555. How the Internet Is Breaking Our Brains | Sam Harris

Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris explore the breakdown of institutions in the digital age, and how difficult it’s become to identify what’s true and what’s not. Harris voices deep concern over the role independent media and social platforms play in amplifying misinformation, especially post-October 7th. They discuss the addictive, fragmenting nature of platforms like X, the erosion of trust in institutions, the dangers of AI-generated identity theft — and possible solutions. The result is a sobering analysis of epistemic collapse, digital psychopathy, and the urgent need for institutional structure in a world where mass information fails us. 'This episode was filmed on June 6th, 2025. | Links | For Sam Harris: On X https://twitter.com/MakingSenseHQ On Instagram https://www.instagram.com/samharrisorg/?hl=en On Youtube https://www.youtube.com/@samharrisorg Substack https://samharris.substack.com/ The Waking Up App https://www.wakingup.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Speaker 00

  Everyone wants healthcare to be simpler and easier. That's why UnitedHealth Group is fast-tracking more than 60% of children's procedures that used to need pre-approval. So more kids get the care they need, when they need it. And speeding up procedure approvals and payments for more than 1,500 rural hospitals. So they can focus on caring for their communities. And that's just the start. Learn more at UHg.com/Access.

• 0:30Speaker 01

  Have you heard the news? Balance of Nature's Fiber & Spice Supplement is everything nice. No synthetics, no additives, and no flow agents. Just 100% ingredients of whole food. It isn't just your average fiber supplement. It also has a wide variety of 12 amazing spices. Just 2 scoops of the Fiber & Spice Supplement, stirred into 16 ounces of your favorite drink daily, that's all it takes to get a wide variety of ingredients of real whole food. Every single day. Here's how Balance of Nature Fiber & Spice Supplement worked for one customer.

• 1:04Speaker 02

  I have been taking Fiber & Spice for over 3 years. When I first started taking it, I could smell the cumin and the turmeric and the different spices. I tell all my friends about Balance of Nature.

• 1:17Speaker 01

  Call now and save 35% on your first order when you subscribe. Use discount code WIRE. Call 1-800-246-8751. That's 1-800-246-8751.

• 1:30Speaker 03

  Share comfort and joy this holiday season at Tacovus. Our boots are handcrafted in over 200 meticulous steps and have a broken-in feel right out of the box with styles for everyone in the family. Our expert staff can help you pick the perfect gifts, and we have free in-store gift wrapping to help make the holiday season truly special. See you soon at your local Tacovus store, or shop with us anytime at tacovus.com.

• 1:54Speaker 04

  I'm increasingly worried that we have effectively rendered ourselves ungovernable based on the way we have shattered the information landscape.

• 2:03Jordan B. Peterson?

  This is a consequence of hyper-connectivity and stunning ease of communication.

• 2:10Speaker 04

  You can just go down a rabbit hole and find endless confirmation that's fairly anonymized.

• 2:16Jordan B. Peterson?

  We have to ground our perceptions in an axiomatic framework.

• 2:21Speaker 04

  The old norms that the gatekeepers, for all their faults, they had standards.

• 2:26Jordan B. Peterson?

  I don't trust anything the New York Times prints at all. The gatekeeping institutions have also revealed themselves as catastrophically flawed.

• 2:36Speaker 04

  The antidote to that, to the failures of institutions, is not new standards. It's really to apply the old standards.

• 3:00Jordan B. Peterson?

  I've spent a lot of time over the years speaking with Sam Harris. We've spoken publicly half a dozen times and privately far more than that. We're coming at the same problems, I would say, from quite different perspectives and establishing some concordance over time. Today, we went down the rabbit hole of rabbit holes, I suppose, discussing the fragmentation of the narrative landscape on the social media front and what that means for cultural incoherence, weakness, demoralization, deceit, self-deception, and inability to understand one another.

• 3:38Jordan B. Peterson?

  And so, join us as we attempt to clarify the catastrophe of infinite plurality. Well, Mr. Harris, it looks like it's time for our approximately annual conversation.

