gets views on YouTube!
The devil
we can only hope
It's it obvious? He's Lucifer.
+Frank Washington *freeze peach They don't like actual free speach.
Philosophy Tube & Contrapoints have great rewatch value.
Booooo at 11:40 .... Season 1 of Mighty Boosh was way better. Unsubscribed, unliked, and un-hit the little bell to be notified of new videos. >:(((((((
Lions and lingerie, the two SEXIEST things in the world. We stan.
In all honesty, this video failed at doing much other than making the left look equally as lost and without answers as the right. As usual, typical liberal positions are held as the left even by those claiming not to be liberal. Honestly, I'm tired of the feel good left. It's exactly what the bourgeoisie loves. It's completely non-threatening. We need to become militant materialist again. That's the only way we are going to find a solution to the postmodern condition and capitalism.
Can you speak up? I can’t hear over your overwhelming hotness
pet a snake when you see one in the street
who else went and got a pet snake
clap clap clap
38:00 Who makes finger guns with only one finger
This is probably the dumbest comment but I gotta say, love your T-shirt in the end. (I had more to say but it’s all been said already)
"Makeup consultant - Natalie Wynn" Oh, You don't say? :O LUL
also, I must have missed the part of his video where he had sexual intercourse with a man (Olly is self-identified as a cisgender man). Unless he did that, not sure what you mean by "act like a gay person."
You look really good in... snakes??? Good look!
Easily the best produce channel on youtube. Always interesting ideas.
Wtf why are Oliver and Natalie so goddamn good looking?! While I’m sitting here in my house looking like a damn gremlin…
Didnt you get cold.
I always find your topic and arguments very interesting. I don't need to read much 'though. Thanks a lot.. Your 'classroom' is very CREATIVE....Keep it up!!!
Hi Ollie, I am new to your channel. Relatively new. Have been introduced to your channel a couple of months back. And I have seen quite a lot of your vids. So, 1stly, thanks for the vids. very interesting content. very well articulated. Hope u continue making more. 2ndly, I would like to request you to make a vid on radical feminism - liberal feminism - the sex wars... I don't know if u will read my comment, or respond - keeping fingers crossed. This is the first time I am commenting on a youtube vid. In fact I created this channel/youtube account (not sure what the technical term is) so I could thank u and make my request. Hope u respond. Thanks again for the good work.
Fucking hell why did I have to be gay? I CAN'T CONCENTRATE ON THE VIDEO YOU ARE SO HOT.
wtf did I just watch
Steven Cleere Don’t you agree that he acts like a gay person? Contra is even more so.
+First Last "bisexual lighting" is a channel meme on this channel as well as ContraPoints. You didn't mention lighting though. You said "why does he 'act' like a gay person?" Not "why is the lighting 'bisexual.' I'm not talking to "someone else" in the comments, I'm talking to you.
Steven Cleere Whatsa camp
I still don't really know what you mean. Do you mean he's "camp"? Because honestly, there's nothing in this video that screams "camp" to me. Perhaps you could point to a specific timestamp that might help me understand what you mean. Or maybe you just wanted to make a homophobic shitpost.
Steven Cleere Look someone else in the comments even commented about the “bisexual leftist” lighting so I’m not the only one noticing this.
"typical gay person"
Steven Cleere He has the flamboyant mannerisms that a typical gay person might have.
Philosophy 101: Common Fallacies: Appeal to Emotion. I would suggest that this is an example of why the 'left' is losing. An utter failure to grasp any of the many concerns that the 'right' find articulated pretty well by Jordan Petersen. An apparent disdain for him manifested in what is fundamentally a piss-take of him. I really don't want to waste another 40 minutes of my life going through this point by point, when I could be watching two episodes of Archer, but from what I remember there were only perhaps half a dozen issues when Jordan Petersen was quoted directly, each time when I was left thinking "You make that sound like a bad thing" (when taken in context he seemed to be making a valid point). Jordan Petersen is not right on everything. On certain issues I disagree with him profoundly. But when it takes 40 minutes to make an unconvincing case as this, my belief in the truth of much of his work is only strengthened. Don't fanny about. Just say "Jordan Petersen said this.. this is wrong because... 2 + 2 does not equal 5 or whatever" as opposed to "because this is what I think". Keep it succinct. And regarding your whinge "hit with a nasty little copyright claim" .. Econ 101 ... What bit is about copyright do you not understand.
I want a snake now... like a pet one
I used to like Harris’s ethical philosophy a lot but now it just seems like a poor mans utilitarianism with less meta-ethical grounding. I think Peter Singer does a much better job than Sam in this regard.
Demonic Olly is Hella hot.
Snake friends snake friends snake friends sNAKE FRIENDS!!!!
Optimistic nihilism is my jam. There is so no real point, it's kind of whatever point you want. So I dunno try to make it a good one, and be nice when possible. Edit: "Best opening since Genesis," you clever bastard. XD
I think you're oversimplifying Harris' thesis of the Moral Landscape. He doesn't claim that there is absolute morality, but that we can use science and reasoning to determine what is good or bad or bad for humans. This is pretty well illustrated by his description of a literal Moral Landscape. Where the morality of things exists in a 3D landscape comprised of peaks and valleys. This is not moral absolutism, but is a blend of relativism and absolutism. It's kind of a synthesis of deontology and utilitarianism, with an application of context and the use of science/reasoning to help determine the morality of these things. He doesn't claim to have the answers necessarily, but that using this framework, people can come to agree on things that are "objectively" moral or immoral. For that matter, I think you're extending this oversimplification to be uncharitable towards his application of this to equality of the sexes. I mean, don't we make claims about systemic problems like racism and the patriarchy, that many are perpetuating it simply because they and their opinions were produced by it? Just like educating people on "wokeness" I think there is a way to improve the odds that Muslim women are making the decision to cover themselves on their own (by that I mean not out of fear of retaliation by God or their colleagues.) He also makes clear that the oppression of women is not only a part of conservative Islam, but also present in other cultures and faiths. (United Pentecostal Church and Mormonism are salient examples.) I don't think this is the hill Sam would die on vs a consensus that murder and torture are "objectively" wrong. We should be able to agree that gender inequality is immoral, and even in the name of religion, the suppression of women's rights is immoral. In places like Saudi Arabia, women are not getting to choose whether or not they have to cover themselves in public, or whether or not they want men to control their lives in general.
Say what you want about nihilistic relativists, at least they aren't the equivalent, metaphorically, of a gateway drug for nascent fascists
So, I was going to write a big thing about how I have a philosophy of my creation (although that does unintentionally draw from alot of existing ideas and just changes them some) that was not at all challenged in this video, and was even supported from time to time, but then I had to go and accidentally *click "cancel" when trying to sort out a spelling mistake, deleting all 3 paragraphs.* So if you're interested in hearing about it, just respond to this or something, and then maybe I'll be in the mood to try typing it up again.
I find you attractive, is that normal?
What are your thoughts about reframing 'meaning' as a biological sensation foremost and an abstract concept second? I consider myself a nihilist, and over time the thought 'meaning isn't real' has increasingly weeded it's way into my everyday decision making. But, oddly enough, it was a short Peterson clip where he said, "meaning is real like pain, but it's a good thing!" that got my thoughts headed down a different path. With this single now seemingly obvious idea, I've suddenly found myself freed from the drudgery of optimistic nihilism. Optimistic nihilism for me at least, required a commitment to the unbearable labour of unceasingly assigning meaning into the world. I can now rather, just simply accept that meaning is best defined as a positive reinforcement mechanism that bubbles up out of my biology. I'm still nihilistic, but I accept that reality exist and with this framework I find it reasonable to reclassify 'meaning' as existing. It's been a nice shift, rather like having your cake and eating it too. The thought, 'meaning is real' has now taken the place of that nagging loop I carried for so many years, and it's honestly done wonders for my outlook. Dr. P has many opinions with which I disagree, but I'll always be grateful that his lecture introduced that particular idea into my life.
I like your work, but I don't like these SoMe controversy, infantil, smear, call out pieces. It makes us all worse human beings. Both sides are heavily misrepresenting each other. It's very dishonest and is removing nuance. I might as well watch commercials. Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?
It certainly seems like you take a leap past the morality of force. You deftly show the similarities between yourself and Peterson but you avoid the obvious postmodernist critique of marxism that to collectively use power is to disempower others. I haven't seen an argument from Peterson which speaks positively of any collective force being used to install morality. I think you slowly but surely find that a bit of morality is a guide to fulfilling hedonism in this video. So where is your disagreement with Peterson? Merely in if what causes long term happiness is subjective? You yourself prove that there is objectively a proper way to treat your brain to not harm its ability to produce fulfillment. So, then is it not true that there could be, with enough perspective and experience a "right" way to live? One which does as little harm to yourself and others as possible while doing the greatest amount of good possible for each as well? You strike on the truth that Peterson's logic doesn't follow without a metaphysical belief but you seem to scoff at the idea that one religious or moral culture could possibly be more ethical than any other. I propose to you that the way to delineate may be in the power required to sustain the moral systems. When you glance over the historical morality and effectiveness of marxism you miss the whole point that Peterson makes: that it is historically evident by the freedom of the west that the moral fabric of the democratic and capitalist world is in some way superior to other social constructions of more collectivist worldviews. That is to say, your true disagreement is on the morality of individualism. I'd like to see a video on the philosophy of force and power politics because I think this is where you will run into a moral quandary.
You can't say things like "down here, everyone's punishment is bespoke" and expect me to go right on breathing.
Heroin doesn’t have any negative long term effects. Except my intestines don’t work. And my sex drive is gone.
In Dostoyevsky's Demons, the protagonist rapes a 12-year-old girl (who later hangs herself), just out of pure boredom. So Dostoyevsky knew a thing or two about the meaninglessness of life. Dostoyevsky is so deep on so many levels, making Nabokov look mundane and banal. Nabokov on the other hands is a much better writer (if you appreciate the carefully and wonderfully crafted turns of phrase) whereas Dostoyevsky is a much better... everything else.
Please support you claims and arguments with substantiative evidence please.
All this reasoning and intelligence goes out the window when you feel pain. Enjoy!
I just noticed the wings
22:59 Gold. Pure fucking gold.
Hedonism is my life philosophy! Eeee! But yes you need to moderate your pleasure in order to maximize it. And it needs to be reigned in by ethics, as other creatures exist, deserve respect, and should not be harmed by your pleasure seeking whenever possible.
Please, please tell me I’m not the only one seeing Sir Edgar from Ella Enchanted.
Thank you very much for this video. I enjoyed your discussion of the subject matter very much and the presentation was so funny! :-)
FYI he sorta responded to his "misaddressing" of certain group identities at his Debate with Slavoj Zizek and interestingly enough Slavoj sort of agreed with his explaination.
Not sure there is tension between what JP has been advocating and what he is against. You can disagree with him, but the way you have applied the word relative to him seems different to the postmodernism he talks about. It is obvious why people on here don't like JP - because he is critical of marxism and some other left wing ideas, but we don't seem to have discussed where he's coming from at all yet.
oliver is only true peterson fan like marx was only true capitalist lol
Epic journey friends
I’m so sorry but... You will never be as fabulous as Natalie
This video has the mouthfeel of a contrapoints video
I've never heard the original, "Goodbye mister A" but I LOVED your cover and I'm going to check out the original! :)
Natalie Wynn was your makeup and nails consultant! That's why the presentation and your whole get-up looked like something straight out of one of her videos! :D You looked awesome by the way.
Challenging your inner Natalie (Contrapoints) I see. ;)
What about the m o u t h f e e l when impersonating JP ? And now for something completely different. A man with three buttocks!
Ed Phone209 Ah yes, famous critic of Marxism Dr Jordan Peterson whose only exposure to Marxist thought was reading the communist manifesto. Truly the left is doomed.
Chloe DeRolf sad thing is I have seen stranger kinks.
Inasmuch as values are independent of empirical claims, they are outside the domain of science
The Lefttube movement has to be careful not to swallow on itself (constructing a group that feels superior); Would be reallly sad to lose all this.
Bruh. The whole of your subscribership is jealous of those snakes.
Great video, but I'll stay Jordan Peterson fan nonetheless.
What do you like about him might I ask? Do you have any criticisms of him or anything in this video that you agree with?
Animism
"Inspiring angel" is a perfect description of Natalie
@Philosophy Tube A guy with a channel called "Ivan's shady existence" made a pretty angry and kind of confused response to your video. I found it quite hilarious how he couldn't stand the style of your performance.
THAT SNAKE IS FREAKIN ME OUT!!!
I used to agree with Camus, but overtime I found happiness in making meaning. In accepting certain things on faith. In doing so I've learned to accept that unhappiness is a part of life. Happiness in pain, not out of masochistic ideals but just from the simple acceptance that pain and loss are a part of life. I can't speak for other's meaning, but for me it's my friends. To be with htem through the positive and negative. to accept the difficulty of life and work alongside them to get through it.
I see you've also cut some of your hair off and stuck it on your face over the years.
Why are all BreadTubers so... weird, it's like they are trying to outfreak each other. When did clean, well-groomed appearance, a suit and a tie, became unfashionable? And what's with all these drawn-out, 40-minutes videos? This is second millenium, nobody got time for this. Damn, if that's the best that the modern leftists can show, no wonder their numbers are so insignificant (and that's a shame, the general idea is good).
If you prefer a more calm mainstream aesthetic, try Peter Coffin or Three Arrows, Shaun too actually
Ain't nobody got time to watch the full, 40 MINUTE (goddamn long) video but imma still say the left is weak because i'm too ignorant and dumb to comprehend what they're trying to say. Ye didn't watch the video and you're judging by appearance and have no sense of irony.
WAIT... that's a real snake?!
Amazing. 'Goodbye Doctor P' is actually mentioned in the 'in popular culture' part of the original's Wikipedia page...
+Thomas Buchovecky I agree with pretty much everything, that is said about him in this video (I haven't fact-checked anything, though, something may be hypothetically incorrect). But I don't like Peterson because of his philosophical stance, I merely enjoy his jabs against fanatical, overzealous activists.
+Morphing Taxi Dear Sir please grab the salts I am about to faint because your statement rings so true
Damn boi, you are HOT.
I never wanted so badly to be a snake.
Brilliant!!! I'm a newbie here, & don't think I'm any good at philosophy or even understanding it, but am off to check out your other videos because I got a lot out of this one!!! Absolutely loved it!! (Maybe there's philosophical hope for me yet...)
Hooray! Welcome!
Philosophy will be better when they separate it from politics like the division between church and state
I love the reference to my all time favorite play. I love that you use theatre as a medium to convey a lesson. I may disagree with you at points but I respect your ability to convey an idea, argument, and opinion in a way I, as a self proclaimed man of thought, can accept your point of view
40 minutes of gay innuendo.
+Thomas Buchovecky No, I don't really believe in these sort of labels/slurs (SJW, libtards, antiSJW, etc.).
+Michael Heyness Are you part of the "anti SJW" community?
I bet the guy has lines like, how dare he make satanism cool. The copyright system is so bizarre, god must invented it to torture humanity. : ) And of course lucifer is a great singer. And what a guy said about pragmatism. Pragmatism is the ability to be pragmatic in a certain field and not be all or nothing, It has barely to do with morals at all. Pragmatism is a facette of what you believe in, not the whole thing. A social worker cant save everyone and has to devide resources to be pragmatic whom to help. He would be bad in his job idf he burns out soo soon because he is careless. But i doubt a badly paid social worker doesnt care about helping as many humans as possible, it just isnt possible to help all people who need it at once.
this was pretty woke, mate.
So I'm about half way, through my lunch break and this video I was wondering, if relativism from what I understand is context of what is right or wrong, culturally or geographically or whatever Wouldn't the historical and environmental factors leading up to say, creations of laws or cultural views be an objective thing? Only subjectively experienced due to "seperation" of said people? Be it in time or historically. Also the seperation between choas and order or subject and object, would remain a subjective thing for the reason that humans A. Have limited sensory input B. We cannot EVER calculate the choas that is reality atleast objectionablly because there are too many variables in past , present and future. As well and things of the unknown (Lol) C. Everything we experience is based on this universes laws, which for most of the physical ones are objective, yet subjectively experienced... Just as a post script, I'm still getting into philosophy so don't shoot me if my questions seem dumb Thanks, Lucifer has some nice wings y'all
Kybalion
Peterson has a very screwed up view on history. Because myths are tied to cultures and cultures to history. And to judge a religion and belief and what it originally meant, you need the history. Overly sarcastic productions is very good, and fun with retracking myths and other historical stuff, with disarming cute drawings and sarcasm. I am pretty sure peterson doesnt know the very common theories explained there that some cultures, like authors either integrate them to get someone on their side, likew see we have something similar to your believes, or you can worship the tree and feast and getdrunk, just call it christmas and jesuses birthday Or plain ripping off characters with slightly altering them to fit in a culture. Overly sarcastic productions is really educational and funny, look it up..
