Peterson and de Sousa debate Living Without the Sacred?

Philosopher Ronald de Sousa and clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson debate Living Without the Sacred: Should John Lennon's Imagine Become Our Reality? The debate was hosted by the University of Toronto Secular Alliance, and sponsored by TVO's Big Ideas and the Centre for Inquiry Ontario.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• TVO
• TVOntario
• TVOKids
• polka
• dot
• door
• polkaroo
• education
• public
• television
• Elwy
• Yost
• Steve
• Paikin
• big
• back
• yard
• ideas
• Canada
• Big Ideas
• religion
• society
• psychology
• identity
• philosophy
• spirituality
• ethics

[fredbergotte]

While Nazism and Stalinism based themselves on "modern rationalist" premises, both were in effect secular religions with hierarchies, prophets, holy texts and a paradisiacal vision of the future - even if neither Hitler nor Stalin actually believed in God.

[Harizl]

@fcblaugrana0

I disagree with your assessment of de Sousa, and also that my reaction was knee-jerk (as it was written after viewing the entire video and then reviewed to compare stances at the end versus beginning.)

I am disagreeing with DeSouza, not Peterson, to clarify.

Creating a experiment to demonstrate something is only one aspect of the scientific method, and not even the most important one especially in this debate about the importance of a opinion-based attribute of "sacredness".

[fcblaugrana0]

... the role of an intelligent scientist (in what I believe to be Peterson's view having been a student of his) is the ability synthesize pieces of information into a broader and more useful model. that is what Peterson attempts to do and that is what any scientist worth reading does. you can disagree with his framework or arguments but you should at least do it intelligently as de sousa does.

[fcblaugrana0]

@Harizl utter ignorance in 60 sec? did you stop watching after 60 seconds? i think your thoughtless knee jerk response is the only ignorance i see. but anyway what is science exactly? yes science is a method for deriving empirical knowledge or 'truth'. but any idiot can design an experiment to demonstrate some useless phenomena under very constricted circumstances that will have no bearing on 'human knowledge' whatsoever. contd

[Harizl]

@NorseMariner7

Human Nature is a Scientific field.

And besides that, Science is not a subject it is a method of finding accurate truth.

[NorseMariner7]

@Euraethes

Yeah that is exactly the conclusion I came to watching this debate. They just didn't seem to agree on even the definition on what they are debating about. A lot of people here will insult Jordan Peterson without even realizing that he is not defending religion, he is defending the intangible values such as love and hope which we view as sacred. I agree with both of these men, but they are debating over something they define differently.

[NorseMariner7]

@Harizl

This isn't a debate about science, it is about human nature and philosophy.

[idworkhard]

I dont like the fact that deSouza denies without contemplating on what he's read. It's like he arrives with the already set conclusion that the journey was meaningless.

[FaganRoberts]

Human life is precious but not priceless.

[CoonAndFriends2]

I facepalmed at 19:18.