• 3:52Speaker 04

  Yeah, nice. You're the clock that ticks once a year.

• 3:57Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, well, I suspect that's more than enough. So tell me what you're thinking about lately, Sam, on the intellectual side and what you're doing.

• 4:07Speaker 04

  Well, it is actually relevant to the chaos in our politics at the moment. I'm increasingly worried that we have effectively rendered ourselves ungovernable based on the way we have shattered the information landscape. And I think independent media of the sort that we're indulging now is part of that problem. I mean, I don't know if you're aware of it or not, but I've been fairly vociferous in criticizing some of our mutual friends. And in my case, some may be former friends, but fellow podcasters and people in independent media. And I just think they've been part of this shattering.

• 4:50Speaker 04

  And it's been fairly obvious. And the cases are different, but many people have been quite irresponsible in the way that they have platformed people uncritically and let them spread truly divisive and dangerous misinformation. I'm thinking especially of in the aftermath of October 7th and the global explosion of antisemitism. We've had some very big podcasts like Tucker's and Joe's platform Holocaust deniers and revisionists. And it's been quite insane out there. And it's just, I mean, that's just one piece of it.

• 5:28Speaker 04

  I mean, you can talk about COVID or Trump or Ukraine or any, pick your ugly object out there. There's just a radical divergence of opinion into these echo chambers we build for ourselves. And it seems to be very difficult to cross political lines. I mean, it's somehow deeper than politics, actually. So anyway, I'm just increasingly worried about that. And, you know, I'm trying to hold up my side of the conversation in ways so as to cross those lines. But I'm just noticing that it's, in many cases, it's proving impossible.

• 6:12Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, okay, well, that's, I am aware of that. It's actually part of the reason I thought it would be useful for us to talk today.

• 6:20Jordan B. Peterson?

  So I want to think about how to respond to that to begin with. Well, I think the first thing that we should probably note is that this is a consequence of hyper-connectivity and stunning ease of communication. Right, so I mean, it's obviously the case that the landscapes of communication that once held us together, for better or worse, are now so multiplicitous that they're new, they're new, they're numberless. And so that, so what does that mean? I think what it means in part, and this is where I think our conversation might get particularly interesting, is that

• 7:05Jordan B. Peterson?

  we don't have a shared story anymore. And I think a culture, I think a culture is literally a shared story. And a story is a structure. This is, you know, been part of our ongoing discussion for a very long period of time, right? This, the relationship between the perceptual framing that is constituted by a story and, let's say, the domain of objective facts, right? This is a very thorny problem. But it seems to me that you have a culture when people share the same story or the same stories. They have the same shared reference points.

• 7:45Jordan B. Peterson?

  And with an infinite landscape of communication, that fragments indefinitely. And then no one, see, Sam, let me tell you, I might as well, just to annoy you, just to get, just to get the ball rolling. I spent a lot of time thinking about the story of the Tower of Babel. There's two stories in Genesis that describe how things go wrong. And one story is the flood, and that's the consequence of absolute chaos bursting forth, essentially. But the Tower of Babel is a story about... Both totalitarianism and fragmentation. So what happens is the engineers get together, because that's who it is.

• 8:30Jordan B. Peterson?

  It's the city builders, the toolmakers, the... Those who create weapons of war. The city builders, the engineers. They get together and they build these towers to... for the aggrandizement of the local potentates. So there was competition in the Middle East of that time to build the highest tower for the glory of the local ruler. And that presumption... So you can think about that as misaligned aim on the sociological front. The consequence of this misaligned aim is a kind of... Uh... what? Because the aim of the culture is wrong. Words themselves lose their meaning.

• 9:15Jordan B. Peterson?

