Watch Sam Harris & Brian Greene on stage FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER ukposts.info/have/v-deo/baCTfKmJsW5ymKs.html

Ben Stiller has really come into his own as a philosopher.

I love how the announcer for all of these is super enthusiastic like he's opening the super bowl and then these three dudes in suits come out and start speaking in soft tones about philosophy.

Sam makes incredibly complicated things simple, and Jordan makes incredibly simple things complicated.

These 4 discussions are truly incredible. The first time I watched these videos was 3 years ago, and coming back to them now has been an absolute treat. I was able to find so many new insights and also see how my thoughts and perspective have changed over the last few years. Also can we take a moment to appreciate how these videos have basically no dislikes. This comment section is also really great - everyone sharing their thoughts and ideas in a productive manner. It’s very rare to see comment sections on UKposts that aren’t mostly filled with corrosive arguments, when dealing with such complex topics. This is an ideal example of how the internet should be used to share ideas and foster discussions.

The winner of this debate is anyone who learned something from both of them.

Whoever came up with the matrix chairs... genius.

We are so fortunate to have this available online for free. And so easily accessible, too. Listening to conversations like these are my personal favorite way to learn. I end up questioning myself, rethinking my own positions, learning how to rationalize and REFINE my own positions too. Thank you for these videos!

Thank you Jordan, Sam, Douglas and Pangburn for providing this video.

Has anyone noticed that Peterson is wearing a tie with tiny lobsters all over it?

I was at this event. I came away from it in a state of wonder. I wasn't sure I had heard it right. I just watched this video and it confirms my wonder, that such a thing could happen, in this time. It is nothing short of a miracle. Thank you, three great human beings, proving that such a discussion is possible, in a time when we are so deprived of deep, meaningful thought.

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them they've been fooled" - Mark Twain

I can’t relay how much I appreciate these conversations. I’ve listened to these four discussions like 5 or 6 times - probably come back to them every 6 months or so. Incredibly enjoyable and increasingly interesting. I pray to the highest value in my metaphysical hierarchy that Sam and Jordon continue this conversation throughout the years

That's crazy I watched all four of these and I would rather be here than the Super Bowl Sunday

Fair enough, man, I mean, hey!

These discussions are fascinating. Tja k you for doing them. Insightful, elucidating and compelling.

The most hopeful thing about these series is not even that so many people start watching this, but that there are Arabic subtitles. That it is not just some (relatively privileged) people in the west take an interest in these discussions, but also from places where free and open debate is generally a lot more scarce.

Totally agree with Douglas’ statement that the fact we get to dedicate time to a discussion about questions so deeply effecting our culture is a very positive sign.

All four of these were basically just intellectual boxing matches. And i loved it.

It is rare to hear Jordan struggling like this. His argument is so difficult to motivate that he has to resort to personal anecdotes. While Sam's basis for an objective morale is by no means perfect, it provides a vastly more stable foundation.

Man I actually felt sad when the conversation finished, great people

I was sat behind the astrologer. He also called Sam a 'communist prat' and said his suits were boring.

Second time listening to all of these videos again, and it was just as good, if not better, the second time through.

And there it is, the sacredness of the present moment. Thanks Sam.

The crowdsurfing was a bit excessive and the moshpit was kinda lame, but otherwise, great show.

"I suspect that many of you are actually here because you would like to hear the void addressed."

When the discussion is so profound, interesting and engaging, one quickly realizes one's own questions can certainly wait. Nay, they must necessarily wait!! Hence the blessed skippage of the Q&A session! 😼👍 I believe Q&A should be excluded from the agenda altogether in such fora. At least when JP is on the guest list. This man can take one's mind on such a journey of thought and reflection that is pure unadulterated bliss, as to make one's own feeble excursions into such matters (and the resulting questions) seem almost insignificant.

1:08 Peterson reply was a perfect lesson of completely not answering the question but making sounds to sound like you're answering the question.

The whole segment was astonishing. I just wish that this trend flourish. That what we need. Thank you, anyone, who watched this video with me.

Great thanks to Pangburn for hosting these four debates. This is some of the highest public intellectual discussion of our age.

