Rising conservative star Jordan Peterson in debate: "Athiesm leads to murder"

a reply to: Arnie123

Atheist heads of state are VERY new..

Can you please name all the atheist leaders from history??

Nope.. because there are none before the turn of the century..

Unless your counting every religion that isn’t Christianity as “athiests.”


Ps.. Oh and thank you..

If you think I’m a blight o these forums I must be doing something right!

a reply to: c2oden

Thank you.. I do enjoy pointing out the patently RIDICULOUS nature of conservative propaganda and that makes some people uncomfortable as it poops on their world view..

a reply to: Raggedyman

I find it hilarious that you have such huge issues understanding something as simple as the golden rule.

"One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself"

If an atheist doesn't want to be murdered, he obviously would see murder as bad. Simple as that.

The more basic motive is that cooperation is good, beneficial to the cooperating parties. That is something that is observed everywhere in the animal kingdom.

It gets interesting when you consider the case of stopping someone from murdering yourself or others by murdering him. Is that good or bad? Would your God be okay with that?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

You have a few links in your OP and one of them is tagged Believer after the part where you said

Jordan Peterson is a self proclaimed Christian evangelical

But if you listen to the vid he nowhere says what you said . Please provide the link and place where he said that . tks

a reply to: moebius

I find it hilarious that you have such huge issues understanding something as simple as the golden rule. "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself"

Page rephrased it to something like this ...Be nice to me and I will be nice to you ... I am sure there have been different people at different times that that may have come in handy . A prison guard standing outside Baba's cell . Or the gal that got pulled over for speeding by a cop . I would imaging that golden rule would work for a rapist or even a pedo .

Your version "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself" has its own set of issues . Not every one respects themselves .So does that mean they should show the same disrespect for others ? of course not . But it doesn't say that and the statement is left open for personal interpretation is it not ?

a reply to: the2ofusr1

That video reference was to the bible.

He's claimed himself to be a Christian.

He's a follower of the bible.

It's patently clear he is one, and his supporters, and apologists, are being dishonest in claiming otherwise.

Do I believe that Jordan Peterson really believes in the bible and Christianity? No. It's his attempt to build appeal to a certain audience.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

I've listened to Peterson on Joe Rogan and he's a very intelligent guy. Some of the things he says I can agree with and others totally disagree. Following the Rogan show, I chose to listen to more of his interviews and panels and found that I probably disagreed more often with his stances and lost interest.

I'm very surprised and bemused how a man of his intellect can sincerely make this argument. It's quite devoid of rational thought and that's one thing he seems to apply to his opinions. It's also a crushing insult to Christians as it's saying they'd all be criminals if they weren't scared of God's consequences.

It isn't an insult to the average atheist as they already know their deeds have no bearing on fear of some afterlife consequences and that Peterson is arguing from ignorance.

a reply to: Kandinsky

I've put forward my thought here about what I think the deal is. He's a smart guy, has the academic credentials but at the same time he's playing the field... playing to an audience, trying to gain appeal so that he can gain some sort of benefit from his speaking and debating gigs. That's just it. Hence his vagueness when challanged to clarify on his 'beliefs'.

a reply to: Phage

i think perhaps a longer perspective could help in this. nearly had it there phage.
so heres some theory. not time to source it all for you in this post...
What we require is better understanding how artificial selection systems developed inside the context of natural selection systems. That kind of reliance upon the DUALITIES of false fundamental dichotomies, and the related impossible ideals, results in recommending bogus "solutions" which are ultimately BACKWARDS!

To better embrace technologies should be inspired and guided by the series of intellectual scientific revolutions and profound paradigm shifts which occurred in mathematical physics (which are what made the electronics possible.) Doing so requires using more UNITARY MECHANISMS, to better understand human beings and Globalized Neolithic Civilization as manifestations of general energy systems.

Natural selection was internalized as human intelligence, which was then applied to the most important selection pressures, which were other groups of people. Hence, the history of warfare, as what made and maintained Globalized Neolithic Civilization, within which context emerged "social media global monopolies" making money by even greater enslavement.

After life exists, then the death controls direct the evolution of that life. In the case of human beings and civilization, those natural selection pressures have driven the death control systems to become most socially successful by becoming as deceitful and treacherous as possible. Hence, it has been rather routine for wars to be started and escalated by staging various false flag attacks.

so thats where "ism's" come in.
the hierarchy-
>the ism/the myth/the fantasy
>the sociopathic leaders
>the sociopathic hierarchy
>the true believers
>the dumbasses (enlightened or not)

result= bull# flows downwards, power flows upwards. this is religion.
and it s all psychology!

what is the basis for a principled approach to right and wrong as an atheist?