  That's what happens in the story, right? Everybody ends up speaking a different language. And then the towers fall apart. So it's because the stories are... The story that's being told is one of human self-aggrandizement, that's part of it. And the culture pathologizes and then disintegrates. And so I see that happening in our culture. There's a technological element of it, obviously. That technological utopians are driving this. The transhumanists are driving this. Um... And we're aiming at the wrong goal. And the consequence of that is that our language is falling apart

• 9:59Jordan B. Peterson?

  and we don't share the same reference points. That's part of what's happening. So I'm curious about what you think about that. You know, how that fits in with your your concern, your emergent concern. Like, when you say fragmentation, Sam, what is it that you think is fragmenting? Because it's not the objective view of the world, precisely, although the scientific enterprise even...

• 10:26Jordan B. Peterson?

  Seems to be shaky and corrupt and falling apart in many ways.

• 10:32Speaker 04

  Well, so I agree with that. I think the analogy to Babel is quite apt.

• 10:39Speaker 04

  You know, I don't think bringing Doge into Babel would have helped much.

• 10:45Speaker 04

  I think it is technological. Yes, but there's just the fact that there is, because of the, I think largely it's a story of social media, but it's really the internet generally. Because of the information technology we have built, people can find endless confirmation of whatever their cherished opinion is. And it's no longer...

• 11:14Speaker 04

  There's some cultural immune system that has been lost, right? If you had to go to the physical conference out in the real world to meet the other people who were sure they had been abducted by UFOs, well, then you would be meeting these people. You would see the obvious signs of dysfunction in their lives. And there'd be more friction to the maintenance of this new conviction just based on the collision with other ancillary facts that have social relevance to you. But online, and again, this even precedes social media. This is true of the internet back in the late 90s.

• 11:59Speaker 04

  You can just go down a rabbit hole and find endless confirmation that's fairly anonymized, right? The 20-minute documentary that blew your mind and convinced you that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by the Bush administration.

• 12:19Speaker 04

  You didn't know that that was made by some 18-year-old in his mother's basement, and you didn't have to know that. You were just looking at the product online. But if you had had to meet this person, all of a sudden, you'd realize that this is the the maintenance of this fiction becomes quite a bit harder. So we're living now, I think, in the second generation of that moment where it really is bottomless. I mean, the ocean of misinformation and half-truth and misunderstanding is bottomless. And the tools we have built to rectify misunderstandings and to spot lies and to be better truth seekers

• 13:03Speaker 04

  are there, but they have been, in some sense, there's an just, this is asymmetric warfare. They're no match for the the the information waste product that can be produced more quickly, right? I mean, this is just the old-

• 13:25Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, it's easier to produce noise than signal, obviously.

• 13:28Speaker 04

  Yeah, or pseudo-signal. Yeah, I mean, there's so much that purports to be signal, right? I mean, and again, this is probably socially more inconvenient for you than it is for me. But I mean, many of your bedfellows or former bedfellows are the principal parts of this problem. I mean, they're the gods and goddesses on this landscape. I'm thinking of someone like Candace Owens, who's quite literally trafficking in blood libels now on her incredibly popular podcast. I mean, she's just gone berserk, as far as I can tell.

• 14:06Speaker 04

  And yet, what is the what is the style of conversation that would disconfirm all of that for her audience? At this point, I don't know, because I think what's happened is we've we've trained up a culture of people or cultures of people that simply don't care about facts, really. They want a story that aligns with their, in some sense, their confirmation bias. I mean, they have certain things they want to believe. There's certain ideas they like the taste of. And then they just want people catering to that appetite. And there's a good business in that.

• 14:49Jordan B. Peterson?

  I know as a clinical psychologist that any given teenager is going to fall prey to peer pressure from time to time.

• 14:58Jordan B. Peterson?

  If you listen hard enough, people are likely to tell you everything.

• 15:01Speaker 06

  Our son, who's in seventh grade, he's starting to fall in with a bad friend group.

• 15:08Jordan B. Peterson?

  Teenagers are desperate to fit in and obviously desperate to have friends and not to be the isolated target of exclusion and bullying.

• 15:16Speaker 06

  How do we as parents get involved, engaged?

• 15:19Jordan B. Peterson?

  The reason people don't have these sorts of conversations is because they don't want the emotion. And the longer you let it go on, the more mess you're going to have to clean up.

