2 thoughts on “Jordan Peterson vs British GQ November 2018”
Thanks for posting this. I watched it a while back and was struck by at least three things:
First, Peterson’s interlocutor here, Dr Helen Lewis, has actually read his books, so is conversant, and in some depth, with what he has actually said, its context, and all the surrounding qualifiers – very important, especially with someone like Peterson, who (love him or hate him) is trying to articulate very complex and nuanced ideas in great detail.
Second, her familiarity with Peterson’s work and ideas enables Dr Lewis to approach the conversation with civility and great focus, calmly and rationally zeroing in on exactly the areas where she has questions or potential differences of opinion.
Finally, to me this interview seems to me to be a fine example of exactly what Peterson (again, love him or hate him) means by a good/true conversation: one in which both parties approach the situation as a potential learning experience, and proceed to actually learn something from each other.
One last thing: Kudos to Dr Lewis for getting all the way through “Maps of Meaning”. I’m just past the two-thirds point in it myself, and believe me, that book is a BEAR!
Here is Peterson discussing this interview with Joe Rogan:
Very interesting chat, and much more nuanced (of course!) than my cursory remarks…
Also, I may have misunderstood Helen Lewis’s level of education; although she has a post-graduate diploma of some sort, it may fall short of an actual doctorate. See her Wiki entry here:
As to “Maps of Meaning”, I have now reached page 327 of 469, and it is still a bear to read, though more than worth the trouble, especially Peterson’s discussion of evil. But more on that later, I hope, once I’ve finished – should I live so long…
Leave a Reply
Consciousness, spirituality, biography, sexuality, androgyny, futurism, space, the arts, science, astrology, democracy, humor, books, movies and more
Thanks for posting this. I watched it a while back and was struck by at least three things:
First, Peterson’s interlocutor here, Dr Helen Lewis, has actually read his books, so is conversant, and in some depth, with what he has actually said, its context, and all the surrounding qualifiers – very important, especially with someone like Peterson, who (love him or hate him) is trying to articulate very complex and nuanced ideas in great detail.
Second, her familiarity with Peterson’s work and ideas enables Dr Lewis to approach the conversation with civility and great focus, calmly and rationally zeroing in on exactly the areas where she has questions or potential differences of opinion.
Finally, to me this interview seems to me to be a fine example of exactly what Peterson (again, love him or hate him) means by a good/true conversation: one in which both parties approach the situation as a potential learning experience, and proceed to actually learn something from each other.
One last thing: Kudos to Dr Lewis for getting all the way through “Maps of Meaning”. I’m just past the two-thirds point in it myself, and believe me, that book is a BEAR!
Here is Peterson discussing this interview with Joe Rogan:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euC3kmns6l4
Very interesting chat, and much more nuanced (of course!) than my cursory remarks…
Also, I may have misunderstood Helen Lewis’s level of education; although she has a post-graduate diploma of some sort, it may fall short of an actual doctorate. See her Wiki entry here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Lewis_(journalist)
As to “Maps of Meaning”, I have now reached page 327 of 469, and it is still a bear to read, though more than worth the trouble, especially Peterson’s discussion of evil. But more on that later, I hope, once I’ve finished – should I live so long…