Jordan Peterson: The Failure of Rationalism and Scientism
In this lecture, Jordan Peterson talks about the failure of rationalism and scientism
Philosophyinsights is a channel dedicated to bringing you the very best in educational content. Here, we take great care in selecting the most informative and thought-provoking videos from across the internet.
It's important to note that a considerable amount of effort goes into curating the content you see on our channel. Our team spends hours sifting through countless videos to find the most engaging and enlightening content that is relevant to our audience. Once we have identified a suitable video, we then edit it to ensure that it fits seamlessly into our channel's format.
We take great pride in the content we present on this channel and strive to add educational value to each video we share. Our aim is to provide our viewers with a diverse range of philosophical topics and perspectives to broaden their understanding of the world around us.
If you enjoy the selection of videos on our channel and appreciate the effort we put into curating them, we encourage you to subscribe to our channel. By subscribing, you will never miss an update, and you will be supporting our mission to bring quality educational content to the world. So, join our community of curious minds, and let's explore the vast realm of philosophy together!
Includes the following footage:
“Hikers” by Kelly (cc license)
“A Woman Looking At A Thick Fog Covering The Bridge” (cc license)
“Woman Playing Chess” (Cc license)
“Sketching a Concept on Paper” by life of pix (cc license)
“mountains” by trilemedia (Pixabay License)
“Jitianu Orthodox Monastery in Braniște, Romania” (cc license)
“Aerial Footage Of A Village Built In A Valley Between Mountains” (cc license)
“The Sun Sets Behind The Mountains” by Darshak Pandya (cc license)
Also check out the full lecture here:
• 2017 Personality 11: E...
"Give science one miracle and it can explain the rest" is an eloquent quote to express the limitations of Reason and science.
There is a limit of our reason. And I feel more alive being emotional, with reason always in reach.
Basically, Sapolsky's Determined 3 factors that constitute what you feel to be your "free will": genetic, environmental and cultural factors. The environmental also includes non-genetic inheritance, the hormonal system part of which you inherit from your mother.
Thanks for the first clip of Peterson I liked.
"Rationality can never lead to truth because it is filtered through our senses and corporal experience." AI has entered the chat.
The anger (or mocking) response is the cognitive dissonance that is born when the subject cannot construct a logical flow of evidentiary knowing in response to new and challenging information (beliefs are challenged). Scientism has permitted the preconceived belief (presumption) to prevail and to argue backwards towards the modelled concept as if it were a proof in a misguided and futile process of confirmation bias. Human knowledge has stagnated and become largely volumes of institutionalized gobbledegook. Not a desirable state of affairs.
Why don't you just write stupid people can't form logically coherent arguments. And Scientism is just a form of scholasticism that dispenses with actual scientific endeavour. When you try to sound too clever you end up sounding dumb. 😉
Thanks PI good you popped up on my homepage. I read The Antichrist - the writing was indeed powerful but I tired of it and can't remember if I finished. At some point it seemed to be mostly ranting - using the writing as a substitute for the physical power he didn't have - but I'm a working class guy and no great intellect. Nevertheless I appreciate his brilliance and JBP's explanations. Hope the new year is good to you PI and all your subs here.
I agree with you. I read all the main works of Nietzsche and there are definitly gems in it where he is really profound. But sometimes it is a lot of ranting and self-gratulation too, especially in his later works.
Thanks PI, I've heard other learned people make similar comments.
I’m trying to find where Nietzsche explained that Christianity’s pursuit of truth is what killed it. Does anyone know what book he said that in?
Nietzsche is overrated, didn't bring anything new to the then philosophical and scientific understanding of people and nature. He used Herbert Spencers's Social Darwinism in saying not to help the ill, the weak and the needy, as that would degrade societies of the healthy, the strong and the independent. Darwin weakened christianity, not "Christianity's pursuit of truth". God wasn't dead during Nietzsche's time, nor is it now, on the contrary, there's never been so many gods in the history of humanity. We have now over 10 thousands religions.
@@kavorka8855 Darwin’s scientific discoveries came from pursuing truth. A goal first articulated by Jesus as far as western culture remembers. Nietzsche is often considered to have drawn many of the wrong conclusions but there is no denying that he was a brilliant writer and thought to question and integrate matters no one els even thought of. When he said God is dead he likely meant within western culture and that seems to be more true with every passing decade.
@@RangerRyke I also talked of western culture, we've new prophets and messiahs, we call them cults, but in fact they're religious cults. There has been "brilliant" writers and thinkers all life long, but what makes some people talk of Nietzsche as ahead of his time is lack of of knowledge of history, the fact that he didn't bring anything new. But what's dumb and silly is to think of him as brilliant now, even after the recent discoveries of new AI algorithms. There are actually people still don't get science! Don't get what "truth" is!
@@kavorka8855 have you read any of Nietzsche’s books? Be honest
@@RangerRyke On the Genealogy of Morality, yes. However, it's not important one's reading of people like Nietzsche, Marx, Foucault, bible, quran, Buddha, what's important is to listen to people's perceptions of them. An example is the Nietzsche podcast, a guy who says is an artist who's no interests in science nor he's an expert in philosophy, his interpretation of Nietzsche is strange, to say the least, all positive.
Listened to 12.40. Here JP is mistaken when he thinks that the requirement of scientist to be objective hinders the scientist to understand us as beings. He and his colleagues have shown that his conclusion is wrong. We can in an objective fashion study how other people react and operate.
I think he is exaggerating to make a point, because as a clinician he is a scientist and as a psychologist he understands the human need for subjectivity.
Cool 😊
When Reason and Science are inoffensive, uncapable to wield a sword or shot a gun....
Are you human?
The argument/lecture is interesting but the 'special editing' is patronising and frankly crap. Stick to Peterson's argument, let us make up our own minds.
Scientism is the opposite of Rationalism. Ridiculous title, sorry.
Cringe cope
Plus the title has nothing to do with the clip...
There are different notions of 'rationalism'. If you view the rationalist tradition as the opposite of the empiricist tradition, then you are right. But this is not the way Peterson uses 'rationalism' here.
@@PhilosophyInsights Rationalism is not the opposite of the empiricist tradition. The opposite, if there is such a thing, is the Idealist tradition. My criticism stands and your defense not only misses my point but is wrong anyway. P.S. All schools of philosophy claim to act on rational grounds and there is no opposite to that. E.g., there is no school of bat shit crazy.
@@PhilosophyInsightsyea he is right.Clickbaiting gone so far that lying has become the norm.Yet we do not accept that because i did not find this channel while scrolling.I did while searching,writing something.The standart i hold you is different.It is unfair but that is how it is.