One more thing. While I don't always agree with you or Brett or Eric I still respect you guys and am glad you are doing what you do. I also don't always agree with the guys on the other side doing the fight like the Daily Wire guys. I'm an equal opportunity offender and disagreer**. Then again would we really want to live in a world where we all agreed? It would VERY boring.
**While substack does not recognize this as a real word I checked and it is in Websters so it's real. I had to do this b/c I myself wasn't sure if it was just slang which I'm very guilty of using too often. Then again in real life I sound more like a Redneck version of Forest Gump so if the shoe fits....😂
We as a nation are best when both sides are in disagreement most of the time for that means that the few times we are in agreement it matters most. I believe this was the intent of the founding fathers; to make it so difficult that only that which truly matters would get adopted.
No form of governance is impervious to corruption for mankind is not impervious to it.
Off-topic but I really like Peter‘s Substitution Hypothesis; especially as he developed it in his YouTube video with Richard Dawkins.
In short, trans people believe that a man can become a woman and vice versa in the same way that Catholics believe the wafer and the wine are the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
I hope I’ve not oversimplified the idea too much but that’s how I understand it.
Absolutely loved this conversation. I would agree that those who employ Socratic questioning alongside relational skills (warmth, attentive listening, summarising) make the best and most trusted friends who will never allow you to get away with flawed thinking. Truths emerge from these conversations to the benefit of both parties, strengthening the connection and enriching our experiences of life. Helping people learn to assume a reflective stance about their own experiences or their beliefs can protect against indoctrination, manipulation, and assimilation.
7 comments as of 2024/09/14. Are we truly in the Matrix with only real life versions of Neo, Trinity, Morpheus, Apoc and the rest of the crew responding? It's not as if Peter is not a very well known person and this is not a subscribers only post so where is all the feedback for this or is the 1999 THE MATRIX more of a warning then 1984 or Brave New World ever were?
If you follow Peter then I plead, provide feedback!
Given your interest in philosophy being more accessible to people, you might appreciate my writing. I'm all about trying to make philosophy available to people.
I once had my fiction writing described as a philosophy textbook in narrative form. Although my writing is more about other people's fiction... for the moment.
As it’s described, exploring the morals and ethics of bringing TV and other media to life. Largely because you can see the philosophy play out and the potential consequences on screen.
I don't agree with you on everything Peter but I thank God (yes I am a man of faith) that we have people like you as well as
Bret Weinstein
Eric Weinstein (& his wife Heather)
Elon Musk
I can't emphasize enough how important it is that no side gets to much power for too long,.
Thank you. That really means a lot to me.
One more thing. While I don't always agree with you or Brett or Eric I still respect you guys and am glad you are doing what you do. I also don't always agree with the guys on the other side doing the fight like the Daily Wire guys. I'm an equal opportunity offender and disagreer**. Then again would we really want to live in a world where we all agreed? It would VERY boring.
**While substack does not recognize this as a real word I checked and it is in Websters so it's real. I had to do this b/c I myself wasn't sure if it was just slang which I'm very guilty of using too often. Then again in real life I sound more like a Redneck version of Forest Gump so if the shoe fits....😂
We as a nation are best when both sides are in disagreement most of the time for that means that the few times we are in agreement it matters most. I believe this was the intent of the founding fathers; to make it so difficult that only that which truly matters would get adopted.
No form of governance is impervious to corruption for mankind is not impervious to it.
Off-topic but I really like Peter‘s Substitution Hypothesis; especially as he developed it in his YouTube video with Richard Dawkins.
In short, trans people believe that a man can become a woman and vice versa in the same way that Catholics believe the wafer and the wine are the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
I hope I’ve not oversimplified the idea too much but that’s how I understand it.
Absolutely loved this conversation. I would agree that those who employ Socratic questioning alongside relational skills (warmth, attentive listening, summarising) make the best and most trusted friends who will never allow you to get away with flawed thinking. Truths emerge from these conversations to the benefit of both parties, strengthening the connection and enriching our experiences of life. Helping people learn to assume a reflective stance about their own experiences or their beliefs can protect against indoctrination, manipulation, and assimilation.
7 comments as of 2024/09/14. Are we truly in the Matrix with only real life versions of Neo, Trinity, Morpheus, Apoc and the rest of the crew responding? It's not as if Peter is not a very well known person and this is not a subscribers only post so where is all the feedback for this or is the 1999 THE MATRIX more of a warning then 1984 or Brave New World ever were?
If you follow Peter then I plead, provide feedback!
Given your interest in philosophy being more accessible to people, you might appreciate my writing. I'm all about trying to make philosophy available to people.
I once had my fiction writing described as a philosophy textbook in narrative form. Although my writing is more about other people's fiction... for the moment.
URL?
Oh, and I did a piece on Star Trek Deep Space Nine, since I know you’re a fan.
Here’s the link:
https://tvphilosophy.substack.com
As it’s described, exploring the morals and ethics of bringing TV and other media to life. Largely because you can see the philosophy play out and the potential consequences on screen.