3:19 (Jordan Peterson) …in the postmodern world, and this seems to be something that’s increasingly seeping out into the culture at large, you have nothing but the tyrannical father, nothing but the destructive force of masculine consciousness, and nothing but the benevolent benevolent great mother. It’s an appalling ideology and it seems to me that it’s sucking the vitality, which is exactly what you’d expect symbolically. It’s sucking the vitality out of our culture and we need to ask how do we move forward constructively rather than just adding to the polarization.
05:41 (David Fuller) Peterson is one of a new breed of thinkers made famous almost completely by the internet not the broadcast media part of a powerful new informal network being called the intellectual dark web. The mainstream media is based on an old dying model that is being replaced by new media and new technology so quickly that its faults are becoming glaringly obvious.
Fortunately thanks to YouTube podcasting and however else you get shows like this one the mainstream media’s stranglehold on information which really is a stranglehold on your ability to think clearly about the issues of the day is crumbling at an incredible rate now the question is who and what will replace it
6:27 (Dave Rubin) Eric Weinstein came up with the phrase, intellectual dark web, to describe this eclectic mix of people from Sam Harris to Ben Shapiro to his brother Brett Weinstein to jordan Peterson all of whom are figuring out ways to have the important and often dangerous conversations that are completely ignored by the mainstream.
It’s why I would argue that this collection of people are actually more influential at this point than whatever collection of cable news pundits you can come up with. If you think I’m being hyperbolic about the growing influence of this group, just check the traction that these people get on Twitter or Facebook compared to our mainstream competitors. Twitter may not be real life, as I say in my Twitter bio, but it is somehwhat of a barometer of what the zeitgeist is right now.
What unites this group of thinkers is a sense that the set of ideas that have run Western culture for years are breaking down and that the chaos of the moment is the attempt to find new ones. It’s nearly all happening online.
08:32 (David Fuller) Peterson’s work looks at how people are hard-wired to see the world differently.
(Jordan Peterson) a lot of what determines your political orientation is biological temperament far more than people realize so for example left-leaning people, liberals let’s say, although that’s kind of misnomer, but we’ll keep with the terminology.
Liberals are high in a trait called openness which is one of the big five personality traits and it’s associated with interest in abstraction and interest in aesthetics. It’s the best predictor of liberal political leaning and they’re low in trait conscientiousness, which is dutifulness and orderliness in particular.
Whereas the Conservatives are the opposite. They’re high in conscientiousness, they’re dutiful and orderly and they’re low in openness. And that makes them really good managers and administrators and often businessman but not very good entrepreneurs, because the entrepreneurs are almost all drawn from the liberal types.
And so, these are really fundamentally biologically predicated differences and you might think about them as different sets of opportunities and limitations and certainly different ways of screening the world. And each of those different temperamental types needs the other type.
Let’s call this a diversity issue.
If you start understanding that the person that you’re talking to, who doesn’t share your political views, isn’t stupid, that’s the first thing, necessarily, they might be but so might you be. No stupidity isn’t the, differences in intelligence are not the prime determinant of differences in political belief.
All right so you might be talking to someone who’s more conscientious and less creative than you if you’re if you happen to be a liberal but that doesn’t mean that that person’s perspective is not valid and it doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t outperform you in some domains because they would.
So one thing to remember is people actually do see the world differently. It’s not merely that they’re possessed of ill informed opinions the whole point of a democracy is to continue the dialogue between people of different temperamental types so that we don’t move so far to the right that everything becomes encapsulated in stone and doesn’t move or so far to the left and everything dissolves in a kind of mealy-mouthed chaos. And the only way that you can navigate between those two shoals is through discussion which is why free speech is such an important value; it’s the thing that keeps the temperamental types from being at each other’s throats
(David Fuller) in the aftermath of the Trump election that came as such a shock to most of the media one of the most widely shared analysis pieces was from deep code. It describes how the establishment, mainstream media perspective, based around liberal values of openness and inclusivity, he calls the blue church, is being challenged by a new web-based insurgency; a red religion based on the values of tribalism.
11:45 (Jordan Greenhall) The culture where the 20th century was a decisive success for blue and a effectively a route for red. So what we see first is that red was forced to move into a deeply exploratory phase. Second that it did this in a context where as it turns out things were changing, meaningfully quite significantly in fact. It from my perspective, in a world historical level, the emergence of entirely new forms of communication and therefore entirely new forms of sense-making and coherence.
12:23 (David Fuller) He concludes that the blue church is in the process of collapse, as its dominant ideology can’t adapt to changing reality. But that a combination of the two sets of values of blue and red is essential.
(Jordan Greenhall) We are conscious and effective in the world in groups, not as individuals and the ingredients of those groups include aspects that are currently showing up as both red and blue. I propose somewhat strongly that neither red nor blue as pure elements contain the ingredients necessary to actually be adaptive to reality. This is a disaster in fact. … For most of human history these groups have actually always commingled. They’re necessary that they actually relate to each other in a deeply healthy and direct fashion. Their separations into armed camps is an extinction area.