I like counter balance of ideas rather than listening to one person's lecture. As long as it is done with courtesy for one another and good will even within opposing views. Sam Harris is good at this. Thank you.

This is great stuff... I hope I can be at one of these discussions live in the Netherlands sometime in the future.

"You must be an Aries sir", nice

I don't usually comment on anything but I wanted to share. Here we have an interesting discussion between 2 radically different interpretations of how human life can be lived to its fullest potential, but that may actually turn out to not be so different after all. Sam Harris is like a manifestation of the left-brain, an orderly and structured intellect seeking precision. That is why he appears to be dogmatic and rigid to people of the more right-brain type. Namely, he is comfortable with certainty, reason, structure, and analysis. His training in Buddhism, which is fundamentally based on direct personal experience of the potential of one's own mind and the experiences inherent within it along with a deconstruction of the concepts surrounding self, seem to provide a framework via which he can confront the problems of ethics and morality. Buddhism teaches you to use meditation and laser like focus to pierce through the illusions of the ego and confront mind directly. Beneath ego and the myriad elements of the verbally constructed self there lies a wellspring of wisdom, compassion, and love. I think Sam is leading people to tap into that wellspring, which is beyond concepts, stories, and ideas, and to drink deeply of something that lives within us. Jordan Peterson is like a manifestation of the right-brain, a fluid and hard to pin down level of mind more akin to dreams and visions. That is why he appears to be slippery and confusing to people of the more left brain type. Namely, he is comfortable with a measure of uncertainty. He is trained in psychoanalysis and various theories of mind from the west, as well as his own attempts to follow the path of the Abrahamic traditions back to their original sources in ancient Mesopotamian tribes. This studying of the various stories and mythologies has revealed to Jordan a sort of luminous thread that passes through them, something more akin to archetypes and the subtle aspects of cognition. He thinks these stories are beautiful compositions of the collective wisdom of the species and, really, of Mother Nature and Father Culture, shall we say. As such, he thinks they embody a wisdom that is timeless in its essence and that can be drawn upon infinitely. Really, I don't think their 2 models of reality are too different, or utterly incompatible. Perhaps they exist on 2 different levels of the same structure, and inform each other, for even Buddhism with its precise rational methods for deconstruction is saturated with profound stories that embody certain attributes of appropriate behavior. If you have your religious stories and your archetypes but you lack direct insight into the nature of your mind and the possibilities it contains (an infinite realm of experiences including the most profoundly spiritual) then perhaps the stories cannot truly come alive and have their deepest power. And if you have insight into the nature of mind and a powerful control of your intellect through meditation and tapping into the deep underlying wellsprings of wisdom and knowledge, but lack a connection to the archetypes and stories of your culture, then perhaps there is no glue via which to bind people together, no area of concepts that people can share and use, especially to help teach the young who are not yet ready to dig deep into the mind via meditation and deconstruction of the ego through direct analysis. I don't claim to know the answers, but both thinkers have stimulated me over the course of their 4 discussions in this format. I think those that vilify one or the other and are unwilling to accept that they are perhaps 2 sides of the same coin, will ultimately fail to grasp a deeper understanding of the dimensions they were traversing, for both gentlemen surely respect each other and agree on many issues and believed that there might be some value in colliding their different modes of interpretation.

Do you like having discussions about ideas with people from around the world? Join us on the new Callin app. We have group discussions everyday on the ideas that mean the most to humanity. Politics, Philosophy, Science & Art. One of the main reasons for moving to the Callin app is their 100% FREE SPEECH policy. Call in and enter The War of Ideas. callin.com/link/ytIdqseMzM

These guys deserve more fans than any pop star...

This is a truly great series of conversations with the power to shift your place on the spectrum. Please take the time to listen to them all... just listen...

absolute gold tier youtube content. thank you for uploading this! subbed

I'm hopeful for Part 5 and would like it to be mostly about practical ways these two philosophies can produce positive impacts in the present world.