• 15:28Speaker 07

  Our daughter was bullied at her school.

• 15:32Speaker 06

  How do we protect our kids when this is happening?

• 15:35Jordan B. Peterson?

  Don't let your kids drift away when they're teenagers. They don't want to, but they will if you don't pay attention.

• 15:44Speaker 00

  Everyone wants healthcare to be simpler and easier. That's why UnitedHealth Group is fast-tracking more than 60% of children's procedures that used to need pre-approval. So more kids get the care they need when they need it. And speeding up procedure approvals and payments for more than 1,500 rural hospitals. So they can focus on caring for their communities. And that's just the start. Learn more at U H G dot com slash access.

• 16:19Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, part of that, I think, is

• 16:23Jordan B. Peterson?

  the consequence of the fact that we have to ground our perceptions in an axiomatic framework. And I mean, this has been my concern with the primacy of the story right from the beginning. And I think the deeper question is, a deeper question is, you know, is there some...

• 16:45Jordan B. Peterson?

  Está alguna estructura necesaria para ese marco fundamental axiomático? La afirmación postmodernista es que... La afirmación postmodernista, la afirmación fundamental postmodernista es que no hay una meta narrativa unida, ¿verdad? Nosotros vivimos en el mundo postmodernista ahora. El mundo postmodernista es un lugar de verdades locales. Y los intelectuales franceses decidieron que eso era necesario y una mejora. Y ahora vemos las consecuencias de eso. Estamos en un paisaje de narrativas infinitas. Y la pregunta es: ¿cómo definir un orden de rangos de narrativas

• 17:27Jordan B. Peterson?

  tales que algunos son válidos y otros son invadidos? La idea de la desinformación está obviamente prediciada en la noción de que ciertas narrativas son invadidas. Y eso me parece evidente. No me llamaría fan de la dirección que Candace Owens decidió tomar, pero no voy a decir nada más sobre ella.

• 17:49Jordan B. Peterson?

  Y lo que he estado tratando de lidiar con es...

• 17:54Jordan B. Peterson?

  Y esta ha sido la base de muchas de nuestras discusiones en el análisis final. ¿Cuál es el suelo adecuado para un marco narrativo? Y mi comprensión de tu posición es que...

• 18:09Jordan B. Peterson?

  Es por eso que has cambiado desde el principio al mundo del hecho objetivo, por así decirlo. Pero el problema es que hay muchos hechos. Y cuáles priorizar y cuáles ignorar es una pregunta muy tórica. Y una de las cosas que se refirió obviamente fue que... Bueno, cuando eras joven, porque somos de la misma edad, creo que eres cuatro años más joven que yo. Teníamos narrativas que nos unían como cultura. Había cierta... Well, there were fewer people. There was more ethnic homogeneity, at least in the local environments in the world.

• 18:53Jordan B. Peterson?

  There was, there were information brokers that were extraordinarily powerful. The universities, the newspapers, the TV stations, the radio stations, and they weren't very easy to get access to. And they had gatekeepers, and at least some of the time, those gatekeepers seemed meritorious as well as arbitrary. And, you know, it could easily be that the fragmentation of the landscape is a consequence of technological revolution and also perhaps of the...

• 19:33Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, you had pointed to the irresponsibility of the participants in that landscape. I mean, I think it's also, or even more primarily, that they're flooded with information and very, finding it very difficult to keep up.

• 19:48Speaker 04

  Well, they're also just not disposed to function by the old norms that the gatekeepers, I mean, for all their faults, they had standards, right?

• 19:58Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right, I know, but, but, but Sam, those, those, those, I agree with you, and, but I also would say that those institutions, the gatekeeping institutions, have also revealed themselves as catastrophically flawed in the last five to 10 years. I mean, I'm interested in your take on this. Like, you brought up October 7th and the rise of antisemitism. And I've been tracking that with a couple of friends of mine, and we've been spending a lot of time fighting it off in all sorts of ways, some of which are public and some of which aren't. And I'm appalled by it.