Have you heard of optimistic nihilism? Kurtsgestat has a fantastic video about it and i feel like i subscribe to that.
He sounds like Mr. Darcy..
“Rather have the snake than the snake oil salesman.” Yasss! I am so glad I delayed my gratification to watch this; you fully articulated my outlook on these characters and my experience (long suspected I’m a hedonist; my husband would agree). And I notice how these die-hard “Westernists” are starting to fall from favor because, as you point out, they employ the tools they seek to destroy. Plus, your smoky-eye game is EVERYTHING! Beep!
olly, ples put your shite on spotify m8
Very nice of Dr. Peterson to provide voice over for his own quotes
Damn boi, you are HOT when you are bare chested and dressed as satan. SEHR HEIßER MANN. Sorry, what were you saying? Relativism?
welcome in the left leaning youtube, try to not get too brainwashed. The same goes for the right leaning youtube
You know that the two are literally one and the same right?
People having fun with their method of presentation, that's the only thing that you can bring up...
+LightNessITA Please look up "14 Characteristics of Fascism" to see how fascism actually manifests. Not all argument, mockery, shaming, deplatforming, or even violence is fascist.
do you live under a rock? The leftube and the left leaning reddit are equals to the far right ones. *you have to circlejerk *you have to act in the same way your community want you to *you have to ignore all the arguments that go in the right leaning direction or you will get destroyed by your community The only difference is the far leftleaning one can act in fascist way and yet they can get away with it, because they are not the "far right" one
What feeling superior to bigots and pseudo-scientists? I am very happy feeling superior to them.
I came here only to find out why young male tech workers adore this Canadian asshole so much, why he is so hard-right proto-fascist, ("cultural Marxism" is a fascist fable going back to the Nazis) and finally why he is such a global warming denialist and lover of tar-oil pipelines. Maybe a answer was in there somewhere...
when you started studying philosophy did you have this style of presentation in mind, or did it just happen to you?
I wouldn't mind if Ollie here decided to fly a bit with those wings so he could grace us with a look at his
Soooo everything is subjective and there is no objectivity? Ok... I knew that
_muh brain wouldn't make any more of the happy juice_
+EvanTheKnave I am talking about the toxic community behind all the leftist youtubers/subreddits are fascist, as a whole, searching and "beating up" everyone with a different opinion of them. That's how fascist was born.
+Thomas Buchovecky I'm usually careful about revealing my political preferences, as people tend to make a lot of unfair associations with both halves of the political spectrum (which itself is quite oversimplifying), but since you appear to be reasonable person, I'll tell you calling me social liberal might be somewhat correct.
+Michael Heyness I'm honestly just asking, I'm not trying to start some ideological flame war.
Judging from your sub list, I would say you're right wing, correct? You could probably tell I'm a leftist from mine.
+Michael Heyness Well they call themselves that so I don't think it's a slur. I was myself one 2015-2017.
The Aesthetic of this video is just stunning. I ,,,,, asafdjlkh
well, if I ever doubted my attraction to cis masc people, I do so no longer
Was only a matter of time before the the left got their version of Stefan Molyneaux..
No, it's even worse, you can't even no if there is something objective because your trapped inside your subjective mind. There may or may not be something objective, but regardless we can't now it.
Damn. First i saw you do detectivework in LA, then i saw you fuck things up in greendale and now im watching you on youtube. Keeping yourself busy from hell it seems
The way that snake keeps slowly tightening itself around Ollie's neck is making me very nervous.
this video is sexy and informative and I'm subverting gender norms now thank you
I love how the third patron listed is "Hedon D'Ennui." No way that's a coincidence ;) Also... lovely shirt at the end
Pussy worship Hm... I suppose there's a "religion" I can get behind
"As has been pointed out by an inspiring angel" Me: Is that.. Contra? *takes a closer look^ "Nice"
this will absolutely give me nightmares, thanks
Life is about finding a way to distract yourself before you die. Hedonism is just a distraction, along with everything else you named.
I can’t get over the Peterson accent when you quote him
I appreciate the amount of effort put into your videos, it shows true dedication, however disagreements are fundamentally the key to progress and success, since a true "good" world is not possible due to how different people perceive "good", I think fundamentally a good balance is somewhere in the middle, not left wing nor right wing, not religious nor atheist which makes it very difficult for a lot of people to grasp and understand. For example, instead of being a strong believer in any specific religion to allow the possibility that they might all be correct to some extent and that you're in no position to impose your own view forcefully on others, may they be your children, friends or enemies. Instead of being a follower of a political view why not listen to all arguments and weight it to how it affects you and your life, we know life is short (relatively speaking) and that our actions today will have consequences for future generations, so if we keep that in mind and then consider the direction humanity is currently going you may find it that both sides have a level of correctness to their claims, migrants are 100% a short term threat, there's no way you can decline that, the cultural difference will always generate some level of friction and conflict however in the long run it would be beneficial due to the genetic mixing that will eventually result (and eventually cultures would mix taking the best out of each culture and grow as a community) As with everything reaching a compromise is key
Best video I’ve seen so far on Jordan Peterson. But I wish you wouldn’t call Harris a neuroscientist. He is a guy with a neuroscience degree who did exactly one piece of scientific research, which was part of his thesis. He has never done any scientific research since. it seems obvious to me that he got the degree just to give his religious and philosophical screeds some street CRED.
Great video but I still wanna know why he's got lobsters in his trousers
Can't believe you didn't mention Peter Singer
21:30 Marx was wrong, capitalism is the best we got until post-scarcity and am sorry we are not there yet.
I like Jordan a lot, but I like this video a lot too.
You're actually magical
That's a pretty cute snake Honestly, I never really like snakes, they don't have any affection for humans, but I guess they are cute sometimes
5 min in, and I'm like... what's wrong with p***y worshipping?! u.u
glad to hear Berthold Brecht is in hell after having to read “Mutter Courage” in school
“ Harris thinks you should all be brave free speech warriors and face the truth” not only is this a simplistic mischaracterization of Harris views, but it’s an obvious rhetorical attempt to liken him to SJWs. You also oddly seem to think the theocratic oppression of women and violence are disconnected from religious ideology. Violence and the oppression of women in the Muslim world has no other origin than the traditions and ideology of radical Islam. Don’t take my word for it, go talk to conservative Muslims and ask them about things like forced veiling and honor killings. They wont dance around the reason why these things occur. You’ve said in past videos that figures like Sam Harris are “racializing” Muslims or “otherizing.” This is deeply mistaken. Criticizing bad ideas and closed systems of thought is not an attack on any group of people, it’s an attack on ideology. You’re a liar with a radical agenda, and your views hurt innocent people that are suffering under theocratic oppression.
Oof...
There's honestly too many things that are drawing my visual attention to really understand the content of the audio. I eventually got over it but it's literally me spending 5 minutes doing "play video, oh what did he say, go back 5-10 seconds" over and over again. Idk, might just be me.
ollie, sweetheart, how do you expect me to focus on what youre saying
Theodore T talks
Camus lived a rather hedonistic life
At the start of the video I was like "Dude, what is happening to you. I miss the simple, straight up educational channel". Then he said: "...has a lot of fans, both on the internet, and in hell. Which are increasingly the same thing." Won me over. Edit: Then he proceeded to misrepresent Sam Harris' moral landscape argument. Sigh.
I use subtitles in your video, sorry for keep staring at your belly button.
But DOES modern relativity lead to pussy worship? You didn't answer, Olly.
honestly you and "Contrapoints" have the best video format for this kinda stuff in my opinion, its chapters and sections full of imagery and clever word play that makes it more than just some guy ranting to his webcam. 10/10
Gonna be honest, Olly being all hot and naked is making it difficult to focus on the lecture
hell seems like a pretty dope place
Hot
Also Daddy
The set up is nice but the topic is boring without pictures and more different visual ques you explained it well
umm wow that song's great also it's to great to see a British contrapoints
+LightNessITA (just thinking about it. Maybe im just arrogant?)
+LightNessITA Its not the Medium which i was talking about. Its the same reccuring... thing... :/
+LightNessITA I really dont like if anything ends in a group thinking. Maybe its just because I am a-social. But Group thinking tends to end in other groups. This is not how social interctions are supposed to work ;)
+Andres Seite youtube is safe, kinda, reddit is so toxic and scary that nobody should use it
To be clear: I like the Lefttube movement (Its a very important counterpoint), but I dont want it to go down because of Left-Supremacists. So keep calm ;)
Jordan Peterson, his intro to his Kirk/Spock slashfic Tell me this is real and not just a meme.
Pussy Worship™
A sexy shirtless man dressed as Satan and talking about philosophy... *waves fan* "its getting hot in here"... :)
“Why are there lobsters in your trousers?” oh man this is too much
What’s that painting with all the suffering people that you put “Good, Obligatory, Wrong, Evil, Right, Just,” &c. over? Looks like Heironymous Bosch
“Relativism: ... Barbarian Hordes ... Pussy Worship” Spat out my tea, hahaha
SO NOW YOU CAN SING
the contrapoints vibes are definitely there, but I like what you're doing, you can pull it off nicely too lol
How to evade Ofcom and slander law ? "GOODBYE DOCTOR P. !" Well done m8
+Andres Seite not sure if you follow politics in general but that is pure group thinking. Everyone to the right of me is fascist. Everyone to the left of me is comunist, ecc ecc
Right, so Yahweh's shit spit daughter is on your side. That makes you someone I don't like.
I love that your canadian accent is fast, and your american accent is slow
25:51 the voice you keep usin for Peterson is hilarious
11:58 the definition of good includes “pussy worship” and I love it lol
5:35 the clip you showed of Natalie was so beautiful
4:15 THE NAILS YES
Am I in love?!?
So, you argue against Peterson by insisting upon "technical definitions"? What is that if not sophistry? Language is but a means of negotiating meaning and is not the actual meaning in and of itself that is to be conveyed, no? Not liking JPs definitions is not a rational argument.
I love the snakes, but i dont quite understand the connection with Jordan Peterson or the devil.
Pleasure (without moderation), evil and everything wrong are the devil's work (well, followers of abrahamic religions say that a lot at least). Peterson thinks postmodernists are bad for the world; evil.
You got a new subscriber the moment I spotted “Season two of The Mighty Boosh” under the Good column
Yeah, the hijab is voluntary wink wink
Your big "gotcha" moment isn't very persuasive. I don't think Peterson would deny personal relativism, it's almost a self-evident phenomenon. His issue is with accepting cultural relativism, which claims all societal changes are of equal value, and the only thing valuable in itself is power. When in fact, the aggregate sum of all personal relative experience creates a real, non-relative (by definition), optimizable substrate, which he believes is best understood through archetypes. I think that's why he's so hell-bent on preserving the biblical texts. He's afraid of resetting the aggregate sum to zero, and devolving back into the cultural relativism that supposedly preceded it.
*Hands gift basket and a bouquet of bread and roses* Yeaaahhh, it's...a thing. ^_^; It'll be okay. We all are. Welcome to the channel! :DD
I don't think you understand Peterson's thinking properly. I think he would agree with you that perceptions of what is order and what is chaos are subjective - after all where you position yourself - at the border of order and chaos - depends on which direction you are facing and how you see things - but I think he has argued that there is always a more objective reality beyond individual subjectivity (operating at any and all levels - an example would be female choice of mate for biological reproduction; societal norms, competition for resources, up to the level of the civilization and higher) that will 'make judgement' on your particular subjective choices for good or ill - thereby the argument that some subjective choices are more objectively better than others. I don't think I misunderstand him on this point - I apologize if I do. Also the statement 'anything is similar to anything if you look hard enough',[...] judging two things similar in a way that matters is subjective' is true to the extent that you can make a subjective choice about what similarities you are able and wish to see - [your example illustrates that one way you can do this by what level of abstraction you go to: Yes Lions and lingerie are both made or atoms, water and arsenic are identical in that they are both composed of protons, neutrons and electrons - but consuming or labeling the bottles on that rationale alone, without any other discrimination, will swiftly bring home the point that a more objective reality (in this case of our chemistry, biology and the limits of medical science) does in fact exist; in this case the 'way that matters' in distinguishing water and arsenic comes from a more objective reality beyond your narrow subjective choice and is not determined by your momentary context and that you may in fact be be completely ignorant of and therefore incapable of making a subjective choice about. So I think Peterson would argue that labeling your jars of arsenic and water identically as simply 'stuff made of protons, neutrons and electrons' is not useful in any other context outside of the narrow one of an abstract determination (like a beverage stand or a chemistry lab) and would probably merit some sort of 'judgement by objective reality' if you did so. This brings the point home that the level of abstraction we work on in our subjective understanding of things can become a highly context-dependent specialized technical language [subjective] that excludes or is ignorant of, and maybe not useful, in other contexts, but the 'way that matters' is by definition not and cannot be ignorant of its context, and the extent to which get the 'way that matters' right is the extent to which we can understand higher objective levels of understanding. For instance the level of abstraction 'empty drums' for the kids to use for welding practice in shop class is tragically one level too high from 'empty drums that used to hold paint thinner'. Similary but in the opposite direction, Feruzi's 19th C Virgin Mary and Jesus and the 5th century BCE vase: Yes 'I think there are similarities here that are relative to certain contexts' yes it foregrounds the subjective element I..I..I.certain contexts for reasons that I have…vs. "Mary and Demeter are both archetypes of the great Mother which exists in the collective unconscious" but I think he would say that more objectively, one way of thinking about it is much more useful and fruitful than the other. As an artist or a student/scholar of art or a student of the human psyche or even your own psyche; abstracting and studying the archetype of the 'Great Mother' would be much more valuable than simply labeling 'images of mothers with newborns that have some similarities in some context'. The extent to which this archetype can be abstracted from the history of the human psyche and its art it is hinting at or suggesting some higher level of objective reality as is the extent to which those aspects of the archetype can be understood qualified or quantified. The mere fact that human cultures widely spaced in time, place and materials can make depictions which resonate with each other and something within us is profoundly useful and enlightening - it suggests the abstraction - that maybe we are not merely creatures of pure subjectivity, there is a way of seeing, experiencing or feeling that transcends the merely subjective. It seems all abstraction is reification: if I understand your definition of it; you are creating a bin for thinking about things which didn't exist under that name before, you are making 'a thing' whcih summarizes qualities quantities of the pool of things from which it was abstracted - in this case one which exists at a different level of reality; perhaps one that hasn't been articulated, the extent to which it can be a 'way that matters' is the extent to which it resonates with other people, or is useful or fruitful. I think it was Democritus around the time of your vase who reified 'atoms' though of course he had no experimental evidence or way to verify this behaviour of reality and is not entirely correct (atoms can be split when subject to conditions not available in ancient Greece) at an even higher level of objective realty that humanity wasn't aware of until the last 2 centuries or so. His fellow Greeks scoffed, but he turned out to be right - atoms as more or less stable (at one set of conditions) at one level of identity and that can engage with each other is an incredibly useful and fruitful way of looking at the reality of the world. But atomic theory only came into being when the techniques and materials were advanced enough to allow manipulation of this 'thing', then it became something that had value. I think Peterson's point is that the extent to which a subjective view is good or bad is the extent to which it is useful or not useful when measured by some more objective judgement, i.e. one which is beyond the initial merely subjective. I think he would say that the layers of judgement of the higher layers build as you go up the scale and understanding grows - I can only guess that he believes there to be, ultimately, only one or he lives his live as if there were ultimately only one. Society tends to move in the direction of disabusing young people of a subjective stance that encompasses a nihilistic world view because those individuals tend to be counterproductive or destructive to the well being of themselves and those around them, and that society. It is the shared experience of life and the value of life of the vast majority of other individuals that exist or have existed that creates this objective judgement. It is not merely the sum of all the other individuals subjective choices about how to live - it is expressed in the society and its culture as a force of its own at many levels as a value. And a value which has utility and benefits for all. I think that Peterson makes the claim that ultimately there is always a higher level more objective reality judgement that will prune back the chaos of an infinite number of subjective starting- or way-points, only a subset of which will prove useful or fruitful in their environment. It's like selection in Darwin's Evolution - there is a mechanism that transcends the individual that judges the idividual 'fitness'. Again apologies If I have misunderstood what JBP has said.
love it!
well im very gay
I didn’t realize until now, but my father is really great at Epic Theater. We love to build elaborate sets for our plays. We also never cover up our scene changes. My father makes sure that the audience can very clearly the crew, and see how the sets work, and move. We make a big show of scene changes in order to display our hard work. We never thought of it as purposefully taking the audience out of the show, we thought of it as a part of the experience. And I really really love it
You know that you can organize a debate with Molyneux any time you want, right?