I've listened to all 4 sessions now. Truly love listening to them. Still, it left me wanting. As far as I know, Peterson was an atheist when he had a mystical revelation. He then tried to make sense of it with the help of Christianity. On one hand this was good because it gave him a framework that was readily available and familiar to him. On the other it put him in a box, so to speak. I just wish he will realise that this is only a phase and that an even more intuitive, clear, precise but also loving and inclusive framework exists beyond that. One that is dynamic, immediate and free of dogma. One that transcends individual religions and has no need for intermediaries. A framework based on direct personal experience. Such a framework exists and if only Peterson could access that, this discussion would have been truly mind blowing. I hope you read this Jordan. 😅

“You must be an Aries” - Sam Harris

I love all of you for taking the time to watch these dialogues. Thank you for existing.

This is my second time thru these and I’m sure there will be a third ma probly a fourth because I’m getting new insights every time. Wonderful and useful conversations. I love this.

Essentially, what Harris is saying is "People ought to be smarter and derive morality through a secular and rational lens". Peterson is saying "Most people are very stupid, so the practical thing is to let them play make-believe with false stories to collectively guide themselves from things they learned from their ancestors."

This debate drove Jordan Peterson to the edge. No surprise. Wisdom comes from pain. More power to him. And, more power to Sam and Douglas too.These guys are here because they want a better world. I hope you do too.

This is my second time going all the way through them. Just as good this time around.

Great talk. I like them all. I think Sam really drove home a lot of good points in this talk.

This is so good!!

Q&As are usually boring and provocative at such events so its good that the four instances went without them. Thanks for making the videos public so that the world could witness a discussion of a very important matter led by very profound and bright thinkers of our time

I think I can live the rest of my life just fine without ever hearing the word substrate again.

Maybe this would be a good replacement to “The View”

Hopefully JP will feel up to another one of these soon.

By pt 3 I was already exhausted by Jordan’s myriad obfuscations but I can never hear enough of Sam even when he has to rehash the same points that Jordan continues to get stuck on

Huge thank you Sam & Jordan for being at the forefront of the public intellectual movement. We are grateful to have you leading these nuance-driven conversations.

This was a good discussion. Why? Because it’s a London crowd, which doesn’t interrupt by clapping and whooping every time anyone says anything.

Sad this company didn't survive. Interesting intelligent conversation... the world needs more of this.

This is like finding an oasis of cool fresh water in a desert where we have been cluessly wandering around for ages, thirsty for wisdom.

Not sure if it’s just me but i REALLY wanna see them do psychedelics together hahaha

At the end, when they answer the question about hate, you can sense the presence of both speakers. A moment where they become conscious to pay attention to the contents of their minds. That is really captivating.

Do you enjoy having discussions on topics that "you shouldn't talk about" ?... Try joining our discord server! We have daily voice chats about life, philosophy, science and art. It's free! discord.gg/XSSGDcdB5f

Massive respect to these three. The courage and sharp thinking they have demonstrated in these conversations are, as a Christian would say, divinely inspired.

I have been VERY unsure about Peterson's way of thinking for a long time. The discussions here (Dublin, London) are for real though and that also includes Peterson. I have changed my mind to a certain extent regarding this guy. Maybe I haven't understood or listened close enough before, 'cos I do think he has important things to say. I am still a Harris type, but I wouldn't disregard what Peterson says in its whole as is often made by his opponents (like myself). Peterson is a very intelligent person and he is pointing to issues which can not just be waved away like that. I don't think his conclusions and recommendations are without serious problems, but I do think he has his place in the ongoing intellectual enterprise.

"No more roundabout discussions of what makes a good man. Be one!" - Marcus Aurelius

Profound responses towards the end regarding "hate." Much respect towards these men.

Loved this. Amazing discussion.

I have to say, I have immense respect for both of these men. I think Sam's outlook is very helpful for people trying to escape the irrationalities of being raised in fundamental religious households, whereas I think Jordan has a very useful and important system of analyzing history and mythology and extracting meaning that can be used in day to day life. I also see the drawbacks of both approaches. Sam's outlook is mostly critical of the erroneous systems of our past, but he either doesn't provide a suitable replacement, or his proposed replacement is rather esoteric and unlikely to be understood by the common person, whereas Jordan's unwillingness to admit that he speaks in metaphors causes much confusion for people, myself included. Combined, though, I think both outlooks are very important. I think listening to both of them in tandem (not speaking with each other, but alone on their own platforms) is unbelievably useful in developing a personal pathway and outlook on life. And I think it's rather easy to understand and filter out where both outlooks have their shortcomings.

my first thought? nice chairs!

