Peterson knocked off his fence perch by smug child
(notthebee.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (43)
sorted by:
Hmmm. I'm not sure. I think this was deliberately bad faith provocation from the start. The kid is disrespectful and pushy and doesn't end up making anything but some pedantic point.
It's hard for me to agree with the idea that he "destroyed" Peterson here as I think the real meat was to come. If it makes any difference, I am an atheist and I would not say I'm generally a fan of JP.
The video is called "Christians vs atheists" if you're the "christian" and you don't confess Christ you lose. End of story.
There is quite litteraly no possible stronger example of "you have one job"
No, the video is called "Jordan Peterson vs 20 Atheists | Surrounded".
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwk5MPE_6zE&pp=ygUWY2hyaXN0aWFucyB2cyBhdGhlaXN0c9IHCQmNCQGHKiGM7w%3D%3D
They edited the title of the video, it was originally "1 Christian vs 20 Atheists".
Its such a retarded gotcha anyway. WHY would that be the title lol, if Jordan peterson is an atheist why would he debate 20 athiests.
He has to be the outgroup if he's going to be surrounded. "Jackie chan vs 20 asians" lol
If you intentionally hide your argument in a debate, it means you're being manipulative and disingenuous, preventing your opponent from being able to address specific points of disagreement.
The kid was absolutely a Reddit tier atheist and uncivil, which prevents good debate, but about his point of contention here, he's absolutely correct. Peterson is being even more contemptible than the Reddit atheist in debate ethics. It is impossible to have a debate when one side is concealing their true motives, arguments, and position. On any topic in a debate, everyone should be rightfully pissed at Peterson for pulling that manipulation.
Hugs, my man. Why would JP face off against "20 Atheists" if not to challenge atheism? Now there are numerous challenges to atheism one could make without invoking Christian thought. But not if your J Peterson. Peterson buggered off because the snot nosed kid challenged Peterson's media personality, ie a "cultural Christian" on the side of "conservatives." Peterson can't say "I don't believe in Christianity but lets talk about Aristotle's metaphysics and the resultant Prime Mover." The checks would stop rolling in.
It was originally presented as “1 Christian vs 20 atheists.” They changed the title after this moment went viral.
Originally it was titled christian but they edited the video.
How many times has PETERson denied Christ, has it been maybe THREE times. You better stop thinking in the box and start thinking in the crucifix or you’ll be doomed to eternal torment.
Its one of those funny things were the question answers itself. To question "why do I have to say I'm a Christian or not?" Is to deny being Christian, and if you don't know the doctrine well enough you wont even see why. its while the petersons of the world cant fuck woth Christianity, it requires a humility they lack, and requires you to abandon consecutive reasoning in favor of obedience.
Peterson doesnt remind me of Peter. He reminds me of Saul, he sees the value in God, but thinks with his little adjustments and input things could be even better.
No, he absolutely was destroyed. Remove all the specific labels regarding Christian/Atheist and he still was destroyed.
He is constantly shifting around, refusing to answer anything, and has completely lost frame. The kid has him squirming and trying to act tough and in control when he can't even answer a simple question and has to "watch your tone with me!!" to pull the only card he has (age/experience).
It doesn't matter if its bad faith, when you are in a debate setting and have made your fame dominating others in bad faith battles (like the famous lobster one) you need to put on a better show.
Remove all the specific labels about Christians or atheists and nothing was said. JP was pushing back on small assumptions and waiting for the atheist to make his point, which I'm guessing had to do with The Mary Question. Instead of actually making that point, he quibbled about the specific labels you mentioned. And that's all that happened.
Not quite. He got Peterson to as good as admit that Peterson doesn't hold the Christian position. Not a death knell in the Atheism-Theism debate, but makes make Peterson seem odd when the following dialogue was :
Even ignoring whether or not Peterson should be playing the role he is, that quibbling is insane. “Why are you asking me that?” I don’t know, because you showed up to a debate to play the opposing side? How else did you expect this to go? The atheists monologue without ever talking to you directly and you get to interject when you spot rhetorical weakness, but pretend to be above it all like you’re the commentator is some sort of political version of MST3K?
I really hate to defend this smug atheist, but those labels were important in the context of the debate. If JP refuses to identify as a Catholic, or even a Christian, then he has no anchored principle to even make a point against in a Christian vs Atheist debate. How can you even begin the conversation if every presupposed position is suddenly "nu uh, I ain't that either!"
So without the labels, JP is just waffling badly. With them, he fails as a Christian by denying Christ and doing so for some beneficial purpose. I guess to not be attached to the baggage of the label.