Another Youtube Marxist making straw-man hit-pieces on people he disagrees with. Next.
Btw i do not understand how you can claim an extensive insight into western philosophy and ethics yet at the same time espouse as brutalistic and error strewn a system as marxist lenninism self evidently is.
"Maps"? Isnt that code for something?
Philosophy Tube I know this is very late, but burkas and hijabs are mostly a cultural thing and not Muslim thing per se
Ollie doesn't delete comments right? Just wondering as I wouldn't have blamed him if he had deleted that thread with franklin pickle.
Albert Camus makes the most sense to me, but honestly antinatalism is the cure from all of the ailments in existence.
That is a good looking demon.
The cut at 3:13 from whole upper body to a close up is jarring as hell, maybe because of the downward movement of your arm pulling the attention in the opposite direction? Sorry, nitpicking I know, just really bugged me
When you critique Peterson's choice of words, all you are doing is academic gatekeeping. The meaning of words changes depending on the context in which they are used, and it's silly to suggest academic philosophy has any authority to lay down definitive definitions for the rest of us. This is especially important for postmodernism and nihilism, because they were literary and artistic movements even more so than they were philosophical positions. I think it is this looser sense of a social movement that Peterson refers to when using these words.
love it! and... you're funny.... (min24) ok not THAT funny.
This is sort of uncomfortable to watch
Ngl he was looking good
Snek
Mighty Boosh reference!!!!!!
Yo wtf this dude can SING??
+Master Adjuster reification
You sir are one educacional and sexy man. Loving the channel!
i love the little danger noodle, i stan him
Since seeing the blooper reel I now have to focus on what Tigger is doing the whole time
oh my god the *titties*.... this is some juicy content
Is that the I Heart Huckabees music in the final circle? (30:30)
Is that a bloody snake!
Your best so far!
Also please hold off on that suicide
you have puffy nips
I've never been so aroused or so well-informed. *swoons*
I would really like to go out and take MDMA with you :D Haven't taken it for the same reason in a while... But I have still some good Memorys of it
18:00 Why are you denying induction in such a goddamn roundabout way?
You should always be naked #OnlyFans
This video is objectively good
god i wish i were those snakes
So how bad did you lose the lawsuit with Natalie.
That's not really you speaking, it's Natalie.
The jordan peterson voice is so fucking funny
i'm just gonna say olly looks fantastic in this, that's my entire take
a mac user? You surely are the king of hell.
Love the song at the end. Ironically he sings about someone's lack of human touch while giving his own human touch to the video by singing an original song :)
Me listening to this: (Brekt)? Who the hell is (Brekt)? Me, laying in bed 2 hours later: Oh heck, he meant BRECHT! To hell, you german philosophy classes!
Contoured for the gods.
Whose snake is that? It's a cute boi
What? Who?? Where???
What a pompous ass. This is real low brow shit.
YO! Your Peterson accent is on point.
"We live. We die. None of it makes sense. Now come watch TV." Morty, of Rick and Morty
So wait are you saying contextualism is a kind if relativism? Because I always thought that was something distinctly different (or at least worth clarifying).
Honestly I don't think the idea that some people (or most or all of them) don't really know what freedom etc means is not that crazy/imperialist at all. It's more like a core Marxist idea that humans, if they are subject to suppression will internalize it to the point where it will be mixed up with it's opposition (hence the "integration" of anti capitalist tropes/opinions into capitalist production). Actually the opposite, that freedom, subjectivity, all that good but unrealised-within-capitalism stuff can lie within an individual and can be just asked (as the veiled women comparison around the 9 minute mark implies) seems to counter basic understandings of ideology and social conditioning. Anyone has an opinion about this? I'd be interested (:
Fucking Christ, I love you.
Everyone in the comments talking about him being like contrapoints when natalie herself was in the credits lul
"Und weil der Mensch ein Mensch ist, drum' hat er Stiefel im Gesicht nicht gern. Er will unter sich keinen Sklaven sehen, und über sich keinen Herrn" (United Front Song by Bertholt Brecht)
Great video, but the volume is sooooo lowww : /
just noticed the birth of venus painting with pride flags in ur studio
Have you read about Carl Jung?(collective subconscious). The Boyd thing is a projection and only serves a straw-man. It seems to me that you are taking Jordan Peterson out of his context (perhaps he put himself there). His "context" is found in his former book/course Maps of meanings. Not everything is relative, we share commonalities across the moral compass, from both evolutive and cultural development. I stopped at 16 min, I've found no rational (in the mathematical sense) argument Peterson hasn't already responded in his book and lectures. I hope you would have done your homeworks on his case, rather than simplifying and making assumptions. Otherwise, your video was very entertaining, nice vibe and costume. I agree about Sam Harris' critique, Jordan Peterson would also agree.
Do a video on your skincare routine. Your skin is STUN
Okay well that shirtless intro Made me gay. Happy pride
I played this video at the wrong moment, for a while thought I accidentality played one of the Warhammer 40k lore videos.
I feel like you're not wearing pants
That... chest... damn! Lookin real Lucifer there
Brilliantly done. Curious about the copyright issue. Can u disclose who claimed to have been stolen from ?
Can I worship bussy instead of pussy? Cause Olly's looking pretty good
Hey, that's fairly good impression of Jordan Peterson XD
Reducing everything down to the usefull and meaningfull parts no wonder depression follows. Jung had mistresses and even spoke on the benifit of having intellectual sexual relationships outside the marriage. Snake over snake oil salesman indeed. Reminds me of a Jung quote about how it wont do to imagine some light and pure path ...but rather to be comfortable knowing there is monstrosity in all of us to be transmuted into conciouss awarnes.
xxxmeteoraxxx Guter mann
Berkley Pearl Well thing is Brecht brigs this on another level, as in the characters themselves taking the audience out of the play. “The good person is szuan” basically ends with the play cutting off at the finale and the audience being told to make up an appropriate ending for themselves
+Morphing Taxi Evidence for your claim that Molyneux is "deranged"? You know that slander, namecalling, poisoning the well, ad hominems etc. aren't rational arguments right?
+Morphing Taxi Unless... it's preferable to smear him from afar instead of actually engaging him in reciprocity in the expectation that actually communicating with Molyneux would result in having to suffer not being able to win an actual communicative argument, hmmm?
Hugo V Debating someone clearly mentally deranged can be quite exhausting
+Morphing Taxi Why would it be masochistic?
Hugo V I don’t think Ollie’s a masochist tbh
E101ification How does he strawman lobster daddy exactly?
Endymion Stfu trot
This video convinced me Sneks are cool
Perhaps it's my strong favour for Peterson's insistence of narrative being the way how humans orient themselves, but I feel like you kept on assuming a lot of things about Peterson's arguments without him actually being here to explain. Perhaps there is moral relativism in the world, but if one adopts the mixture of Kantian- Piagetian Deontology ethics as explained by Peterson this issue, generally speaking, would resolve pretty well. For example, when you said that Borders could be conceived as both chaos and order depending on the observer, I would argue that Borders represents the tyranny of order, rather than chaos
Also, a wonderfully Brechtian blurring of the line between Olly Thorn the actor and Lucifer, Lord of Hell and Father of Lies, the character.
You do a good Lobsterman voice.
The Peterson impersonation is uncanny, uncomfortable, and great.
I was a fan of Albert Camus ideas and then I heard what happend to hes second wife. Shrimp d*ick .
Sploosh
god damn you read the entire book. i can't even make myself read good books and i have the entire summer off from teaching english. you're out here reading shitty ones for a joke. shit's inspirational dude
Why am I so turned on by this??? Why goddammit WHY?
That Chest though. lol
Stop trying to be contrapoints
You had me at Brecht
@Master Adjuster reification
@Master Adjuster reification
@Riley Carpenter you can subscribe on patreon and then immedietly cancel your subscription
@Riley Carpenter Paypal.me/PhilosophyTube his paypal is here for a 1 time donation
reification@Master Adjuster
@Riley Carpenter Paypal.me/PhilosophyTube
@Frank Washington *freeze peach They don't like actual free speach.
@Liam Boyd well she crewed this video so that might be why
What is decent about a "decent video" that fails to utilize the possibilities inherent in the medium? I know someone who used to have similarly unnecessary reactions to certain videos. Reactions that couldn't be explained by content or a criticism of anything substantial in the videos. Once it became clear to him that the connecting thread was the presence of a shirtless man or a noticeable bulge around the crotch area, he was able to explore and come to peace with the source of these internally conflicting, irrational impulses. It's a rare circumstance where psychotherapy proved effective in arriving at a solution. Irrationality stemming from childhood mistreatment or improper conditioning can be an almost genetic inevitability if not nipped in the bud with an effective freudian analyst. @SquidCaps
@The Humungus oops... thanks lol
Pretty sure you meant "red" @Crossed Wires
@Gehenna's Fire I don't know much about Buddhism, but isn't it based on trying to end suffering? In which case it would be totally consistent with hedonism.
@The Humungus The wavelengths of light not absorbed by, and translucent to, Earth's atmosphere remain the same relative to the composition of that atmosphere, however the meaning of 'blue' can never be objectively verified as no 2 sets of human eyes or optic nerves are precisely the same. No 2 historical experiences with 400 nanometer wavelength light are the same. Every consciousness is as valid as the next. Objective perspective is either a myth, or hypothetically possible if experienced by some form of god. If that argument doesn't win you over? In my universe it's a fact that objectivity doesn't exist
@The Humungus Wait a minute... what if... he's complaining because he used the copyrighted material as obvious satire... and they nailed him on copyright anyway!
@Aaron B Lingwood Ah, so that's how it works.
@Robin Evans Patrons get it early.
@Mark B Not exactly. There is a subtle difference, I will explain: Peterson is a pragmatist (could be from his university training) and pragmatists do not have a set of ethics of their own (not even Dewey's imo). Its basically a parasitic philosophy that relies on another code of ethics, but then evaluates parts of it to see if it fits its use. Peterson is (rightly) claiming that society now - which is mostly pragmatic - is dependant on ethics from religion. Meaning, atheists are connected to religion in the west as long as they remain pragmatic.
@Riley Carpenter PayPal.me/philosophytube
@Jonathan Ⓥ what peterson really hates is atheism because he believes in a subjective made up God. He just won't admit that publicly often.
@Robert Hamilton Yeah, fun for YOU, when they aren't your neighbors. Enjoy your "not in a Conservative area" privilege.
@Riley Carpenter PayPal, check above or an earlier vid
@Dream Delirium I do, but right wing, gun nut, loonies don't. Which is what makes it a fun aesthetic. It's a paradody within a parody.
@Robert Hamilton So, you have no idea what Satanism is...
@Master Adjustereification
@Dream Delirium because its a fun aesthetic and neither God nor Satan exist.
@Riley Carpenter There's a url for where you can do at the bottom of the screen for most of the ending song.
@Riley Carpenter He mentions ko-fi in the video, can't recall the username at present.
@Liam Boyd ...who feels a little derivative of Kenneth Anger...
@Riley Carpenter His paypal is listed in the description
@Matthew Morris ...I mean...duh.
@pietzsche How do you distinguish somthing that is true to all humans from somthing objective? If there's no distinction then... well there's no distinction.
@zack rudinski philosophically objective things are true without respect to perspective. Something that appears true to all humans would just be relative to all humans. Truly objective things seem unlikely as the idea is internally contradictory. Scientists often use the term "objective" but that's more a function of language than a commitment to the philosophical concept
@Master Adjuster reification?
what kind of snakes are those? the larger one looks like a carpet python maybe. they are beautiful. i want to smooch the king of hell and cradle his beautiful serpents.
What are the snakes' names?
"Is this Theodore T. Talks?" Ha ha ha ha ha!
You do a pretty good JP impression.
this is a good look for you
unrelated but at 30:20 you sound exactly like Matthew McFadyen in Pride and Prejudice
Me too, kinda
Rather back handed.
@Morphing Taxi Evidence for your claim that Molyneux is "deranged"? You know that slander, namecalling, poisoning the well, ad hominems etc. aren't rational arguments right?
@Morphing Taxi Unless... it's preferable to smear him from afar instead of actually engaging him in reciprocity in the expectation that actually communicating with Molyneux would result in having to suffer not being able to win an actual communicative argument, hmmm?
@Morphing Taxi Why would it be masochistic?
No reply as of yet. Hmm.
Oh my god how dare somebody have a contrasting opinion to you.
How did you get oliver to do this
I think I need that Jeff Goldblum Chaos T-shirt!
I can't stop watching this video it's so good
I think the guy in this video would get destroyed by Peterson in a live debate.
Those nails are EVERYTHING. Incredible video as usual
Im convinced Contrapoints and Philosophy Tube exists in the same universe. And that universe is horny
Juden peterstein
Your Peterson voice is A+
Ha classic! An idiot lobster fanatic using the "you're taking him out of context" You are a 2 year old meme. Who's got money on this bafoon responding to me with "YoU diDn'T ReFUtE mY aRgUmenTS!!!!1"?
Gay But I love it ☻
I should have found this channel ages ago. Fucks sake man this was brilliant funny irreverent inteligent and stupid in a good way not to mention just very visualy pleasing, well done
Just discovered you. And I already love you. Now I say goodbye to learning for my finals. I have to watch a whole lot of awesome videos.
Oh my god it's contrapoints but a guy
No. Harris does not say "I know what's good for you". He says "there are facts about whether something is good for someone or not". At no point does he claim to be the authority on any given one of those facts; he merely asserts that there are facts to be known.
@Philosophy Tube surely you recognise that you're not really engaging the point? Let's say that Harris is wrong about all of those observations - fine. But the foundation of his argument isn't predicated on that. Your response was ad hominem. He could well be wrong about all of those specifics as a person, but the crux (that there are facts to be known) stands whether he's right about those facts or not.
In his book and elsewhere he *at least* strongly implies that Islam is factually bad and that stuff like torture and racial profiling is okay.
Wow just read below that your sexy devil has aroused so much insecurity in JP fan boys that are now traumatically acting out like his confused alter boys. Keep up the good work.
Oh My Gosh! so thrilled with your artistry and articulation of what I call 'Whole Truth' philosophy. LOVE ALL you sexy devil.
Marxism has produced X Y and Z that has been beneficial to humanity. And X Y and Z would be..?
Because people have different reactions to the forces of order and chaos doesn't make those forces subjective, it makes humans subjective. A chaotic being will feel terror in the face of one that enforces order, while an ordered being will feel more at peace. If you were to for example reference a minority group who feels that the uniform of the police symbolizes systemic oppression in the form of unequal enforcement, and if that were true, then the uniform would not represent order but disorder and chaos. Peterson merely believes that us subjective humans need a balance of the objective forces of order and chaos. I think people naturally understand their objective properties so the good doctor doesn't need to spell them out.
28:35 whatever Diogenes was doing. That stuff is actually golden
I'm always confused when people complain about relativism. As I understood, it is a feature of anthropology to distance your own bias from the people you are interacting with, in order to promote a greater understanding and respect of each other. Can someone clear this up, is this a different relativism we are talking about? I want to get my definitions straight.
nietzsche actually said that religion is for pussies, basically. In a sense that it gives people hope that one day "the sun will shine upon them", just do some good thing and avoid doing bad things and then just wait to die. The ubermensch does not hope to be saved one day. He does not need to be saved because he is not miserable. He gives his life a value himself. And no, atheists and apatheists are not immoral. Actually I would say we are more moral that religious people because our moral come from our consiousness and not from an external source. We do not help people for some external reward, we do it for the sake of it Because we love people. That is why the lives of ubermensch are meaningful
Gay And I love it ☻
@Voltairine Kropotkin in this case, at least, he'd be right - I don't have any evidence that he recognises that he's not really engaging the point. Note that I did phrase it as a question though and not as a statement.
James Fletcher Daniel Dennett writes in _Intuition Pumps_ that any sentence beginning with "surely" is disguising the fact that there's no evidence or real argument to support i.
