Jordan Peterson & Sam Harris Try to Find Something They Agree On | EP 408

Added: Dec 27, 2023

Impact of Social Media

The conversation begins with both Peterson and Harris expressing their concerns about the negative impact of Twitter on public discourse. They discuss how the platform encourages impulsive and immediate responses, leading to a lack of genuine conversation and the amplification of narcissistic tendencies. They also highlight the role of Twitter in driving polarization in the broader culture and its potential to bring out the worst in people.

Search for Objective Foundation for Moral Claims

Peterson and Harris then delve into the motivation behind the search for an objective foundation for moral claims. Harris shares his experience of encountering moral relativism, particularly in response to his criticism of Islamic extremism. He describes a conversation with an academic who dismissed his views on the Taliban as mere opinion, leading him to realize the extent of moral confusion in well-educated individuals. This confusion, according to Harris, stems from a belief that objectivity with respect to moral values is impossible, leading to a lack of solid ground to stand on when making moral claims.

Existence of Evil in the World

The conversation also touches on the existence of evil in the world, which drives the search for an objective foundation for moral claims. Harris explains that his quest for such a foundation was motivated by the collisions he had with people after writing his first two books, particularly in response to his criticism of Islamic extremism. He highlights the reluctance of some individuals to make moral judgments about the treatment of women and girls under the Taliban, despite their finely calibrated moral scruples in other contexts.

Unity of Good and Directionality

Peterson and Harris agree that there is a unity of good that encompasses attributes such as beauty, truth, love, and gratitude. They suggest that these attributes are reflections of a higher order good that may be ineffable and beyond human comprehension. They also argue that while the ultimate good may be unknown, there is a sense of directionality that guides individuals and societies towards better possibilities for well-being and moral progress.

Dissent and Ascent

The conversation delves into the idea that in order to reach a higher state of well-being and insight, individuals may need to undergo a period of dissent. This dissent may involve confronting suffering, malevolence, and darkness in order to make an ascent towards a higher moral and spiritual state. Harris uses the example of exposure therapy, where individuals voluntarily expose themselves to stressors in order to overcome fear and anxiety, as a metaphor for this process.

Religious and Mythological References

The conversation draws parallels between these ideas and religious and mythological concepts. They discuss the alchemical idea that the philosopher's stone is a jewel in a toad's head, symbolizing the idea that that which is most needed is found where it is least wanted. They also reference the story of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table embarking on a quest for the Holy Grail, where each knight enters the forest at the darkest point to begin their journey. These references highlight the theme of confronting darkness and suffering as a pathway to higher wisdom and well-being.

Critique of Religious Claims

While both Peterson and Harris acknowledge the wisdom and inspiration that can be found in religious texts, they also critique the unique sanctity and divine origin attributed to specific religious books. They argue that the utility of specific ideas and texts should be evaluated based on contemporary intuitions about wisdom and barbarism, rather than solely relying on religious claims.

The Nature of Wisdom

Peterson and Harris agree that wisdom is essential for navigating the complexities of life. They emphasize the importance of having a conversation that is more persuasive and enlightening, drawing on the wisdom of the ages found in literature and historical texts. They also stress the need for a universal, modern conversation that transcends sectarian and cultural boundaries.

Dogmatism and Misuse of Tradition

The conversation delves into the concept of dogmatism and the misuse of tradition. Harris points out that dogmatism is the unwillingness to revise beliefs, often in the absence of evidence or in opposition to evidence. He highlights the divisive nature of dogma and its inability to track the truth. Peterson adds that dogmatism is the antithesis of methodology and is often based on an unwarranted omniscience.

Religion and Authoritarian Dogma

The discussion touches on the authoritarian misuse of religious traditions. Harris criticizes the dogmatic nature of religious beliefs, particularly in Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. He argues that religious fundamentalists assert claims that are in contact with specific facts, such as historical events and scientific knowledge, making them unlikely to be true. He also questions the preposterous claims found in religious texts and the lack of evidence for their perfection.

The Role of Sacrifice and Redemption

Peterson introduces the idea of sacrifice and redemption as central themes in the biblical corpus. He suggests that the biblical narrative culminates in the proposition that salvation and redemption are dependent on the voluntary willingness to confront the worst tragedies and acts of malevolence. He uses the passion story as an example of the universal pathway to salvation and redemption, emphasizing the necessity of encountering unjust suffering and malevolence.

Evil, Ignorance, and Wisdom

Harris presents an alternative framing of evil, suggesting that it may be more a matter of ignorance than anything else. He proposes that evil people are more a product of ignorance and the lack of knowledge about what they are missing. He argues that the deeper problem may be ignorance rather than inherent malevolence. He also discusses the possibility of curing evil people and the ethical implications of withholding a cure as punishment.