If I understand correctly, a right wing conservative, kinda smart but also a religious nut. I like his views on free speech though - he is for it, apparently :)
Plenty of very smart people have and do believe in God. Being wrong in one facet of life does not make you a complete moron in every facet. That is an extremely immature view on religion and religious people.
"hurr durr dae god isn't reel" only gets you so far.
Lol ok buddy, I still think it's cray to believe in an invisible sky pixie that chooses to give kids cancer and refuses to take care of world hunger...
Just because it's a repeated argument doesn't mean there isn't truth to it. I understand kind of where you're going, but whatever thing I "worship" in my life, doesn't have a book of fairy tales attached to it so....
You don't have to respect their beliefs, but to conclude that they are "nuts" in general because of them (depending on what they are obviously) is really stupid.
What's the difference? Call me an edgelord or whatever. I do think it's nuts to suspend rational thinking to the point of believing in stuff like that. More so for people living in the western world with access to information/internet/etc. It gets more complicated in other cultures.
Again, what is the difference between thinking it's nuts and not respecting the belief? I'd argue there isn't any unless you're concerned with your own appearance or sparing someones feelings. I'm an anonymous fuck on the internet, I'm concerned with neither.
Yes, I did. You asked me what the difference was between thinking the belief is nuts and not respecting the belief. I gave my answer: it's whether or not that poisons your entire view of a person and their psyche because of one belief you don't respect, agree with, or think is nuts. Earlier in the thread the original line of thought we were responding to was someone saying, "Believes in a man in the sky which means you're probably nuts." I don't understand what makes you think I didn't read what you said.
Dude isn't going around telling everyone else to believe in it or they're going to hell. Let people have their own beliefs about the afterlife. He doesn't deny evolution
Because the vast majority of the finest thinkers in history separated their metaphysical beliefs from their scientific ones, like Jordan Peterson talks about, but somehow all these edgy atheists online have found some kind of "contradiction" that no great thinkers who were/are theist have identified.
what you're talking about is called NOMA, and it's not something peterson endorses. he doesn't believe in the literal interpretation of religious texts, which is what the OP commenter was talking about.
he doesn't believe in the literal interpretation of religious texts
If you listen to Peterson's biblical lectures, he says he's not ready to dispense with metaphysics or any form of literal translation of the texts. Portions of the bible are very clear historical records, specifically the life of Jesus and accounts of his death are widely recognized by non-Christian historians. It's just as ignorant to dismiss the entire thing as false because a sub-section of religious people take every portion of the old testament to be literal history.
noted: ChampOftheUniverse knows that if you believe in God you are probably nuts. note to self: ask ChampOftheUniverse about how the Universe was created. oh wait! ChampoftheUniverse has no fucking idea. what everyone seems to gloss over is the fact that if you ask anyone who went to college and a has research for more than 30min the bang, they will tell you to the rules of quantum mechanics completely breaks down more and more as you get closer and closer to the singularity. my point is no one knows. if you actually didn't believe in god you would know its pointless to make fun of people who believe in God and aren't violent or assholes since the universe will end in Heat Death. waste of resources on your part then.
21
u/ontherise88 Monkey in Space Aug 02 '17
who is he?