How evil of Doctor Peterson to try to push his views and political ideology down people's throat, how nasty and Intellectually dishonest, it is important to point out these intellectual marionettists when they try to convert people to adopt their values and beliefs ....... But have you ever heard of Hedonism ? It is on the rise lately, since I agree with it so much I will expose it in such a good light that it will apear as if it doesn't have any problems of it's own, and it is not as if I by any means am trying to ideologically push people towards a completely arbitrary philosophical doctrine about the world just because I like it, may it be far from me ! Imagine that ! I would be doing exactly that which I so much disagree about ! It would be just like I began to commit the same errors of Dr.Peterson, and we cannot have that !!!!!!
The hive mind is a fascinating thing. Fascinating and truly detestable - in equal measure. Just wait until the owners of this rock get back. They will be pissed. Aleister Crowley, has a lot to fking answer for. The eternal skull fking is well and truly deserved if you ask me. Philosophising for a living is so 19th century.
ok fine maybe I do like men
lol you deserve more attention
>using the moral high ground to justify your actions is bad >punch nazis, racists, and homophobes
@Master Adjuster Reification.
@Riley Carpenter at patreon you can, if not just unsubscribe right away
oh fuck, a smart and handsome guy
Snakes? A shirt with Jeff Goldblum's face on it? A pretty damn good rendition of one of my favorite songs? Actually insightful analysis and excellent content? This can't be youtube can it?
14:48 WHAT? so because YOU FEEL a certain way that changes the world you inherited.. not a chance. There should be no doubt about the function of borders and the reasoning for uniforms on police in any sane person.
This is a jumbled mess filled with logical leaps and faulty thinking.. listening to this word salad is like putting my head in a blender.
12:20 massive logical leap... you are just 'drawing this conclusion' because the words sound alike, the conclusion isn't logically similar to moral relativity. They are not relative as in relative to a social context or relative as in 'everchanging', its relative to IN WHAT SENTENCE(STRING OF WORDS) YOU SAY THESE THINGS.
9:15 and what is wrong with that? WE DO KNOW WHAT IS GOOD, just because YOU DON'T doesn't mean NORMAL PEOPLE can still ACT honorable.
Science won't have all the answers - but truth has shown that certain ideas create better functioning societies than others.
8:13 acid-attacks is an imported problem, so is taharush gamea, honor killings, cousin marriage(incest) and related problems are real.. closing your eyes and pointing to some arbitrary marxist idea about power-dynamics is not going to help whatsoever.
I had a friend at one time who was REALLY pushing the Jordan Peterson mindset at me, and I was hesitant to go there. I'd never looked into Jordan Peterson up until that point, but as soon as I saw a video or two, I was shocked that my then-friend idolized him so much (he really did idolize him --- he quoted Jordan Peterson constantly like it was a holy text or something). It was at that point that I realized how much my then-friend and I fundamentally disagreed on many social and economic issues. Needless to say, things happened, and we're no longer friends, but I'm completely cool with that --- I don't need someone like that in my life. I'm an engineering student --- I can see past the guise of objectivity that Jordan Peterson claims to uphold. Keep up the excellent work, Olly!
Hbomberguy sub here. This was my first video. What a trip it was.
Just began watching. This tran is both in love with your costumes and incredibly thankful for such great content. Keep it up. Time to subscribe and watch literally everything else.
Um, ok, so ... I think there's a problem with your argument for hedonism. The way I understand your argument is as such: If we have to accept that meaning is fundamentally constructed by humans in the face of a cold and not inherently meaningful world, we have to combat this by consciously constructing our own meaning. Because, as was presupposed, meaning is constructed, it is contextual to the people who construct it. Therefore a theory of how you should construct meaning must itself allow for contextuality to some degree. This part I agree with. You then go on to claim that the way we should construct meaning in our lives is by the metric of how much long term aesthetic pleasure we may get by looking at how we live our lives from a distanced perspective. And here is where I disagree. Or rather, I think we're missing something here. We're missing an idea of how and why things actually become meaningful to people. So ... yeah, that's basically that. I was gonna write a thing about why we need to understand how and why things become meaningful to people before we tell them how to construct meaning for their lives, but I think that's blatently obvious, so I won't bother. I have some other grudges against your argument as well; for example the point you yourself criticized: that sometimes pleasure isn't pleasurable; and in fact I think human emotions are a bit too complex to just put one on a pedestal (or at least, if pleasure is not understood as an emotion, we should explain what exactly makes it distinct). And the whole distanced perspective part I'm not sold on either, yet I believe that it is necessary for your argument, because aesthetic pleasure is ultimately the pleasure of perceiving something, not of embodying it. But without an understanding of how things become meaningful to people, these points of contention are just as void as your conclusion, so it wouldn't make much sense to argue them, before the first point is resolved. So ... how and why DO things become meaningful to people? PS: To clarify, I very much did like the video and I even liked the argument I criticized, I just don't agree with it.
Who're the snakes? I want to here about these snakes! Are they okay? Do they like their snoots booped!? ANSWER THE QUESTION
The citations on this video are cracking me up. The details are excellent. Thank you.
Hell is not a place. It is actually probably exactly what you think death is.
Sounds funny how you dismiss Molyneux as an "ex-software salesman" while yourself declares being a "philosopher". One that has not written a single book or ever developed any line of thought other than regurgitating past failed leftists mojos. The question is, would you dare have him on your show or you going to his? I have plenty of popcorn stored...
Nihilism is cancer
this is a great video but olly i gotta know what the snakes’ names are!!
Could have just called Boyd's theory Cornell Realism.
You always put so much effort into those videos.....Amazing.
Wrong!!! You are misreading Peterson, or at least cherry-picking his philosophy for the sake of drama. If you want the "Peterson for Idiots" version: he is basically telling young people who are living in their parents basements, daydreaming about their futures, their place in the word and otherwise shopping around for an ideology at the University and online should INSTEAD get their lives together first. Obviously this is good advice for any parent as well as for their rebellious teenagers who are being radicalized at the Universities. To be honest and realistic, most likely your "revolution" will never come and once you grow out of the "extended adolescence" (Peterson) of your college years you will be shackled with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of $$$$ in debt for a worthless social science or philosophy that allowed you to explore the revolutionary ideologies of your youth rather that doing something that would have been truly productive and good for your own future, family and society. Secondly, Peterson also talks about "hierarchies of competence". Thus in order for you to become a leader of society you must demonstrate that you have your own house in order and are otherwise somebody who is responsible and competent enough to be put into a position of leadership....So Peterson's message is for young people to not waste their time on radical revolutionary politics...and if you are going to go down that route, at least be more mature and have your house in order first. I know, philosophy for adults is a bitter pill to swallow, but Peterson is spot on in calling out the university-industrial-complex for extending adolescence and shackling millions into debt. That much, you have to give him credit for.
Help! I’m in love with this man
Thank you.
albert camoo? bertolt brekt? the butchering of it all :)
The song at the end at 1.5x speed...
I re-read Das Kapital and the Communist Manifesto purely for the entertainment value. I feel they could be renamed Adventures In Fantasyland Volume 1 & 2.
Hedonism reminds me of Crowley and H.P. Blatvatsky. Is there any real overlap there?
You wait for the drugs to wear off. I am waiting for them to kick in. Hedonism, Hero, Hedonism, Heroin - look how they all sound so similar. See you in two hours.
Why is Goodbye Dr P not on spotify yet?
"but how can you tell the difference between a brain scan of someone who is "really" happy and someone who is merely deluded? You can`t." That`s a little nitpick from me but _what_? What do you mean? Did somebody take scans of people and they discovered there is no difference? Can you link that study? Because if there is a straight correlation between saying "im happy" and "im not happy" and being happy and unhappy and the difference shows in scan than there will be a difference between a brain scan of a happy person and the one who is pretending. Like, i know that you meant this as responce to sam harris who thinks he can tell people if they are truly happy but, god, your sentence sounded really stupid. And than you make song where you tell science is bad? get out of here and call hbomb or smth. Do you really wanna support anti-science?
I know this wasn't uploaded in June but.... My fellow mlm, happy pride month
"does relativism lead to pussy worship" Uh, I sure hope it does
God damn he’s such daddy material uuhhuuccuchuuhuhh7hfhughgggg
Peterson hates Postmodernism because he hates the French
22:35 haha I could have sworn you were HBomerGuy for a second there
You can't where religious garments by choice, that's dumb.
What's the snake's name, is it yours? It's cute. Mum's Christian so I can't have one :3.
@The Intrigued wrong. He was "specifically" asked about women who *say* that they wear the hijab voluntarily. If you want to argue specifics, then make sure to fully engage them, as what is voluntary is orthogonal to what people say is voluntary. I also like how you close your remark by calling him a moron based on his alleged failure to recognise the specifics - talk about ironic. Regardless, this is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand: even if you were right in your claim it'd have no bearing on anything here.
Harris was "specifically" asked about those women who wore the Hijab voluntarily, to which he replied "don't take their word for it". Now, there might be lots of Muslims women who are forced to wear the Hijab but I'm dead sure there are many who do it on their own, he was specifically asked about only those. The moron never answered the question.
Good job on deconstructing Peterson so that people can see his inconsistencies. Don't think I agree with the whole hedonism is the answer to nihilism bit. Or the whole religion isn't a good answer to nihilism remark. But otherwise ummmm creative video and uhhhh... theme... lol
Jordon Peterson, responding to his waitress' question, "Is Pepsi okay?" lol
Blanik L-13 Gömmies owned e
HuskerfanMargarita So he’s blatantly pushing conservative propaganda but disguises it as self improvement in order to appeal to emotionally stunted young men? Yea I already knew as much
EL Presidente Damn right
@James Fletcher I haven't watched the original video, maybe there is 'say' in there but it's irrelevant really. Of-course, some women might be forced to wear the Hijab so "don't take their word for it". Take Harris'...Umm? Who knows. I don't believe that the man wanted to ask whether *all* those who say they wear the Hijab voluntarily are correct in their saying or not? It was really about consent, and what do we do with those who wear that on their own. "Don't take their word for it" take anyone's. And you'd still have a big portion remaining, what do we *do* with those still remains unanswered.
@The Intrigued that's because the *say* isn't included in this video. It's been cut out. At no point does Harris state that they're brainwashed.
@James Fletcher 8:40 I'm missing the *say* here and the point really was what we *do* with such women. This is also why he says they might be brainwashed.
yummy body & mind.
A man pretending to be a scientist saying that we can just ignore certain people or data is admitting to being a bad scientist. You can be certain that they manipulate their results, exclude samples they don't like, and use inconsistent collection methods because they "know" they're right.
As a gay man, this costume makes me feel personally attacked.
"If nothing we do matters, than all that matters is what we do"
I was zoning out during the Order Chaos purple background quote until I read the citation. Now I can't breathe.
SNEKKKKKKKKKKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
You Jo-Pete impressions needs a little more Kermit.
Hell is just Denton, period. That, and Clearwater, Florida, Ormskirk Lancashire, Akron Ohio, and the entire state of Arizona.
This video weirdly calms me down and i also realize I watch it after hedonistically binging on video games or some other selfish pleasure
_d e l a y e d g r a t i f i c a t i o n_
uuuhhhhhhhhhh the nails and the snakes........senxy
Is your word-salad because of drugs?
@The Intrigued if it's irrelevant then why predicate the entirity of your initial reply to me on the contrary? One second, Harris is a "moron" who doesn't understand the soecifics, but as soon as it's established that it's you, in fact, who doesn't understand said specifics, all of a sudden those specifics don't matter? How convenient buddy. Nice moving of the goalposts there. Yeah, don't take their word for it. If their word isn't a reliable metric by which to determine the accuracy of the claim then you shouldn't take their word as reliable justification. I don't even know what the rest of what you've typed actually means.
Great video man. Good job.
"if one does not worship the pussy, they a lil bitch" - Nietzsche
i thought this was gonna be a critque on jordan peterson but it turned out to be a whole different sort of bag of nuts
*punch nazis, racists and homophobes back. FTFY
Like the last time he debated a marxist?
just beautifully written and articulated
23:33 Reminds me of Garry Shandling. Made me smile.
Increible
Sexy man.
I was turned on to Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged when I was in my late teens by a coworker. It was like the scales had been lifted from my eyes. I suddenly saw the world, its perfections and imperfections, with the clearest lens. I took some of the language in stride: I was acutely aware of certain trains of thought that were certainly wrong. Her writing elevated my person and gave me a voice, where I used to simply not have one. I was the guy that argued why I didn't need to pay for someone's grandmother's care, about personal responsibility, of being uplifted when seeing someone achieve. I used to feel angry when people "peddled their sores," thinking it was about guilt trips and coercing people into things they didn't want. I didn't like that people could coerce corporations using what I called frivolous lawsuits, thinking the amounts were excessive for the damages. It took working for a large bank, living with people of humble means, an abusive relationship, and my mom's suffering for me to admit that Rand did not have the right of it, that heroes can and do exist, but not in the fantasy of her novels or the delusion of her philosophy. The people doing the legwork and standing up for people even at personal cost to their livelihood and safety, those are real heroes we should be celebrating. I think Jordan Peterson is filling the same role for the same vulnerable people, though much more modern and direct in his approach. Rand always hid behind her "telling no man what to do" mantra, instead opting to say what they should do. Strongly. Peterson is much more willing to program his audience with dos and don'ts for his ideal life for them. Overall it is more toxic only because he is more relevant. Speaking as someone who drank from the Kool Aid and spends time regretting his impassioned defense of these kinds of delusions, I can do little else but apologize for the harm I could have done by my spread of that ideology, and cheer on those who would fight it in the name of the potential and the goodness I do see in people. Edit: Keep up the good fight.
I'm on my second watch, I couldn't get it the first time around, so distracted with his sexyness.
I'm not the only one who got distracted by the adorable snakes, right!? Please tell me I'm not alone in this!
You made some valid points. And I could pick some or most of them apart. But it’s pointless to. The real problem, is that Peterson is a psychologist. I’m interested in what he had to say about human relationships and happiness based on his research of people. His interpretation of philosophy is interesting but we can pick apart his views, or your views, or any philosophers views on philosophy all day and kind of get nowhere. The biggest problem with this video and others like it, is that it’s really easy to tear someone down in YouTube response video to get a bunch of ad money. But not as easy to inspire others with real wisdom of your own. I’m sure you have a moral code you live by. The very fact that you’re a successful YouTuber means it’s probably very much the advice that Peterson prescribes. So what’s your advice for living a meaningful life? Do you take a stance on anything or are you just playing academic philosophical gymnastics with famous speakers for YouTube plays? You throw some options out there I guess, in a tongue in cheek we’re not sure if you’re being serious kind of way. Like, Hedonism. Is that really your advice. No, so you love on to The Absurd, which I enjoyed and being a cynic I’m quite drawn to but it’s not good advice. I tried living that way when I was younger. The. You realize other people are taking life more seriously and you’ve fallen behind in the great Game!! (Ultimately life is a video game where you have to maintain certain parameters and continually level up without letting your parameters drop. Yes I just gave you the meaning of life. That’s all it is, you’re welcome) And to top it all off, you baaaaaaascially agree with Peterson in the end anyways. And you certainly can’t disagree with his oppressor / oppressee argument because you’re a rising YouTube star, and that means that as soon as you earn more than $34k a year, you are now the 1% and you are an oppressor, which means your beloved Peterson hating fans will happily chop off your head once it rises above the crowd. Anyways, I did enjoy the piece, I just didn’t quite get any useful wisdom other then it’s ok to bang your sister?? What would be super great is if you went toe to toe in a live debate with Peterson. Debates are like, the new blood sport.
The best male boons are the left-wing boobs
Pussy worship makes sense to me. How are you born otherwise? Meanwhile, I'm just gonna worship that devilish chest hair
I like cats
Rhyannon Ashford Dr Jordan Peterson is a scientist. Oliver Harper cited no examples to support his assertion of Peterson “cherry picking” evidence, then as he came onto the important topic of Marxism (which is the foundation of Peterson’s philosophy as he is totally against the Totalitarian Communism this brought, the horrors of its society which he has studied extensively, and the way that Marxist thinking has pervaded Universities and led to a legal restriction to free speech in regards to the use of Pronouns, which he says he would be quite prepared to use the preferred Pronoun of a genuine student who wasn’t being disruptive in the class out of ordinary respect, but he is perturbed by the Orwellian precedent set by it now being illegal in Canada to not use a person’s preferred Pronoun even if you are convinced they are doing it to disrupt the class and mock the teacher’s authority, Peterson wants to be free to do the right thing not legally required to do the right thing), Oliver Harper skipped it with an off-hand remark, saying it was a big subject that could only be addressed by another video. This utterly invalidates his critique of Peterson as he fails to engage with his fundamental philosophical rejection of Marxism. Weird how a video about the Meaning of Life should be meaningless because it deliberately avoids engaging with Peterson’s solid criticisms of the Marxism Oliver Harper loves. Oliver Harper is a pretentious coward.