• 20:39Jordan B. Peterson?

  What's happened in Canada on the anti-Semitic front since October 7th is something I never thought I'd see in my lifetime. It embarrasses me to the core. My goddamn government came out the other day, those bloody liberals, and they talked in the aftermath of October 7th about combating Islamophobia, as if that's Canada's problem, which it isn't. And so, but, and then, you know, you saw what happened across the United States and Canada with regard to the universities, Columbia University in particular, and their absolute silence and complicitness while these terrible demonstrations were going on.

• 21:24Jordan B. Peterson?

  Not that I think that the demonstrations themselves should have been, well, we can talk about that. Letting terrorist radicals take over the universities doesn't strike me as a very good solution. So, so, I'm curious about what you think about that, because, well, so, like, I think the gatekeepers have abandoned the gates. Like, I don't trust the New, I don't trust anything the New York Times prints at all. I think they're reprehensible. The universities, I think, are beyond salvaging. I can't see how they can be fixed. Anyways, man, lay it out. Tell me what you think.

• 22:00Speaker 04

  I think those, all the way up until those last two statements, I can sign on the dotted line. I think the, all of these institutions have embarrassed themselves in recent years and for the reasons that I think you and I would fully agree about. You know, this became most obvious during COVID, but it's, you know, the October 7th is more of the same. But I would just point out that the antidote to that, to the failures of institutions, is not new standards. It's really to apply the old standards. I mean, we need the institutions-

• 22:39Jordan B. Peterson?

  Spoken like a true conservative.

• 22:41Speaker 04

  Yeah, yeah, yeah, fine, well, I mean, so it's-

• 22:44Jordan B. Peterson?

  No, no, but-

• 22:45Speaker 04

  Yeah, but the antidote, the antidote to fails, or failures of science, say, you know, or scientific fraud- Is not something other than science. It's just more science, real science, good science, scientific integrity. And so it is with journalism, or any academic discipline, or anything that purports to be truth-seeking, we have standards. And then there's nothing wrong with our standards. What's dangerous about the current information landscape, where we have just this contrarian universe, where anything that is outside the institutions is considered to have some kind of primacy, where everyone is kind of a citizen journalist, a citizen scientist,

• 23:25Speaker 04

  where you just kind of flip the mics on and talk for four hours, and that's good enough. What that's selecting for are the people who have no standards to even violate. I mean, these people are incapable of hypocrisy. The one thing that's good about the New York Times, and Harvard, and any other institution you would point to that has obvious egg on its face at the moment, is that at a minimum, they're capable of being shamed by their own hypocrisy. And the people who aren't, I would agree with you that there's been some institutional capture, where we have people in those institutions who just shouldn't be there.

• 24:06Speaker 04

  But we would make that judgment, again, by reference to these old standards of academic or journalistic integrity. But Candace Owens just doesn't have that. I'm sorry to beat up on her exclusively, I can move to other names if you want, but I mean, she's...

• 24:22Jordan B. Peterson?

  No, it's not, it's not, it's...

• 24:24Speaker 04

  Principal offender.

• 24:25Jordan B. Peterson?

  The reason that I don't, the reason that I'm not inclined to discuss her isn't because I agree with what she's doing. It's because I think the best way to deal with what she's doing is not to discuss her.

• 24:34Speaker 04

  Notice her, okay. But I could say the same thing about Tucker Carlson, right? And you might, whether you agree with me or not, this is my view of him, that he's not in the truth-seeking journalistic integrity business. He's in the, he's got some other political project that entails spreading a fair amount of misinformation, quite cynically and consciously, and smearing lots of people. And in the case of, you know, I don't know how deep his antisemitism runs, but in the case of that particular topic, midwifing a very misleading conversation with an amateur historian, who he considers the greatest historian working in America today, Daryl Cooper, the podcaster.