I love all of these guys and listen to all of them individually with so much respect. From listening to Sam speak about religion in the past, it was clear he was really trying to explain things in simple and direct metaphors that could be palatable to most people. Yet it was still at a high level of sophistication. My take on Jordan, who is an intellectual “god” among us mere mortals, was that he wasn’t actually answering any of the direct and simple questions. It was like he had to drive to the supermarket 5 minutes away from his home, but took the back roads through the most beautiful and eloquent landscapes only to never arrive at the destination.

I really hope there will be a part 5 someday...

Sam the voice of reason, Jordan the voice of wisdom and Douglas the voice of mediation. This was an absolute pleasure to watch with some seriously contemplative arguments. I am sure this will be an excellent personal source of conversations for years to come. The world needs to hear this discussion.

Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris are the left and right brain hemispheres of humanity.

After watching all 4 of these debates, I’ve concluded that both of them are right. Peterson is clearly correct in his analysis of the archetypal power that mythology and religion has and how vital it is that we don’t scrap them completely. These narratives have a numinosity to them that mere rationality could never foster, and that numinosity is what drives people to act in accordance with the teachings and motivates people to transcend themselves. Harris is correct that archetypal possession on a collective level can be incredibly dangerous considering the vast majority of people are completely unconscious of the fact that they are possessed by an archetype. This leads to fanaticism and dogmatism. The answer lies in educating people about the psychological significance of these stories as well as the danger that comes with becoming possessed by it.

I don’t think so much that it’s believing in an invisible friend, but that you believe you are a part of an incomprehensibly large system, while at the same time having so much power as an individual, and that all your actions and even your thoughts have effects that ripple throughout the universe, and your “soul” will take account of all of it.

I was in that crowd, brilliant evening

My gf: do you believe in God? Me: LETS GO ALL COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCES ON THIS SHhHhhAll We!

The audience will always choose to continue listening over Q&A because there's always less people that will have questions

As far as what we are living now ...conrad hilton stated it best in one of his published prayers. God help us in this our hour of. Need. You gave us a beautiful garden in which to live and we have turned it into a battle ground.....

Jordan: "Douglas, you were going to say something." Douglas (looking at Sam): "You were going to ask something" Sam: "Was I going to ask something?" Douglas: "Yeah" This cracked me up more than it should've. 1:16:11

Well, you can always rely on JP to say the word “substrate.”

¡Suscríbete a nuestro nuevo canal en español! Our new Spanish channel will feature professionally translated voice acting & dubbing for all Pangburn Live Discussions. Please subscribe & share with your Spanish-speaking friends! ¡Esperamos que disfrutes! ukposts.info/have/v-deo/nKeadal_oGZ_y2g.html

A fine cigar... Jordan displays an extraordinary level of unwavering determination and articulate conviction in upholding and expounding his belief..limb flailing and gesticulates abound...while Sam is cool..calm and secure. He returns Jordan's serves with ease and aplomb.

You know Peterson is going in when he starts playing with his ring

Douglas was amazing. Understated, as one would expect with the other two filling the space, but heavier because of the brevity.

I believe that this conversation is a part of what Oswald Spengler called the "Second Religiousness" in his book, "The Decline of the West", published in 1917. The thesis of his book is that every great culture is based around a central idea. The central idea is always expressed in a religious manner at first, and the creative phase of a culture, which lasts about 1000 years, is the attempt by the people to express this idea through art, music, math, architecture, technology, governments, etc. The first religiousness is spontaneous and organic, which corresponds to medieval Christianity for Western culture. Eventually, the people figure out how to express their ideas more explicitly, which for us came through the renaissance/science/enlightenment. There is a crisis period in which people totally exhaust the original idea of their culture, and the values are inverted, and there is nihilism, and then the people come back to the "Second Religiousness", which is a conscious and deliberate return to and analysis of the old traditions. After this, the culture permanently stagnates, since there is nothing new to be generated from the culture's original formulation, and there is nothing left to do but to maintain what was built before. The author claims the same thing happened in China, ancient Egypt, ancient greece/rome, India, and now in the West. Among his other predictions (made in 1917), were that communism would collapse in Russia because it is not an organic expression of Russian culture, Western arts will stagnate and focus more on the form than the meaning, there will be no new fundamental math or science (like on the scale of inventing calculus), but that there will continue to be technological development, there will be "communication and transportation fantastic to the point of madness", that there will be more world wars until the west is controlled by 1 empire (note he considered Russia to not be a part of Western culture), there will be a population decline, etc. One prediction of his which has not come true yet is that eventually people will get sick of money politics, and we will return to autocracy (rule by naked force) as a response, and the West will get Caesars again. If people like Dr. Peterson can successfully make some kind of synthesis of the old traditions and modern knowledge, and if this synthesis is widely adopted, then the West will endure (since the people will again have some kind of coherent moral idea that they can rally behind), but the west will stagnate indefinitely, as India and China did before. If they are unsuccessful, then we will get another dark age.