That was the single best Jeeps impression I've ever heard
Danse macabre in the background
Objectivity and Relativism have nothing to do with meaning in reality. Meaning comes from unpredictability (as derived from Information Theory) and reality is unpredictable due to it being neither determined nor random but based on choice (as proved by the Strong Free Will Theorem). Since one cannot exactly replay reality due to its unpredictability, our choices have real consequences which cannot be undone. That means our choices—all of them—at some level, are meaningful. Choose wisely.
1:35 Snake: I’m bouta end this man’s whole career
There is no meaning in life. There is no right or wrong. So just enjoy life while it lasts
We've got an Angel fan.
Why is it that everyone wants to avoid nihilism. For me, nihilism is a good life philosophy. It can be freeing to accept that life has no goal or meaning. Just do what makes you happy.
What Nabokov book is he holding at 31:57? Lolita?
Goodbye mister A.... Still bops!
That was really great. On point, logically sound, concise and humorous.
Are you sure your not Natalee Wynn in drag???
it took me 30 minutes to notice your thorax hair
my philosophy is empathetic hedonism; maximise your own pleasure and the pleasure of those around you (also in the way that you said where long term pleasure is prioritized over short term gratification if the short term gratification makes long term pleasure impossible or more difficult to achieve)
Felis Silvestris Catus Oliver Thorn is a pretentious coward. Thanks for the correction.
@Uncompetative His last name is Thorn.
Olly would have to raise $50,000 first.
Why couldn't Ollie fight it? It's like pretty obvious fair use; Ollie says it's a "cover," but how is what he did different from parody?
Rip me in half daddy
Never forget that Sam Harris literally advocates the death penalty for thought crime in the one book.
I love you.
Everybody's got a hard-on for Ollie here (and well you should) but didja ever stop for a moment to consider: *Camus* Ya didn't, didja?
I like how you do the scenes ( like the satan one and the singing at the end ) it makes it more amusing and of a show :)
22:52 LMAO Foucault would be in tears
thats just depressing to most people
@Morphing Taxi what about what he teaches is "conservative propaganda"???
If live has no value other than what you personally decide to give it, whats wrong with me of my own conscience deciding that murder and rape is morally correct? Since is came from within myself, how can someone of your professed viewpoint on morals denounce my outlook? Beyond just having a personal opinion that it is wrong based on your own socially/personally induced belief structure?
@Baas Note neither of them destroyed each other in that debate so I don't know what you are on about. Plus Ziezek is barely a Marxist. If anything his views align more with Hegel than Marx.
needs more kermit
Aw man I love snakes, but I don’t see many. I wish I could hold them like you do in this video more often.
What if your never happy and never sad. Am I depressed, even though I’m never really that sad?
1:15 song name. Please?
Me: "Yknow, I think I might be a lesbian, I'm not really attracted to men anymore." Oliver Thorne: *exists* Me: "Nah, definitely bi"
I actually think do I am an absurdist.
Is pepsi okay?
GODDAMN THE SONG IS AMAZING it's like the new panic at the disco I love it
ugh daddy
So....Oliver and Natalie....that’s definitely happening, right? Right?!
Rhyannon Ashford Peterson wrote a book where the twelfth step was to pet a cat you encounter in the street. So, no I don’t hold him in high regard.
@Uncompetative I was referencing Sam Harris, but your presumption and defensiveness for Peterson is quite telling. Also, I'm a psychologist just like Peterson and his work is garbage, unfounded, nonsense.
@Imurk Life has no objective value to the universe, but it has value to us as social animals. Humans are social animals, murder and rape are inherently anti-social acts. You can personally decide that murder and rape is morally correct, but that will make it very difficult to co-exist with your neighbours who think it is abhorrent, you will only be able to maintain that morality with those few who agree with you.
Why play devil's advocate when you can just play the devil instead?
"Stop trying to reify fetch. It's not going to be reified."
OLIVER, YOURE TURNING CISHET MEN GAY. HOW DO YOU FEEL.
interesting video, haven't seen all will do(am at 9:41), I think at 8:46, the argument is, if your society/god/ideology actively asks you to do something and you follow, is it your free will or are you just following orders, am a nihilist so i don't care in general, but when people only do because, "that's what expected of me" edit: on the order thing, police are mostly the Order of the land(that they are in), a outside force would still see them as the Order of that land but not a Order of the outside land. (17:00) edit 2: good video, falling to drugs (sugar and caffeine, and heavier) has most often seamed to me as personal weakness, as in that one self can't phase the face of reality whiteout it shattering your world. liked the video tho so that's something
Scary that Olly now makes Zizek look conservative. Brother I watched your videos in 2013 when you were in Grad school, they were no BS, straightforward and fairly unbiased. Although I disagree with many of your opinions, I hope all is well.
usually the word "hedonist" carries for me the weight of not being able to plan for the future well rather than making rational calculations for his future self. JP as far as I know advocates for orienting your life towards minimizing suffering, for you and those around you - is that not close to what a rational hedonist would be?
False equivalency at 8:00
Semantics are so annoying
The internet and Hell are increasingly becoming the same thing.
I always suspected the devil had a british accent
I think I'm a hedonist now...
Philosophy Tube more like Philosophy Daddy
♡♡♡
I am still a fan of Peterson, I still agree with him on many things. Did I not understood a thing?
Hmm, I just stick to realism, objectivism with the dash of stoicism to be honest, seems simple and clear.
@14:00 ChoAs iS a lAdDer
Jordan Peterson in the introduction to his Kirk/Spock slash fic hahahahahaha
i audibly gasped when i realised that was a Real Life Snake hot damn
good grief you are just a slimy exhibitionist
Why are we watching two idiots who very, very clearly didn’t think through what the hell their talking about? How did we get to this point? Like really though
Why is Sam Harris actually still thinking through the basics of cultural relativism
5:26 bae
❤️ Trans rights are human rights ❤️
Loved the video but I think the whole video comes down to collectivism vs individualism. So how i perceive things should only affect me as an individual and that's what makes things objectively true, like your example with the lion it's finding the most simplified version available. An example would be I see blue as blue but my fiend walks in and sees red. The individualist approach would be that I see blue the collectivist approach would be one of us is color blind. So the argument against collectivism is power struggle and the argument against individualism is stagnation. So I think Peterson's conundrum with relativism is that he doesn't know how to reconcile that if he speaks he's creating a collective but if he doesn't he'll be placed in a collective.
Well, shit, my personal philosophy is hedonism, then. Honestly, not really surprised.
I feel one step closer to becoming a Satanist
SEXY TITLE
You appear silly as you attempt to destroy all order that brings any meaning and yet you spend the video leading up to a final statement on chaos as meaning (not to mention all your other videos which attempt to make sense of things with narratives as well). Good luck with that.
This really is a Satan type trick.... So, Peterson's ideals criticize the destructiveness of the Left's fascism and their ignorance of highly verified research on psychology and biology. The Left/Oliver/Philosophy Tube audience just says "That's what Peterson's doing." Nope. Not an argument.
Even if what you're saying about Peterson's take on post-modernism is 100 percent true, its really not a substantially pivotal to Peterson's philosophy as you think. If Peterson were to be sit down and his ideas on power etc. put into a different political historical context, his research and conclusions would not change, still holding strong.
No culture's morality is better than another one's (if they are constantly searching for truth)... but at any given time you HAVE TO CHOOSE ONE. And its stupid for a country to naively include many (simply because they are pushed to by outraged "virtuous" Leftists with hero complexes) because its hard enough for the population to unify behind ONE.
The Peterson hating via clever theater of YouTubers or snowflake posts of their audiences is fucking retarded. Y'all haters refuse to look any deeper than your emotional reaction to what you hear. You've lost the argument RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE.
I can't articulate how happy you being able to get a live snake to talk with makes me She just looks like shes having such a good time lookin around from your arm
I...like this look a lot
Why didn't you talk about the mouthfeel ?!
Does that snake have a name?
《L⊙L》 Nice attempted Peterson interpretation, but it totally came out as Obama trying to sound like Peterson.
the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death. that's what life means and the "meaning of life" means different things for everyone else other than the definition there's no one meaning of life it's different for different kinds of people. i don't like when people see nihilism as a bad or sad thing and of course not everything doesn't matter like murder and incest are obviously wrong, but if smaller crimes don't really matter there's more freedom. lots of people are worried about their own lives so even if you're the worst person it won't matter eventually like we all know hitler is bad (just using that because it's popular but i could say genghis khan he caused a lot of death) but we don't think about him that much in our daily lives and if all our knowledge is lost and after a thousand years hitler will just be a story or maybe completely forgotten. hitler caused a lot of deaths and you can too but in the long run it won't matter and we know murder is wrong so maybe don't go the mass murder route of freedom. if you're always worrying about things you shouldn't because things don't matter, but that's all stupid because things matter a lot to us for example if you collect coins to a point of obsession and someone steals them from you and melts them it won't matter in the long run, but it will matter to you, and that was what gave you meaning in life. so things do matter, but there's no grand meaning to life it's just there. I personally think if life has a purpose it's purpose is to create more life. this is probably obvious but i'm just writing it to understand it myself
You should a video on Steven Crowder if you haven't yet.
I hadn't watched this video to the end before; holy crap the Hoosiers cover made me cream, I thank you Olly.
damn boo, u smart
You with long hair is so sexy.
Conservatives are far more obsessed with pussy. How tight it is and whether you’ve had sex or not. Progressive men are just care about whether they like you or not and just ask whether you want sex or not.
Jordan Peterson is just trying to help young men find meaning and take responsibility and their is nothing wrong with that.
i love the JP responding to "is pepsi ok"
Sold!
Maybe this is just because I'm a student of philosophy, but anything having to do with ethics and morality I can only judge using one of the major systems of evaluation. Anything can be justified from a certain point of view, but you sort of just have to pick the one with the least inconsistencies.
I gotta say, this is a LOOK.
drag me 2 hell daddy
I agree strongly with your critiques of Peterson, but I can't bring myself to accept socialism. I think it's a worse system than capitalism, through and through.
I think things like marijuana and other psychedelics can help people find the meaning in life again. They surely did so for me! I use marijuana on a daily basis and every time it brings me back to the present moment and removes all the chatter in my brain that gets in the way of me experiencing the present moment. And once you experience the present moment as deeply as I have, you realize that the meaning is right there in your face! Go out into nature and pop a tab or some shrooms or smoke a joint and try to tell me life isn't beautiful.
To me as a Buddhist, it is obvious that the meaning of life is just inherent in life itself. Experience is meaning. To live life is to be bound up in its meaning. If you don't feel life to be meaningful, you're probably depressed or suffering from trauma. Take a walk through nature and try to tell me that life isn't beautiful. You can't.
Your content is great but you should have a more vanilla channel or website without the creative/dress up side because some people may use it to de value your arguments and that would be a shame because your content is really good.
You and ContraPointa will make a fine weird couple.
“Lions are similar to lingerie in that they’re both made of atoms.”
What software did you sell?
If we agree that well-being is the goal , then there are objective truths about being well and not being well. If a muslim woman wears a veil because of her religion and she thinks that she is happy , you can objectively say she is delusional,if she wears it beause she likes the style or because she is vulnerable to sun light , then it increases her well-being and it is objectively true to wear it. If you have a given goal you can make objective judgements , and of it is not so clear you should enlarge the context in order to weigh more factors in order to judge. Man , I hate relativists and subjectivists, so annoying and dumb, soyboys and snowflakes and too much..... emotions..
@Joshua Muir And lastly , if we take for example the muslim woman with a veil. You can say , well she is happy due to her devotion to God an she is wearing the veil by choice. From humanist point of view, that is WRONG, because she can be as happy if she is not religious( there isn't some specialized kind of happiness for religious people) and wearing a veil doesn't increase her objective well-being in any way. If it is a fashion choice and she is wearing it during summer days of 42 degrees, then it is also objectively WRONG for her to like that fashion style during summer. Maybe not in the winter however. Context plays pivotal role in humanist philosophy , but direction is more or less objectively determined.
@Joshua Muir The belief of Nihilism is also seeking of well-being. A true Nihilist has promised to himself never again to be deluded or misled by anyone and anything, it a result of existential crisis that some people just can't get out of. I would say acting randomly is not a nihilistic way of acting. Randomly is more Absurdistic way, absurdists are people who believe that the meaning of life is in the conflict of meaninglessness and the search of meaning , so they embrace everything that life has to offer- more of a living in the moment kind of philosophy. Nihilists are destroying every idea and are pointing out the meaninglessness in even trying to find meaning. It is not random.
@Joshua Muir Humanist view is achieving objective well-being NOW in this life, humanists disregard afterlife or everything that they are not certain of, they think that even the question of meaning and purpose is a WRONG QUESTION. The analogue would be that we can all agree, literally all of us what a good car is, whether it is rustry whether the breaks are working, no person in the planet would disagree with the definition of a '' good car'' the well-being of the car is absolutely objective. If we agree that the PURPOSE OF LIFE IS TO ACHEIVE MAXIMUM WELL-BEING WHILE STILL HERE, that is what basically is the humanist view, then it is objective criteria of well-being the same way as it is with the car, there is no afterlife for the car or some transedental meaning for the car , that is why the example with car sounds more trivial and common sense. Eveything you do , you do it because you think if you don't it would be worse , so it is objectively tru to say that everything we do , we do it to increase well-being, however I am not saying that it is objectively true that we should be all humanists , I am not, so I am fine with that. The problem I am having with video here, is that as you yourself said suicide or sacrifice are not increasing of well-being , which is much more closer to the humanist point of view, and at the same time you say that there is no objective truth about well-being. I dont' know if you got what I am trying to say here, you are tryng to be subjective when I talk from humanist point of view when you say that there is no objective criteria of well-being , but at the same time when I am subjective and when I say that suicide in the mind of the person commiting it (WHICH IS SUBJECTIVE) is an increase of well-being then you say it clearly not as if there are some objective rules, that is my problem here.
@StaRFox Some things I'd like you to comment on if that's okay :) Can you give a concrete definition of wellbeing? (i.e., a non-subjective one) Can you comment on the cases of: A nihilist who believes their actions do not impact anything and therefore acts in a random way. A heroin user who uses unpure heroin despite knowing it will kill them. Something else I'd like you to comment on: If someone does an act which decreases their overall wellbeing but increases it in some area, can a tiny tangential link to increasing wellbeing being a fundamental goal justify calling it an objective truth?
@Joshua Muir Even suicide is an increase of well-being in the mind of the person who is commiting it. If they have problems they can not resolve , then it is increases of ''well-being'' not to exist.
@Joshua Muir The person who is sacrificing himself feels good about the act other why he would not do it , in his mind it is better to do so , so it increases well being of the person who he is saving and consequently the act increases his emotional well-being even for a short period of time , comparing to not doing the sacrifice , so overall it does increases well being.
@Joshua Muir It is objectively true that we seek , well-being , it subjective that it is important to put the human being as primal agent to decide what exactly is well-being and not God for example.
@StaRFox "It is objectively truth that we all seek the maximum of well-being" Assuming you are referring to personal well-being. Hypothetical: A person sacrifices themselves to save another. This is clearly not in their own personal interest in maximising well-being.
@Joshua Muir yeah , sure, but for me everything subjective is ....... well subjective , not important just your personal view , if you don't matter your subjective ideas of meaning don't matter as well...
@Joshua Muir Also some other distinction. Everything we do is connected to well-being and our desire.... basicaly things to get better. It is objectively truth that we all seek the maximum of well- being. The difference here is that humanists like Sam Harris put THE HUMAN at the center of achieving well-being. If human being is at the center , claims that you feel happy by wearing a veil , because Allah said so are wrong, because it is your well-being that matters independently of religious context.
@StaRFox So if there is no objective meaning of life there are only subjective meanings of life?
@Joshua Muir I believe that there is no objective meaning of life and basically we are wasting our time doing..... whatever we are doing, and that is not subjective. It doesn't matter if we are here or not , we are just a bunch of atoms that will disintegrate at some point.