• 25:17Speaker 04

  And, you know, the opinion expressed, again, this is like, this is at the highest possible level in our information ecosystem to the largest audience. You know, few historians in human history have ever had a bigger audience than Daryl Cooper had on Tucker's podcast and then quickly followed by his appearance on Joe Rogan's podcast, right? And on that podcast, he spread the lie, the recycled David Irving point, that, you know, the Holocaust is not at all what it seemed, and you wouldn't believe it, but the Nazis really never intended to kill the Jews. They just rounded up so many prisoners in their concentration camps and found that they just didn't have enough food during winter to feed them, and they just were put

• 26:00Speaker 04

  in this just impossible situation. And might it not seem more compassionate to euthanize these starving prisoners in the end, right? That's how they accidentally stumbled into the final solution, right? That's what he spread, again, to the largest possible audience. And in Tucker's case, you had a very, I would say, sinister midwifing of that conversation. In Joe's case, he just doesn't know when he's in the presence of recycled David Irving, and is just happy to have a conversation with a podcaster of whom he's a great fan. But yet, he's still culpable for not having done enough homework to adequately push back

• 26:44Speaker 04

  about what's being said to his, again, to his audience, which is the largest podcast audience on earth. So, it's journalistically, and I know Joe doesn't consider himself a journalist, he considers himself a comedian, is just having fun conversations, great, but what that is tantamount to at this moment, especially in the context of the worst eruption of antisemitism we've ever seen in our lifetimes globally, that's tantamount to taking absolutely no responsibility for the kind of information that is flowing unrebutted into the ears of your audience, right? That's why I got angry at Joe, right? I love Joe, Joe is a great person. He's completely in over his head on topics of that sort, and it has a consequence, it

• 27:29Speaker 04

  has an effect.

• 27:31Speaker 08

  Getting the most out of life means being prepared for whatever comes your way, but many of us don't realize that a simple will doesn't actually cover all aspects of estate planning. There are crucial elements that need separate attention. That's where Trust and Will steps in to help ensure your loved ones are fully protected in every situation. Right now, you can visit TrustAndWill.com/Peterson to get 20% off their simple, secure, and expert-backed estate planning services that cover all your essential bases. The process is straightforward and free of complicated legal jargon, so you can complete your estate planning from the comfort of your own home. Knowing your assets and final wishes are properly documented and legally protected can give you peace of mind so that you can focus on living your life fully, knowing your loved ones will be taken care of, and according to your exact wishes. Plus, their website is incredibly user-friendly and simple to navigate, making the whole

• 28:16Speaker 08

  process super straightforward. What's particularly reassuring is that your personal information and documents are protected with bank-level encryption for maximum security. Each will or trust they create is tailored specifically to your state's laws and your individual needs, covering everything from care wishes and guardian nominations to final arrangements and power of attorney documents. It's no wonder they have an overall rating of excellent and thousands of 5-star reviews on TrustPilot. We can't control everything, but Trust and Will can help you take control of protecting your family's future. Head over to TrustAndWill.com/Peterson for 20% off. That's 20% off at TrustAndWill.com/Peterson.

• 28:52Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, you know, one of the problems, I suppose, in some ways, Sam, is that in this new information landscape, we're all in over our heads.

• 29:05Speaker 04

  Yeah, but some of us are alert to that possibility and worried about it and taking steps to course correct and notice our errors and apologize for those errors.

• 29:14Jordan B. Peterson?

  Okay, okay, well, let's also try to make a distinction here. You know, I mean, there is a distinction that's important to make between...

• 29:26Jordan B. Peterson?