1:40:25 he said Shakespeare couldn't have written cain and Abel cuz perhaps it exceeds the limit of Shakespeare' intellect. Aeschylus said this about 25 centuries ago in i think orestia trilogy. He was a human completely indifferent to Judeo-Christian theology and was able to write the lines ' it is the mark of a true friend to be able to honor without envy a friend that has prospered " Its all human wisdom

That would be a great sitcom “ You, Me, & Marcus Aurelius” moderated by Douglas of course

Brilliant minds all three, One thing missing though, A big ol Hitchslap !

If you are an Atheist please check out Peterson's work, if you are religious please check out Harris' work. Because no matter where you stand on the creator debate both these men are amazing and cover a hell of a lot more than just this topic. Either side you are on, you can learn a ton from both of them on the way of being. Don't let their stand points put you off checking out their work because you will be doing yourself a ton of deserve. I watch both in these series of debates I tend to sway more towards Harris but I in fact actually consume more of Peterson's work especially his Maps of Meaning lectures. But both have helped me tremendously. Harris' waking up app has always been an amazing tool for me. Don't let your side on this debate stop you from seeking truth and challenge yourself. You will benefit greatly from it. Hats off to this two remarkable gentleman. I'm entirely grateful for their work.

If humanity is in the hands of such minds, I have no fear for the future.

Ben Stiller, Kermit the Frog & Jimmy Carr - London

When asked what does Jordan Peterson deeply hate, and maybe to the degree of the most. He answered. “Well I would say that I spent a lot of time over the past 30 years trying to understand the part of me that could be deeply satisfied as an Auschwitz prison guard. And I would say that, that part is worthy of hate. I think the best way to overcome it is to recognize it in yourself, and to do everything possible to constrain it, and that’s what given me an overwhelming horror both of the nihilistic void and the catastrophes of totalitarianism. The reason that I’ve turned towards the degree that I have, to the analysis of religious traditions, while not losing my scientific perspective in the meantime, is because I’ve done everything I could to extract out the wisdom necessary to understand how to deal with that bit of unredeemed evil that every-bit of us possess”.

I have got to say that although a valiant and salient defence of value of religious substructure by Jordan and Douglas.... If you listen carefully and if you listen to it again & again & again & again.... Sam's points were not defeated .... Not for one second.... Never defeated. And Yet - Bravo Jordan & Bravo Douglas. But Sam, as always - you have got it.

This video is valuable

"jesus smuggling" -- someone needs to put that on Urban Dictionary

I wish I could go to a beautiful building every Sunday and listen to these discussions.

Thanks!!

What I love about these is that everyone on the panel is correct. Typically a conversation involving two different points of view results in an argument. With a panel like this, that isn't a possibility. So at the very least we get a massive catalog of things to think about going forward. And in a more immediate way, we have an example of what discourse is supposed to look like.

Ali G should mediate the next debate.

Sam Harris is always raising that one eyebrow like "and... your point is???"

Listening to these 2 makes me think of that scene in *Raiders of the Lost Ark* where Indy (Sam) comes face to face with the Arab guy (Jordan), and the Arab guy flashes around his medieval weaponry and fancy moves, but they all amount to very little and can’t touch Indy as he just cuts through the crap and blows him away with his modern gun.😳