@Joshua MuirWell, I am not saying that my belief system is maximising well being. That is what is called Secular Humanism. I will give you some example: If a radical muslim kills his gay son , because he thinks that his son will go to hell because by living a life as a homosexual the son commits mortal sin, the father does so with the implicit idea of increasing well-being, otherwise why do it. However if you state that maximising well-being as the very goal of life-you dont care about anything beyond the observable, then you have sligthly different situation. In the latter situation you can objectively critizise muslim father's idea of persuing well-being as WRONG. Humanists emphasize of well-being NOW , while most people seek some more transcedental meaning and in often cases that comes on expense of the well-being now , which is the main concern of humanists.
@StaRFox Ah, I now get that you can have objective truths if you make a subjective presumption. However, you seem to be making the claim that maximising wellbeing is an objective truth with phrases like "everything we do is connected to well-being". Maybe I'm just missing your point, but that's how it comes across. If you are articulating that "relativists and subjectivists are dumb", while also predicating your belief system on a subjective truth, that all seems a bit silly.
@StaRFox I wonder what you think about self-destructive habits, about self-sacrifice etcetera?
@Joshua Muir And btw, everything we do is connected to well-being , otherwise why do what you do, exactly to increase your ''wellness''. So everyone is in this game. It is different thing to say that it is the goal of life , but regardless of what you think , you think what you think to increase your well-being, we dont need to agree on that , it is just what it is...
@StaRFox I am just asking how you can search for objective truths when you are making a subjective assumption.
@Joshua Muir I am personally a Nihilist, so you dont want to go into meaning of life dicussion with me , trust me. All I said is if we agree on common goal then objectivity becomes much more clear. So you are saying we should not strive for well-being or what?
why would we agree with that foundation ?
Does this channel always rip off famous names to get views?
The return of the Y boner. With a vengeance.
satan good choise of art and repping J. Bosch is always good
This is just mental gymnastics. Do what works for you.
I wouldn't say Peterson's take on Postmodernism is wholly inaccurate, he gets a lot of the fundamentals right, even if we quibble over interpretative implications. Postmodernism, to dramatically simplify it, is an ideology of interrogation. It is only concerned with probing a subject until it atomizes for the sake of analysis. The biggest problem with postmodernism is the relative ineptitude of those who wield it for their own ends, asking "why though?" where it makes no sense to ask, just for them to fill in the gaps with preconceived fanciful nonsense. I have often called postmodernism the heat death of philosophy. It is in my opinion conceptual entropy, and 9 times out of 10 is used in a way that is completely unhelpful or as a tool to open space for some fallacious assertion. The trick is to hold the people employing postmodern investigative techniques in an inept or useless manner to their own postmodern standards for whatever conclusions they end up forwarding. Needless to say these kinds of individuals do not like having their ideas/agendas placed on their own butchers table for dissection. It is at this point, at least in my personal experience, the moral pejoratives are flung around, which gets to the real crux of why they were arguing to begin with. They almost always have an ideological ax to grind, and this is where I believe all of Jordan Peterson's anxiety concerning postmodernism stems from.
Are those your pet snakes? I had no idea you sold pot.
25:20 it's "effeminacy" not "femininity" you FAGGOT.
"I have objectivity on my side, you cannot prove me wrong". Just like everyone else who who thinks they are right. *Hypocrisy Intensifies*
Hard to take anyone seriously when they're dressed like a gay satan.
You are performing a very well known “ no- no “ in the world of cinema——you are creating a visual focal point with the snake. This causes your message to take a back seat and most will not hear a thing you say while they focus on the snake.
wow the left has chosen their champion.
9:40 yes some facts are more valuable than others based on the measure of truth to the. its true i have 3 siblings but its more true that i have 2 sisters and a brother and its even more true that i have 1 sister 1 step sister and 1 step brother.
2:36 ...the look on my face whenever anyone tells me they admire Peterson.
This video is about 3000% smarter than I am
That Snek is hanging around having a heki' good time in hek.
I disagree with most of what you say, but I love the way you say it and how thought out what you say is. Subscribed.
Do you offer transcripts of your videos? I enjoy what you're saying, but frankly, the visuals and tempo variations in your speech easily distract me from the topic. Your material is thoughtful enough to deserve a good sitting-down-to in silence.
Science is not God. It just explains How thing work not even Why? Its silly to see science as a alternative to God. Its like comparing a egg to a fruit. Conservative Islam = honour killings?? Not correct! Dont mix culture with religion. Huge hindu population still practise honour killings. They are not muslims. Its a sick cultural problem where they view women worthy of less. Yes some muslims do it but cannot use Islam to justify it cos Islam does not permit this type of madness. Voluntary wearing of veil does not mean its Voluntary. Sam u naughty boy?!! It just goes to show how someone supposedly learned can still be so so stupid. If life is just having fun it would mean life is meaningless. And life is not meaningless. You can say it is but it don't make it real. Its about being grateful to the one who created you. Sometimes we just don't want to accept the truth as it is cos it does not go along with what we (the ego) want to do. We want something that allows our whims and desires, hence you say just have fun. It just means we are deluding ourselves, hopefully not till the end Don't worship your own intellect. Accept the truth even if it goes against everything you thought was correct and may make you look silly. If you cannot do that no point looking for the truth. The actual devil will just keep you busy with all this fancy philosophy and you will miss the bus
A few pushups every once in a while wouldn't hurt, brother
Sorry, English is not my mother tongue. I see naked man with makeup who thinks he's funny and looks like a travestite (drag queen)and slander Jordan Peterson. We know well that hell is full of such characters. It would be interesting to hear him to hear what he have to say, but he would have to do it whit stile, as a man respectfully. Not like some psyche bitch in heat. I am sorry, I don’t mean disrespect, but I would rather listen to philosophe then the clown.
The Muslim women's obedience can be interpreted in a more favourable term used by feminists: "Internelised Misogyny" right?
Maybe the devil is English
Capitalism is based on hedonism since it relies on increasing demand.
@Subway Hobo I'm not sure how you read that and came to that conclusion lol. I think that neoliberalism is the single most destructive part of politics at the moment. It is the big bad.
@Preston Polen funny i feel like i agree with you and don't think neoliberalism is a bad thing at all
@Mal c.H I guess at the end of the day, it comes down to what the individual values most. To quote Marx, "In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in a single sentence: Abolition of private property" (The Communist Manifesto, Part II, Proletarians and Communists). If we are using the Marxist definition of socialism, which is a society head by a state which enforces a classless society, and eventually erodes away into a stateless society as well (Communism), then I find this to be unrealistic, and as I said in my first reply, tyrannical, as to me, I find private property to be something that people should have a right to. This, of course, can be taken very overboard though (as we discussed with neoliberals), and to quote Rousseau, "Moreover, it follows that moral inequality, authorized by positive right alone, is contrary to natural right whenever it is not combined in the same proportion with physical inequality" (Discourse on the Origin and Foundation of Inequality Among Men, Part II). I guess I feel that if you are of a higher economic caliber in society, you have a sort of inherent obligation to a moral order. But then there's the part where you can't use the state to ENFORCE that order because that's tyrannical too! Politics are so confusing lol. I don't really know where I am on the political spectrum, but I guess it would be 'somewhere on the left' TM. I appreciate your civil discourse! It gives me hope that society isn't (((totally))) screwed!
@Preston Polen Thanks for your response, I really appreciate it. As to your first point, I would certainly say you couldn't be more correct (but I do somewhat disagree with your assessment that capitalism is not inherently authoritarian, but that is a debate that we can have if you'd like - I'm talking simply based on its foundational principles and aspects).And I have to say, my friend, when someone says they dislike neoliberalism, that's a big high five from me. I Can understand your points of contention when it comes to private property and your apprehension on that front, but I think that its important to note that socialism is foundationally about the restructuring of labor. That is its most important aspect. It aims to revolutionize how labor is structured, just like how capitalism did the same thing when it was implemented. It aims to change the dichotomy between the employer-employee relationship. Or, rather, it mostly seeks to abolish it and the power dynamic that comes with it by restructuring labor so that way the employees are also the employers. Capitalism does some things well, but it has too many inherent contradictions and issues that cannot be resolved by the system itself, since the system is what gives rise to these issues in the first place. Much of this would be resolved if workers had more autonomy and agency in the workplace rather than a hierarchical, authoritarian-esque workplace. I appreciate you chatting with me and being kind and civil - like, what the fuck? That's not how YouTube comments work, you FOOL! Hehe but seriously, thanks for being civil and actually chatting.
@Mal c.H Capitalism is not inherently authoritarian, just as socialism is not inherently democratic. I like capitalism, but dislike 'neoliberalism' and the corporations that hinder progress. I believe that limiting people, though, from having the ability to have any private property at all is also inherently tyrannical, as it gives the state (which I do not trust) a total monopoly over power. If we can eliminate powerful corporations, the capitalism that is left in its wake is harmless. Think about it this way. How much has the guy who owns the coffee shop down the street ever hurt you? Very little, or not at all. Meanwhile, corporations can and do hinder you on a regular basis. I think that punishing the man who owns the coffee shop, who likely already treats his workers very well, as he must in order to keep them from going to someone who will treat them better, is wrong.
What is fundamentally wrong or displeasing to you about a democratic workplace rather than an authoritarian one?
an argument from aesthetics is not a good argument so i don't think he should change
FAGGOT KILL YOURSELF
@Frank Washington Diaries *freeze peach They don't like actual free speach.
I think the fact that Peterson links responsibility to meaning is one of the most positive things he's done. I don't really care if you can poke holes in his philosophy, the fact that he's actually helped people pull their lives together is proof enough that he's not a snake oil salesman.
The moment the video hit the 32:00 mark it became one of Ollie's best work. I'm saying this from an objective standpoint.
This video is a perfect example of social science students having trouble with statistics / stochastic determinism or basically the notion that several options may coexist relatively, but are not equally valued objectively
Objectiity doesnt mean 100% clear answers. Thats, where statistics comes in....is that so hard?
I think Jordan Peterson would say that walls and police forces have the potential to be tyrannical manifestations of order. Terror can be brought on by either Peterson's conception of Order or his conception of Chaos. The example of an abusive police force you gave would still be an example of order in Peterson's schema -- albeit tyrannical order -- not an example of chaos.
You do love coming back to the terrible and all encompassing evil of men "Controlling women" lol Your videos just... you don't quite get to an accurate or effective argument. You are close-ish but not quite.
" A philosophy of life that tells people to ignore pleasure just isn't going to go anywhere. That's why I'm not so hot on most major religions." Solely vouching for Christianity. Christianity as a whole does not tell people to ignore pleasure, it tells people to ignore harmful acts towards yourself or for others. The entire gist of Christianity is that we, humans, are not forced to obey the law because someone already payed the price for every human being that breaking the law would cost. In this freedom of not being bounded by needing to obey the demands of what is right, is where pleasure can be found. Where there is belief that ultimate pleasure is found in unison with God in heaven, there is still much goodness, creativity, and enjoyment in the world. We are allowed to enjoy it, we were given dominion over the world and it was a good thing, but that doesn't mean those things are more important than a relationship with God who created us. Exercising enjoyment in the world is find, but finding purpose and identity in that enjoyment rejects God, and by doing so, you reject the eternal God that made you and decide to die with the Earth. Hedonism is finding identity and worth in the worldly pleasures. Christianity is finding worth in what Jesus did for humanity, and as long as God is what drives you, and is where you draw your worth, and is where you put your identity in, then the world is our domain to shape and there is nothing shameful in that.
The Hoosiers song takes me back
This is so cool !
Your impressions are so absolutely bonkers I would watch just to hear them.
30:49 I wasn't ready for that.
I know you are an “intellectual man” but Lucifer is not the “lord of hell” as some believe. Rather he is the powerless headpiece, a “symbol” of hell. I don’t nesseseraly like you and have a feeling your not religious but figure I’ll throw my 2 shekalim in here anyway. Satin has no power.
I think an ideology that can be described as a relative to hedonism is optimistic nihilism. Nihilism is most often seen in a bad way but I believe once one truly confronts that life is meaningless and we are but small specks in the ever so large universe that we can find comfort in taking what little time we have and making the most of it, not only by enriching one's life but by enriching others as well. While this sounds great to me I am aware that this ideology does not work for those not inherently optimistic as I am, those who choose to focus on the bleak part of our existence. For the people who choose to look on the bleak side might need to find that sort of meaning in there life, but for those like me I take comfort that most likely my life with ultimately be meaningless and rather than dwell on that fact I choose to make it the best part of meaningless life it can be.
Exactly, is quite difficult for some to turn to optimistic nihilism
"Taking God's dead corpse and turning it into fertilizer" that is the best quote I've ever heard
Seems like you missed the boat to utilitarianism, but just barely. I would study it more if I were you, because it offers a better solution than hedonism.
Oh Hell. This happens far too often. The other Canadians have asked me, once again, to assure any non-Canadians present that we do not like Jordan Peterson and pretty much think he's the biggest twat waffle ever to misrepresent real Canadians on a global platform. On the surface, he's calm, not prone to being overtly adversarial, and he's polite-ish. Sadly though, that's a lie, a facade. The reality is that he's just a dick. We have no idea why. Sorry to be so harsh. We don't blame you for strongly disliking him. We are also sorry that he keeps sneaking across the border. Happy Canada Day! ( 01 July.) Come up and visit! You can bet your ass that Jordan won't be here!
Thank you! I have a lot of really nice words to say to you about how much Dr. P. And people who have say they are philosophers giving such awful advice and philosophy to my own life. It’s made me hit a point of hating philosophy, which I used to love. I don’t have a great capacity at the moment to say y’all the nice feelings I have for this video, so I can really only just say thank you right now. Thank you!
Porn, but _actually_ educational.
How old are you
maybe Peterson does agree with relativism but decides to disagree with it because it brings him more pleasure, seeing the world in a relativistic view makes him feel weak and powerless so he might just be doing the thing that benefits his pleasures in denying it so he can feel better about his existence. also wear a shirt next time, if i wanted to stare at a half naked dude for 30 minutes i would watch a Kevin James movie.
"Turns out to get into heaven you have to be both Muslim AND trans" Perfect start to the video
"...arguably say more about controlling women than religion". Absolute nonsense. You're a good thespian. I'll grant you that.
You're an idiot. You're a philosopher alright. A philosopher for losers.
Holy shit that's a real snake
"or... whatever Stephen Molenoux is peddling"
OK so how much snake poop did you have on you after this?
wow
if you only knew how bad things really are
You actually have to be a certain size to be healthy.
You have used yellow marker in a book?! You truly are a demon.
is he gonna do the whole video shirtless? i hope so tbh
The largest argument I can bring to the table is that youre arguing philosophy with clinical psychology. A very concept you brought up which I do really appreciate looking at his views via a different perspective however you're also arguing that he's wrong using philosophy.
29:40 and that children is why we strike at the london underground
i cant watch this any longer, if you watch this video and think to yourself that it sounds about right, then the education system failed teaching you how to research. sheeps.
@Joshua M Alright.
@Empyreal Denizen well considering how respectfull your request is, i will do so, can you remind me tmrw at about the same time?
@Joshua M Would you mind going into more detail on how many things he got wrong?
@Empyreal Denizen well depens on which topic, for example, dr. peterson doesnt devalue marx work, he just pointed out that there are a lot off ppl misinformed about his work, pulling the wrong conclusions and that these ppl are quite dominant on college campuses, he even got as far as not calling them marxists, because they dont praise what marx said, he calles them neo marxis, he had a 2 hour conversation with Slavoj Zizek on this topic if you are interested in that. i swear every point he makes (up until the 6. minute, couldnt take it much longer) was so obv wrong, not because he doesnt know what he is talking about, but because he switches things on purpos.
Care to explain?
Shit's hilarious man
King Twunk
I'm a new subscriber, thanks for your work.
Was Knowing Better first with wearing devil,angel costumes to his videos or Philosophy Tube?
He's like genderbent contrapoint.
I think you missed a point (I could be wrong) Jordan Peterson says that order is safety but it can also be tyranny, when you say that he would disagree with any order being as good as any other the reason he can still say one is better than the other is because if the duality within order, he would say father is the symbol of order but there is the tyrannical father and the good father. Similarly with black person being scared of the police that is not chaos but rather it is the other side of order which is tyrannical.
Empyreal Denizen ah that’s great, thank you for following I know I’m quite rambly at times.
@Mrginge143 Your analogy helped a bunch. Thanks!