Humanity? What's good for society? Situational ethic? You know, everyone uses situational ethics, but religious people lie and say they don't.

You know many animal species work together peacefully and help each other for the common good. Are they theists?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

His freedom of speech arguments made sense to me. The rest seems to be riding on the 'Alt-Right' wave including his alignment with the Kek guys. It's what happens. A person opposes something in a moderate way and somehow gets carried along to the fringes.

I would prefer that he's faking his faith for group acceptance because I can't accept a man of his intelligence could say something so stupid.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

It's patently clear he is one, and his supporters, and apologists, are being dishonest in claiming otherwise. Do I believe that Jordan Peterson really believes in the bible and Christianity? No. It's his attempt to build appeal to a certain audience.

And you would be correct because he clearly states in that vid when asked directly in no uncertain terms that he is Agostic . Not as you claimed that

Jordan Peterson is a self proclaimed Christian evangelical

ag·nos·tic aɡˈnästik/Submit noun 1. a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

a reply to: Kandinsky

I would prefer that he's faking his faith

He is not faking it or claiming to be a Christian but makes it clear he is a Agnostic . I wish he was a Christian but that is not the case .

a reply to: the2ofusr1

At the beginning of the video he says rather clearly he's a Christian.

If you wish to entertain his attempt at being vague after that, so be it.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: Southern Guardian

I've listened to Peterson on Joe Rogan and he's a very intelligent guy. Some of the things he says I can agree with and others totally disagree. Following the Rogan show, I chose to listen to more of his interviews and panels and found that I probably disagreed more often with his stances and lost interest.

I'm very surprised and bemused how a man of his intellect can sincerely make this argument. It's quite devoid of rational thought and that's one thing he seems to apply to his opinions. It's also a crushing insult to Christians as it's saying they'd all be criminals if they weren't scared of God's consequences.

It isn't an insult to the average atheist as they already know their deeds have no bearing on fear of some afterlife consequences and that Peterson is arguing from ignorance.

What insults my intelligence is an argument like the one you are offering here

Tell me Kad, why does society have laws and a justice system
Seriously are you so naive that the obvious nature of this world escapes you

Even with punishment and death, the courts are overloaded
How do you rationalise your opinion and reality

Another thing, your concept of Christianity is flawed. It's not based on fear, it's based on love
Your are arguing from ignorance

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: Raggedyman

I find it hilarious that you have such huge issues understanding something as simple as the golden rule.

"One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself"

If an atheist doesn't want to be murdered, he obviously would see murder as bad. Simple as that.

The more basic motive is that cooperation is good, beneficial to the cooperating parties. That is something that is observed everywhere in the animal kingdom.

It gets interesting when you consider the case of stopping someone from murdering yourself or others by murdering him. Is that good or bad? Would your God be okay with that?

But the golden rule is the opposite of evolution and survival of the fittest
Or are we more than animals

At least phage was smart enough to see where the argument would lead
You are not that smart obviously

Do all atheists believe in the golden rule or do you think/wish/hope they all do and if they do, why?

a reply to: Southern Guardian

At the beginning of the video he says rather clearly he's a Christian.

I didn't say he did't say that ,I said he never said what you said he said which was

Jordan Peterson is a self proclaimed Christian evangelical

There are a lot of groups and individuals who claim to be Christian but are not because they do not confess the basic belief that Jesus died was buried and rose from the dead . Its fundamental to the very core of Christian doctrine belief . That is why groups like the Mormans and Jehovah Witnesses are not excepted into the orthodoxy of Christianity .

originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: the2ofusr1

The link has already been provided and another provided by another member. He's a Christian and a follower of the bible.

By all means find an alternative link where he says he's not a Christian.

Peterson is not a Christian, he catagoricalynstates he is an agnostic
Why are you confused about what he states

It beggars belief

a reply to: Raggedyman

Peterson is not a Christian, he catagoricalynstates he is an agnostic Why are you confused about what he states It beggars belief

I guess using their standards we will have to call anyone living in "Christendom" a Christian ...well just because

a reply to: username74

i dont want to give too nihlistic an impression. this doesnt detract from individual spirituality (your own personal interaction with your perception of the world). hope lives within the dream (people wish for things to get better). the identity of the accredited agent of the change is optional. (allah, god, gaia, universe)

This is probably closer to the origins of religion in that it was home made (cave bear skulls and incense in the caves) and after the advent of sedentary living practices it becomes a material issue. it becomes religion proper where the human brains hypnotic sensitvity to rhythm lights smell and sound leaves us vunerable to the power of a societal framework enabling the hierarchy presented in my previous post.