  Accidentally wandering into pathological territory, you know, and, and causing disruption because of the magnification of your voice. And there's a big difference between that and exploiting the fringe for your own self-aggrandizement. And there's plenty of the latter online. And I'm, I've been concerned for some substantial amount of time that online anonymity also drives that. I mean, you talked about the utility of embodied interaction in separating the wheat from the chaff, right? So one of the things you see online is, as you pointed out,

• 30:11Jordan B. Peterson?

  if you have a crazy idea, you can find 300 other people who have even a crazier idea of the same sort, and you can get together with them, which you couldn't have done 20 years ago, because there's only one of them per 100,000 scattered all around the world. But they can aggregate together quite quickly online. The, the, the places that females gather online, for example, are rife with that kind of pathology. And all sorts of psychogenic epidemics spread without any barrier whatsoever in consequence, because young women in particular are susceptible to psychogenic epidemics. And so that's a huge problem. It's also the case that in real-world conversation,

• 30:55Jordan B. Peterson?

  if I'm talking to you, you know it's me. And I have to live with the consequences of what I've said to you, assuming we ever meet again. And I have to live with the fact that other people hear about it as well. But if I'm, if I'm anonymous, then I can say whatever the hell I want. I can gather the, the fruits of that, and I can dispense with any of the responsibility. And so my sense is that... Online connectivity magnifies our voice to a degree that it's virtually impossible to be responsible enough to conduct ourselves appropriately, because the reach is just so great.

• 31:36Jordan B. Peterson?

  And anonymity, anonymity literally gives the edge to the psychopaths, predators, and the parasites. And this is a huge problem, you know, as a biologist, we could think about it as biologists for a moment, Sam. I mean, I would say two things. When the cost of communication is zero, the parasites swarm the system. Right? Because communication is a resource. And abandoned resources attract parasites. And what is it now? Fifty percent of internet communication is bots. And a huge part of the reason for that is that communication is free. But it's not free, right? Because you have to attend to it. It actually has a cost.

• 32:21Jordan B. Peterson?

  So the price of free is the wrong price. You know, let me give you an example of this. Just you can tell me what you think about this. You know, one of the things I've done recently with my daughter and her husband mostly, and a bunch of professors, is start this Peterson Academy. And we have an online social media element to that, which attracts about 15,000 regular users. And we keep a pretty close eye on it. And we refunded the money of 10 of our students, because they were causing trouble on the social media platform. 10 out of 15,000. That's all.

• 33:06Jordan B. Peterson?

  And it markedly improved in their absence. And so, you know, there's an interesting dynamic there, you know? We don't know what online anonymity does. We don't know what free communication does when the actual price isn't zero. It certainly serves the parasites extraordinarily well. And we don't, we are learning that bad information is easier to generate and spread than good information. Right? None of this is personal, right? None of this really, I know we've already talked about the fact that all of this, all of this...

• 33:48Jordan B. Peterson?

  What would you say? Edgy conversation can be monetized and used to attract attention towards bad actors. Let's leave that aside. I agree with that completely. I think it's appalling. But there are structural problems here that are even deeper. No, and I think, well, anonymity is a huge problem. But then also, I think, well, what the hell are we going? What, what, what kind of world would we define and, and live in rapidly? If every bloody thing that you had to say online was verified with a digital identity? I mean, they've taken a lot of steps in that direction in China. That doesn't look very good to me.

• 34:24Speaker 04

  Well, I think the structural problems run even deeper because, yeah, I'll agree with, I agree with everything you said about the effect of free and the effect of anonymity. And I, you know, I draw two lessons from your, your experience with your online forum. One is that having, having it behind a paywall made it, made it much cleaner than it otherwise would have been. You only found 10 people you had to kick out to clean the whole thing up. But the other point is that those 10 people can have, really have an outsized toxic influence on a, on a larger culture. So I mean, that's, I think we, we want social media platforms that, that draw that kind of lesson. But it's not just anonymity and it's not just, uh,

• 35:08Speaker 04

  people who are grifting or, you know, are otherwise incentivized to be liars or, or, um, spreaders of misinformation. There are people who, with reputations, you, you would think they would want to protect. I mean, people with real, you know, like the, the, the biggest possible reputations and the biggest possible careers, who in the presence of social, social media, have gone properly nuts. And I, I would, you know, put as patient zero for this, uh, contagion, Elon Musk, right? I mean, Elon has, you know, I've witnessed a complete unraveling of the person I knew.