Empyreal Denizen I wouldn’t say it’s a miss representation, I think it’s fair to say that relativism is imbedded in Jordan Peterson’s world view, I only think it falls short when he says the police man is order to one yet chaos to the black person (and this logic applies to other ideas) what the black person in this case is experiencing is too much order, tyranny rather than chaos and this is how Jordan Peterson answers this particular argument. So basically chaos and order can still be said to be objective even though at times it might be contradictory (in the case if the policeman) order is still the consistent factor there, within order there is a duality but that doesn’t necessarily make it relativist. I guess as a analogy you could say there is a magnetic field, even though they pull in different ways depending on where you are you still wouldn’t say it’s relative because it’s all part of the whole, two sides of the same coin. hope that clears it up, sorry I’m not always the greatest at explaining things
@Mrginge143 My comment will be geared more towards Philosophy tube's representation of Jordan Peterson's arguments rather than what I think of your earlier comment. If P.T. truly did misrepresent Jordan's perspective then this video is meaningless. Though I don't know enough about Jordan's philosophy to be sure.
Empyreal Denizen thoughts?
Hmm.
Doesn't Harris's view on women who choose to wear head coverings translate to the concept of internalized misogyny, not that he knows what's best for people personally?
You're wrong, Peterson is wrong, I'm wrong.
Don't worry. You'll be strong enough to do it someday
haha
If hitler and Stalin and mao, read this book When they are young.
your Jordan Peterson sucks, man.
What is odd to me about the conclusion, is that the statement "Life is meaningless, so get on with it." is a contradiction. If it is meaningless, there is no reason to "get on with it." and even your own conclusion "Life feels meaningless but I talk to friends and listen to music" is just a restatement of Peterson's main point "Pursue what feels meaningful."
Okay, he’s not red pill philosophy. Thank god!
10/10 Depiction of lucifer
Take away the smooth talking accent and the satan costume for shock value and nobody would EVER listen to 40 minutes of this pseudo philosophy.
Good job Lucy. Who will you corrupt into oblivion next?
I was all ears till you praised stewart lee . sorry but he's not a good man or a great intellect .
if you think the universe is finite then you are an objectivist . and the other is the other .
I find you highly annoying and disagree with nearly everything you say. I watch your videos purely for purposes of masochism. That said, "Taking God's dead corpse and turning it into fertilizer" is the best description of Petersonianism I've ever heard.
Ok excuse me where can I buy this song
john is healthy is not relative unless you're equivocating about the term
"those in possession of the moral facts can be justified in acting violently against the morally ignorant". I can think of one group that actually takes that statement seriously. It's called Antifa. Do you have any antifa videos?
You also have said just said that you think Sam Harris seems open to the idea that those in possession of the moral facts can be justified in acting violently against the morally ignorant. Again, your words, but you're straining so hard to apply them to Sam Harris in any way that I can't help but think you're about to use them as the basis of an argument against Jordan Peterson, but I could be wrong.
You say Harris has allowed himself the possibility of saying "I know what's good for you, and I don't necessarily need to ask." But Sam Harris didn't say that. You said that about him. Even worse, you said it about him based on a thing that you lied about him saying. You cannot be expecting anyone to take you seriously.
So you purport to tell us what Sam Harris has said...over a video of Sam Harris saying what he has purportedly said, which is completely silent, and then respond to your own statement as if Sam Harris said it. Are you asking your viewers to take you seriously, or just screaming into the void?
You should lie about Stefan Molyneux next.
It's good of you to point out that Marxism and postmodernism are contradictory. It seems you have actually engaged with Jordan Peterson's work to some extent, At least more so than you did for the Ben Shapiro Video. You seem to be actually saying that he has conflated them, though, which is actually the opposite of what he's done. nice try though.
I do follow his work. He doesn't use nihilism and relativism interchangeably. You're just hoping none of your viewers will go look for themselves and just take you at your word, but I forgot. you are the devil.
Peterson has a lot of very useful insights. Having said that I felt your critique was fair. He certainly overextends.
I thought porn wasn't allowed on youtube??
Jesus christ this just disgusts me, sorry men acting extremely feminine just creeps me the f out.
@3:03 the numbers say otherwise but sure, just say something as fact without evidence behind it. Honestly didn't expect I'd leave the video so quickly but can already see you'll fudge things a bit for your narrative. Which is a shame since I've enjoyed some of your other videos, though I might have to reexamine what I've taken from them now that I can see maybe some of your off the cuff statements aren't necessarily truthful
More talented demons than you, lucifer. They might just over throw you and send you to mega hell!
Disgusting.
You are the only person I have ever heard combat figures like Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro on their ideas who actually understands them. Thankyou
Great points in your video but I love the noodlibois the most they’re such perfect spaghettis.
Allow me to make some points to the contraaaaary
I'm watching this a part of the way through before sleep so that my dreams would be, ahem, bespoke. Many thanks, snake daddy.
I can't criticise these points, I am too uneducated for that. One thing I know for sure is that I don't want to be a part in anything you are doing, and I do not want to see a future you are proposing. Peterson has helped hundreds of people just with his clinical practice and, many more with his talks. I know for sure he is a good man, an exceptional character and his work is making the world a better place. Your eerie videos show a really dark road on which I sincerely hope humanity will not embark. Best of luck.
I’m sorry you’re just really distracting this episode.
You sexy beast.
But if people watch Jordan Peterson and turn their life around for the better why are people so against what he has to say, he's not talking to everyone but the people he is talking to he just so happens to be helping, let the man be
Life is meaningless if you want it to be. That’s the danger of relativism. There’s no objective meaning, but the presence of a subjective meaning in an individual is objective.
Peterson himself said that Marxism and postmodernism are contradictory, but this doesn’t stop people making a nonsensical mix of them.
I'm 10 minutes in and you've barely said anything... what's the point of this video? who are you criticizing and why? what are your arguments? Such a waste of time...
Man, Tom Riddle really like cosplaying, doesn't he?
My problem with Camus is that he brought up the idea of philosophical suicide, which is just trying to find something to do in the absurd, like cleaning your room or pursuing hedonism. However, what he suggests we do, is the exact same thing everyone else is trying to do. He suggests to just live with it, which as a matter of fact is something to do in the absurd, thus committing philosophical suicide, and jumping into a lava pit with Peterson and Sartre. A good answer would be: there is no answer. Nothingness, is the answer. It doesn't tell you to do something, it doesn't advocate for a way of life, it merely states the truth of the absurd: there is nothing to be done, and there is nothing more beyond that. In the end, nothing actually matters, and what we're doing is just trying to avoid that.
Uh, actually he is either a boring Roman version of a Greek personification for Venus but only in the morning, or Nebuchadnezzar, who Isaiah kinda eulogized then King Jimmy's goons mistranslated from sources like the Vulgate. Ha-satan's not the name of person of any kind, just a general term for anything spiritually trying. Judaism has no hell, so Christianity ripping off a bit of Egyptian Kemeticism is one of many utterly incompatible breaks with its own claimed history.
well maybe some of us _did_ wanna stare at Half-Naked Ollie. _maybe a lot of us did._
That's how I always saw it. There IS such a thing as indoctrination, after all.
Would you not consider you're videos propaganda? I am not saying I agree or disagree it's just the format you seem to use (associating Peterson with the devil etc) just seems like propaganda to me.
@Frank Washington Other *freeze peach They don't like actual free speach.
Loved this video too mate! Mr Peterson isn't anti Trans just the language that goes against the greater good...Anyway I need to redo my nail varnish...because this CIS gender bloke just likes wearing it... :D
Someone's playing devils advocate...
Well in a way everything just is. It's absolute. But the way you view it is relative because you don't fully know. It's hard obviously then to draw the line since different people "know" different things. That's why everyone just should be free to live their own life as long as they don't hurt or take the freedom from someone else.
Nihilism is an apathetic way of viewing life. The point in the books written by Nietzsche is that with no higher being to believe in what is there. It means you, yourself has to become something more. You are a superman in shape of your own destiny. You should read them. Nietzsche himself indeed went crazy in the end but his works are remarkable. Edit: to understand the difference between nihilism and depression/despair read about object relations theory. Harry guntrip has a good book on the subject.
Nothing opens honest debate quite like associating your oponent with the devil
Peterson associates his opponents multiple times with serpents, chaos, dragons, and devils throughout his book. I literally got the idea from him.
My biggest problem with hedonism has never been the fact that some ways of pursuing pleasure are self-destructive, since that is pretty easily resolved. It's the apparent lack of reason or even justification for altruistic behaviour in situations where it is not ultimately self-serving, which could be anything from sacrificing your life to save a stranger's child to refraining from taking out your anger on some poor anonymous worker at a business you're never going back to. Am I wrong?
this is so tiny but ur like the only white person ive heard say muslim correctly
You’re amazing in the way you structure your arguments.
Hey Olver, I've recently just started watching you and think your content is top tier. I don't know if you will see this, but, I would love to hear your thoughts and discussion proposals on China currently... Their reintergration propsals and plans with Hong Kong and théir rocky relationship withTaiwan. I hope you're keeping well x
The entire premisse of this video and your arguments, are based on "and xx(Peterson or Harris) would undoubtably say [insert what you think they would say]". Why do you think they would say that? I haven't read a Peterson book. Motivate your premisse better/more. For me at least, you asserting something without proper motivation, simply isn't enough. Moreover, it is quite clear he hasn't said anything like that in the past, because otherwise you would've quoted him -- like you do on many other places in the video. I stopped watching ~25 minutes in. While this video was mildly entertaining at points, this wasn't one of your better videos.
HOly shit those snakes are real
I love the aesthetic.
Or you could take the optimistic approach to nihilism..? Theres only one life so live it to the fullest. Skate fast, get ass, smoke grass fam
Satan got me out here questioning my sexuality
I mean, I agree that we can and should judge things objectively, but the standard should be human rights, not our own cultural norms.
You made me gay....
Since this is just your subjective viewpoint, everything you said is irrelevant hollow and ultimately worthless. And that was my subjective view of the world. Neither are right nor wrong. I hope you clarify this to your subscribers before they get the idea that they're right and others are wrong. That is your conclusion based on your arguments however, your followers seem to be ignorant in elementary philosophy. Assigning value to one thing or another is ultimately your own choice, which leads to another conclusion that what you mumbled all this time is nothing but your brain in action and that a different brain is just as valuable (if any) and just as right as his, ultimately meaningless. So I say why not jump.
imagine using an apple product in 2019
Hm. Not been on Philiosophy Tube in a while. Let's see how Ol- . . . Heyyyyy, how you doing buddy?
I couldn't concentrate because I kept wondering if you were wearing pants. Is there a JustForFans version of this? I ask for no particular reason.....
Sorry I couldn't pay attention because my urethra was burning from cumming and pissing at the same time
More like doctor pee amiright?
you got a snake on you
I think my submersion into the snake keeping community has become a little too much because when I saw the snake on satan I was like "WHO SNAKE IS DAT? :3 CYOOT LITTLE BOI"
my favorite thing is people who never got to experience what communism and Marxism have done to the countries they've been in. I'm okay with your video, but you basically (and i get you were partially kidding), but supporting an ideology that has committed the same level of crime to say the Nazis is just foul dude.
A better word for relative would be contextual.
Molyneux looks like the villain in our movie.
@Caleb Berney thx comrade
When satan is wearing a crown with crosses on it smh.
Single greatest video i have watched summarizing petersons weird views
I disagree with your argument for relativity, but I did enjoy your talk. Thanks for the provocative counterpoints, it is not often I can get through a video arguing against my favorite speaker!
Thank you .
In the framework of the English language, the deciding factor of how something is pronounced correctly is the pronounciatiom that is generally agreed upon. The majority of "white people" say Muslim correctly in their own respective languages.
Thx comrade
Good God no. Welcome to BreadTube comrade
Caleb Berney it’s not that I wouldn’t like them. I just started watching his videos, and while the channel says it’s name is philosophy tube, the last couple I’ve watched have been political, and have very little to do with philosophical arguments. There are even points where he restates a part of Jordan Peterson’s own argument and presents it as he it’s not Peterson’s point, but his own. It’s like trying to claim intellectual territory instead of engaging with an argument on its own merits.
He does! The Philosophy of Antifa. It also appears in his video on Steve Bannon. Though, based on your tone, I don't think you'll entirely like what said videos have to say - though I have to admit, I'm pretty intensely antifascist and I didn't entirely get along with them, despite the fact they put forth an argument in favour of fascism.
Thank you
Which is actually a good summary of the Egyptian myth that Dr. Peterson describes in some of his talks.
27:43 This can be bad for a number of reasons. On an individual level, you less likely to hurt someone, and you have more control over actions. On a group level...well groupthink is still very much a thing e.g. The Internet. Without the cleansing nay-sayers and potentially-offensive speech where people see themselves as individuals first (a democratic process), the uniformed hive-mind plows forward with bad ideas intact, like a clump of parking-lot snow, now with much more power.
19:28 This is real talk though.
14:57. The example he gives regarding order is that is can also be tyranny -- which can also be terror as you say with regards to the police. There isn't a contradiction here. The chaos experienced by crossing a border is not necessarily because of the wall. You're ascribing the chaos to the incorrect variable here per the example. The wall is still order. The crossing of the wall is the chaos. That is an action that requires a willing participant. Chaos comes from going from the familiar to the unfamiliar.
Was with you until 9:13. Making a few successive assumptions. Not good logic.
You've done a completely shit job of "proving" that his definitions of order and chaos are relativistic. You gave one thin analogy of how crossing a border can "feel" chaotic and based the rest of your critique of his position on that fake "proof". But you proved nothing. Analogy isn't proof. And just because two things share some characteristics doesn't mean they are the same thing. Just because you gave one arbitrary example of a border sharing elements of chaos and order that doesn't prove in the slightest that there is no such thing as Chaos and Order separate from each other. Very weak thinking dressed up in a lot of attitude.
The only thing I got out of this was Theodore T. Talks
This guy is as smart as Russell Brand pretends to be.
The snakes were the stars of this video, 10/10 would pet
Loving the finger nails my dude!
Mom: what are you watching Me: a video of a Lucifer with man tittys patronizing me on why Jordan Peterson thinks I should live Mom: you should have just said porn
Which Olly would you let you be railed by/or rail? Tag yourself! Fire Fighter Monocle Posh Arsonist Centrist Literally Satan Sex Work Pimp In a tux Prince Oliver Thorn and his horse
You should take your shirt off more and fuck some woman while dressed like that. But only if she wants to!
The snakes add a nice touch 5/5
9:05 what is this bit about Harris opening himself to violence? Did you forget to add a clip?
Got to about 15 mins. Done. Another flashy misunderstanding of what Peterson is saying.
watched a couple of these videos now. He has a couple of decent arguments, but he puts in more time into theatrics than he does considering if he has the moral highground against the people he's criticizing.
@Brandy C I agree, there is a lot of thought and effort that goes into the videos. But I disagree with his essential moral arguments. The values that he highlights as the greatest good I don't believe are the greatest good. In fact, I would argue he is enticing people to run astray from a greatest good, much like the character his costume portrays would. His arguments are internally sound, and the absolutely feel good. But there are better things than feeling good. A master's in philosophy is like a law degree without judges. It just makes you better at arguing, but there's nobody with absolute authority to say you're right or wrong. Just more people in the future who will argue about how right or wrong you are.
The guys has a masters in philosophy. Maybe consider that things go on behind the scene that you aren’t seeing every second of. And I like the “theatrics” and visual interest. It often serves as a metaphor or dovetails nicely with what he’s saying. It is not accidental. The whole thing shows that very much thought and effort has gone into every aspect of the video. If it was some guy screaming into his webcam with poor acoustics for an hour, they would get lost in the shuffle.
Does Harris use the term "objective value"? It is a self-contradictory term. There is no such thing.
On the issue of the veil, isn't it possible to be oppressed, even participate in self-oppression, without realizing you're being oppressed?
Is it safe to say that 12 Rules for Life stands outside of Peterson's other works? Like, aren't you allowed to write a book that contradicts your other works if it's intent is to help some people out?
Hail Satan
Such a cute Snaky
Satanism is for fags. I find it funny Jordan Peterson and this guy are equally evil.
I order my life along lines of scientific socialism.
Keeps my hair shiny
You must eat alot of word salad
I think this just has to do with the limitation of the Youtube platform being unable to address someone's general viewpoints on a topic. Oliver seems to assume his audience is informed on JP's viewpoints, which I can see why you might be frustrated by that. However, I'm curious; where you think JP is being misrepresented?
@Cabbadath B idk, a lot of people seem to have payed a lot of attention, at least at the visuals xD.
Yea that gives out a red flag, everyone just talking about how gay they're turning bc of the host lol
This is the only comment I've read that actually addresses the video.
If he stopped demonizing all leftists as "postmodern marxists" and stopped getting involved with politics, id absolutely let them be
Some things were good and some things were bad in this video. As a person who has been watching and extensively discussing most of Peterson’s lectures, I didn’t feel like this video taught me anything new. I disagree with Peterson’s view that pragmatic truth is the most fundamental truth, which is the basis for many of the points discussed in this video. However, I think you underestimate both the depth of the ideas and Peterson’s awareness of the subjectivity of his ideas. Both in his conversations with Sam Harris and in other contexts, Peterson has acknowledged the similarities between his pragmatism and postmodernism, but you made it seem like this is something new. Furthermore, Peterson’s ideas are popular precisely because hedonism has been insufficient for many people. The type of hedonism that you describe is, as I see it, the dominant view of life in Western societies. Happiness, preferrably continously through life, is what people seek and what they want for their loved ones. However, the people who feel drawn to Peterson are not satisfied with hedonism - Peterson offers something different, something more. I think Peterson’s ideas can inspire philosophical reasoning (it has done that for me), but the main purpose is to help people act - not think. Petersons ideas, regardless if they are true or not, help people to take responsibility and improve themselves - and to feel good while doing it, since it feels meaningful. Assuming that truth has some real relation to success (believing truth leads to more success than believing falsity), then there is something to learn about the truth from Peterson’s ideas, since it leads to more success (for at least some people) than hedonism. My conclusion is that Peterson’s ideas contain truths that my society lacks, but that he doesn’t have the complete truth. I think that this depth was missing in your video. The style was great though! Found your channel a few days ago and am excited to see more.
This isn’t a good representation of Peterson’s worldview. Chaos and order ARE experienced within the realm of the subjective. The world of subjective experience has as its centre the contrast between the “unbearable” present and the ideal future. We have goals (and necessarily so - else it’s impossible to act), and the things in our environment are given importance only if they assist in attainment. “Order” is where our actions result in expected outcomes. “Chaos” is where they don’t, or where we do not know what to do. We have very many goals - many of which have to do with survival. Depending on our situation, the importance of different goals change. When we’re desperately hungry, finding food is most important. When our basic needs have been met, we must choose another endeavour. Meaning is experienced subjectively as we move toward a new goal. As we carry on acting, patterns of behaviour emerge - behaviours that best ensure the continued survival of a society. But evolution is always essential, since order tends on its own toward tyranny. Myths describe the process of updating cultural practices - of venturing out into chaos and finding new and more useful ideas. The integration over time of “better” and “better” behaviours brings us nearer and nearer “the good” - nearer and nearer “the promised land”. So, you see, there are “better” and “worse” ideas in that there are ideas that do a better or worse job of facilitating the continued enjoyment of life of individuals, informed in their development by subjective experience and objective fact. The societies within which more of these “better” ideas have emerged and been adopted are the most successful societies. The rational ideologies of fascism and communism failed, while the haphazardly evolved Western systems have stood the test of time, and have also allowed for the “best” lives ever lived by human beings. Peterson rejects the most dangerous postmodern ideas, but he actually uses very many others. You’re correct in pointing that out. But, his justification for the rejection of Marxism is well founded - is based on as-objective-as-possible evaluation of inter-subjective experience, and whether or not the outcomes of some particular goals allows for the maximum possible enjoyment of individuals’ subjective experiences - whether or not those goals were constructed with a balanced view of the present in mind — are we lying to ourselves when we set ourselves our goals?
Jordan Peterson killed philosophy (for me), Oliver Thorn brought it back
"There are non Muslim people who make their women wear veils"? Are you sure about that one? Because I'd be more then happy to admit my ignorance if you could provide an example, or a link, beyond anecdotal, of course.
Got a citation for you - Leila Ahmed's "Women and Gender in Islam"
Mmmmm dig the hairy chest....
I quite like Hindu philosophy's approach to hedonism, it's fine, it can even be noble. But ultimately, it won't satisfy the desires of the heart. The heart wants to reach higher and higher to the transcendent, to an ultimate reality, nothing else will truly satisfy it, according to the philosophy. Pleasure is too fleeting and a person who seeks only pleasure can find it much more difficult to deal with suffering and the unpleasant and horrible aspects of life.
Lmao "sometimes the best response to the meaningless of life is just to fuck your own sister". Haven't had a good laugh like that in a while. Cheers!
I don't know if you read the comments but I wonder if you know of the views of morality imparted by Matt Dillahunty, they are short of like Sam Harris, But without pretending that all questions can be answered by science or at all, but still basing ourselves around wellbeing as an objective foundation to Morality.
I can't tell if I like it because he's smart or because he's British.
I don't get how a youtube video with far more creativity and production value put into it than most other videos can be claimed by a company that has no creative or production input in the video. So what if the video uses a couple seconds of your music - the video is 40 minutes long. Nobody watching the video recognized the music or at least watched the video for the music - all of these big media companies stealing the works of others are objectively wrong (yes, morality is objective - that's my opinion anyways). At least give the youtuber a chance to remove the music and keep the ad money.
I'll forever find it strange that people act like nihilism is evil and makes people murderers. Like I feel like I have a pretty nihilistic view on the world but I'm not gonna go out and shoot and Arab (yes, I'm referencing The Stranger)
Fucking hell. Peterson's "order and chaos" nonsense reads like a goddamned horoscope.
"Huh, I wonder what this Philosophy Tube guy is up to these days and if his channel has evolved in any way since 2016". [...] "Sweet Jesus."
I should be paying attention but SNEKS
That was enlightening and sexy.
It's been a few years since I was doing my philosophy degree, but I am pretty sure your definition of moral relativism is wrong. From what I remember moral relativism is the idea that we should judge acts or people relative to their society's morals. The example we learned was Euripides's Medea, who was doing terrible things in the end by our standards, but according to Greek morals of "it's good to help your friends and hurt your enemies" she was a hero and not a morally ambiguous character at all.
6:15 IKR? :D Also... 8:08 - you can't have one without the other, so what's the difference?
breadtube is gay, and you're all a bunch of freaks
Okay. but individualism is just as much "a uniformed hive-mind with bad ideas" as anything else and can lead to bad outcomes too. You can't have a political system without some level of cooperation and "groupthink" push for a common goal which is to impose its preferred outcomes on the rest of society. That goes just as much for Libertarianism as it does for other forms of governing principles.
evan thesquirrel I guess you can disagree with his arguments, but I don’t think he’s trying to say that there is only one specific alternative to Jordan Peterson and his ilk; rather, that Jordan Peterson’s line of thinking has a lot more holes in it than people want to believe and lacks a lot of internal logical consistency.
@evan thesquirrel You disagree with his arguments, but you did watch the video, which is the point of the theatrics.
He's wearing it ironically...
You have issues...
Ben Shapiro is not hard to understand, which is why he only ever takes on students in Q&A sessions where he controls the floor -- to maintain the illusion of superior thinking.
Not the only, but I think does it the best
Fine. Take my money, damnit. That was good. I’ll donate. Sheesh.
Climbing the Maslow Pyramid. That’s an objective philosophy... ;)
"Believe me Hedonism is entirely consistent with delayed gratification" Daddy uwu
Yo I'm a lesbian but Lucifer's kinda hot
I want to suck your dick while you tell me what a dirty fag boy I am with that sexy British accent that sounds a bit piratey..... AooHhhAhhh
I love how the snake changes.
I like JP, but I’ve always wanted to hear discourse over his religious views. Ty for making this
Your idea of hedonism sounds more like the philosophy of Epicurus than hedonism.
I’ve never heard Jordan Peterson say any of those qualities in groups was inherently bad. Source?????!
Ok but, the women who wear veils "voluntarily" do so because they believe they should in order to desexualize themselves so that men won't be tempted. ......What? How is that even remotely okay? How is this not completely batshit? How is that not brainwashing?
SNEK
9:05 Ummmm ok, snake slithering up yummy big chest....too hot. I think this is on the wrong ___Tube website. Gayest philisophical content on YouTube Award?
I swear the only way people like Jordan Peterson could be honest is by accident
Wow I didn't plan to to watch this all in one go, but welp here I am pleasantly entertained, and a bit more enlightened on my own beliefs.
"A couple of wrong notes thrown in" I think back to the natural light getting in your eyes. Fuck you that's brilliant
Being a JBP fan myself, I think I disagree with your characterization of my characterization of Peterson's characterization of social contructivist's characterizations of Marx(ist)'s characterization of society's characterization of supposedly societal/biological hierarchies/dichotomies of the natural world we are characterizing categorically.
Peterson isn't using order and chaos to describe objective morality... You're missing the point. No hate but you're mannerisms are really creeping me out and making it hard to hear what you are saying.
You can't be an "accidental rip-off". That's an oxymoron.
Philosophy Tube 5 dancing israelis
This dude grabs my gay attention A LOT!!
The devil is one of the most giving figures ever. The fact that he doesn't conform to our usual standards of morality alone is just so.. interesting.
the devil bit at the start was SO GOOD
I knew a philosopher like you would pick a problem with Sam haha the thing I like about Sam is he takes a simple assumption that any rational person could accept, about well-being, and creates a very grounded and realistic set of possible answers for hard moral questions. Sure, in the end, anyone can submerse past Sam's floor into Nihilism and Existentialism... But most are not going to be able to handle what that means for living a meaningful life in today's world.
Using Deconstruction, Epic Theatre, Absurdism, Foucault & Contrapointsian aesthetics to tear down Peterson's arguments against Nihilism & Postmodernism?! (& PUSSY WORSHIP) ALL IN ONE VIDEO?! My good karma must be through the roof! ❤️
I want to listen to what you're saying, but I'm too distracted by the snake, its trying to strangle you man! You can see from the start how it begins to wrap round his neck. Still amazing content
Great actor, singer and compelling and a creative storyteller that builds solid arguments. I'm floored. I think I will envy unsubscribe just so I can admiration subcribe again. Thanks Nat and Breadtube for the recommendations!
Can *Clap* We*Clap* Have *Clap* More *Clap* Shirtless *Clap* Satan *CLAP*
I agree Hedonism is the shit
Petersonism, i like it
It really was the hair cut that slowed me to embrace your channel
14:00 great Jordan Peterson impression
Keep doing what you are doing comrade. Humanity needs you.
A couple of years ago, I heard of a concept called "optimistic nihilism." In layman's terms, it means life is meaningless, and humanity's existence serves no greater purpose, so you might as well spend your life enjoying it and making the world a better place for others. That's basically how I operate.
God you’re such a beautiful person already and you just kicked it up to 11 with that Lucifer cosplay
The longer I gaze at him, the sexier Lucifer becomes. Such is the power of temptation.
There is something about a man comfortable enough with himself to glam up like this. I like it. Also, did your arm hurt after making this video? That’s a lot of snake holding.
Excellent video. Truly enjoying your work thus far.
Shouldn't that be pronounced "Kamee"? I learn that in school. 39:50 - of course! xD
I think this is my all time favorite video from u!
Well, Jordan got his ass whipped when he debated/discussed with Zizek, even though Zizek went nice and soft on him, he still got fucked nonetheless.
Zealot I’m wherever Philosophy Tube is
You're on the wrong website bro.
We know and we like it
@Mike I watch a lot of youtube philosphers. JP, who I discovered through Joe Rogan, Wisecrack, Vlog Brothers, counter-arguments. I gave this guy a shot and I'm not a fan. He's got his style, good for him, I hate it. I probably won't watch another, but time will tell.
That is one comfy snake.
Anyone else kinda wanna get rawed by him?
I'm not a JP fan. However, I dislike dishonest representations of the arguments put forth by other people. As was the case in your previous video that I watched, and commented on, you are once again strawmanning the argument you are addressing. In this particular case, you are making a far more extreme case than Peterson is saying. His argument is more along the lines of "What we have works, you better be damned careful before making changes as you don't know what the consequences of those changes are. While changes can be good, the vast majority of changes are bad." He is not against order or chaos. He is for both but that they need to be in balance, with order being more dominant than chaos. You are making his stance the extreme and then attacking the extreme, which he doesn't actually hold. The rest of what you say seems to be spot on. However, this single adjustment in his stance causes your entire argument to collapse. I like your videos so far and your rhetoric and presentation is quite good. However, the reasoning employed hasn't been as good.
Peterson is one of the very few people who affect me directly on a physical level, such as by blow or a spasm. Even with just one soundbyte through his voice and with a mere glance at his phiz. It is subcutaneous and biographical, but I nevertheless ascribe it to his rebellious, narcissistic authoritarianism that completely penetrates him. Astonishing.
i really like you
“‘12 Rules for Life’, a very popular self help philosophy book and ‘Maps of Meaning’, which is also a book.” Oof.
tfw you wish you were the snake, both to listen to the video in person and well...
That hairy chest of your is SEXY!!
Postmodernism 101 - point out an exception or possible exception, claim there is no common human experience. Yawn.
[sigh] ...in philosophy it ALWAYS comes back to Jacksonville hookers, doesn't it?
What a hot devil!
Oh my new favorite channel. Totally smart.
Just wanted to congratulate you on your research and thoughtfulness put into these videos. Too often do I feel like Leftism doesn't get any philosophical support against Shapiro or Peterson who very much expunge a certain philosophy as part of their argument. This is great and very well made.
i don't understand a word hes saying but gosh thats a cute snake
I love the blurred nipps
Brilliant
Sade was the personification of hedonism. Not a so great way to go imo.
It is quite ironic that Peterson draws so much from 'Christian' values while at the same time speaking I'll of Marxism, when the very central tenet of Marxism comes from the word of Christ himself: "from each according to their ability, and to each according to their need."
O00h the slithery boiiiz
Daddy Peterson
I'm watching this video at 1.25 speed.... and he still speaks unbelievably slow in many many places. Going to watch on to see this point of view. If you watch it... speed it up.
Sorry hedonism would make people selfish and destroy society
but that wouldn't be hedonistic since it would make the hedonists unhappy.
Huh what? I have no idea what you were saying for the first ~3mins. Too busy listening to the masterpiece that is danse macabre
I wonder if he made the Muslim and Trans comment knowing that the Iranian subsidizes MTF transitioning (unfortunately not the reverse though).
I like that the snake is subtly attempting to kill him throughout the video
The one sleight of hand that I've always disliked and I think is a pretty pernicious form of pigeon holing that nobody should engage in is calling Peterson's work "pop psychology". His work hits on way too many psychologists (and too deeply as far as the education level of their work to refer to as mainstream) and if we talk about folks like Jung there is definitely a very strong streak of ambivalence in the mainstream culture for a large body of his work. This "counter argument" comes off as some weird inversion of argumentum ad populum and argument from authority (claiming that because the psychologists he cites are allegedly well known they are less rigourous) turned into an appeal to spite. Im 24 minutes and the entire deconstruction of relativism and referring to it as a contradiction fails to mention a huge elephant in the closet that makes up the cornerstone of his argument and rebuffs many of your critiques. He constrains value of subjective experiences as objectively useful by running it through a set of constraints that greatly reduce the range of solutions that solve the problem; he argues that many of the stories we've constructed transmit the ideas that pass the muster of these increasingly complex and challenging constraints with varying degrees of fidelity, and that generally these ideas evolved with the arrow of time, the collective interaction of large numbers of people, and allowed for us to develop the ability to more accurately discover the truth. By ignoring the first half of that point you make it easy to call his argument contradictive when there are super-ordinate ideas that you never addressed that clear up a fair bit of it.
Peterson is one of the very few people who affect me directly on a physical level, such as by blow or a spasm. Even with just one soundbyte through his voice and with a mere glance at his phiz. It is subcutaneous and biographical, but I nevertheless ascribe it to his rebellious, narcissistic authoritarianism that completely penetrates him. Wouldn't be surprised if he reeks after it. Astonishing.
lol this is just too good
@Ross Kaske sure do
@Sessena hope you like hell
As southern boy trapped here all my life you are the best thing since the book On the Road
jarvis cocker would be proud of your closing credits song
This is such a well done video. That JP impression killed me
Watching these videos is like drinking from a fire hose
The fact he put Season 2 of THE MIGHTY BOOSH on the good side shows that Olly's thoughts need to be taken seriously.
Is it better to describe Camus as French or Algerian?
https://www.patreon.com/philosophytube would be a very helpful place to visit: this video has been hit with a nasty little copyright claim by Sony Music and so I won't get the ad money, which isn't loads but definitely makes a difference because this was my most expensive and time-consuming to date!