• 35:50Speaker 04

  And I believe I knew him fairly well, uh, under the pressure of... Extraordinary fame and wealth, but really, you know, kind of weaponized by his addictive entanglement with Twitter. I mean, he was so addicted to Twitter that he needed to buy it so that he could just live there, right? I mean, that was, Twitter was his whole life before anyone heard about his impulse to buy it, or anyone heard about his concern about the woke mind virus. I mean, before COVID, he had gone off the deep end into Twitter being everything.

• 36:27Jordan B. Peterson?

  How do you, how do you know this? Like, I'm not disputing this.

• 36:30Speaker 04

  I know, I know this, I know this because I was his friend at the time, and I, I was there, you know, in his, very close social circle when, you know, Twitter was causing obvious problems for his life and his businesses. When he would tweet, you know, 420, you know, funding secured, you know, and the SEC, you know, raids his, raids the offices of Tesla and seizes everyone's computer, right? I mean, that was, he was, he was screwing up his life through Twitter, and yet it was unthinkable that he would get off of it. So, so potent a drug was it for him.

• 37:13Jordan B. Peterson?

  Let me ask you about that. Let's think about this biologically again. One of the ways you could define addiction is as the pursuit of positive emotion that's bound to us a very short timeframe. So you get addicted when you optimize positive emotion over a very short timeframe. So, so for example, the addictive propensity of cocaine is dependent on the dose, but also the rate of administration. So the reason that snorted cocaine or injected cocaine is more potent than the same dose of, like, swallowed cocaine is because it

• 37:55Jordan B. Peterson?

  crosses the blood-brain barrier faster and raises the dopaminergic pitch quicker.

• 38:01Jordan B. Peterson?

  So there's rate and

• 38:03Speaker 04

  Also, the reward component appears to correlate subjectively, not with the peak in actual pleasure of the resulting stimulus, but in the peak of the expectation that the pleasure is about to arrive.

• 38:22Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, yeah. Well, the dopaminergic system is an expectation system. And cocaine, okay, so now, so here's what we have with social media, with the bots, with the AI algorithm optimizers, right? So this is what's happening. You can see it happening to YouTube too, is that the systems are optimized to grip attention. But the battle is for the, for shorter and shorter, what would you say? For shorter and shorter durations of attentional focus. So the battle is not only for attention, but for the shortest possible amount of information that will grip the maximum amount of attention.

• 39:01Jordan B. Peterson?

  Now, the AI systems are using reinforcement learning to determine how to optimize that. And that's driving that fragmentation, like you can see it on YouTube, because YouTube is tilted more and more towards shorts like TikTok, right? These fragmentary bursts of maximally attractive information. And they could capitalize on rage, because rage has a positive emotion element. Now, I want to put this into the context of what you said about Twitter. And you and I could have a conversation about X and Twitter that's personal as well. So you said, you know, Elon got hooked on X and enough to buy it. And so let's assess that situationally and biologically.

• 39:45Jordan B. Peterson?

  Now, I've spent quite a bit of time on X. In fact, it's the social media platform that I've used personally the most. It's the one I'm most familiar with.

• 39:57Jordan B. Peterson?

  And I would say it's been a very, it's a very complex platform for me.

• 40:04Speaker 04

  Yeah, hasn't it at various points convinced you that you should no longer use it? Haven't you gotten on and off?

• 40:10Jordan B. Peterson?

  Multiple times, multiple, multiple times, multiple times.

• 40:13Speaker 04

  I learned that lesson exactly once, but it really did stick. I have not looked back.

• 40:17Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, well, that's partly what I want to talk, what I want to talk to you about. I mean, so part of it is, you know, I get a lot of my podcast guests and my ideas for podcast guests from X, because I follow about 2,000 people. But I'm very extroverted, and there's an element of impulsivity that goes along with extroversion. I'm very verbally fluent, and so I can think up new ideas in no time flat, and I'm likely to say them. And so it's very easy for me, if I'm on X, to react to a lot of things.

• 40:52Speaker 04

  Yeah, but but mouth.

• 40:55Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, that, but it's weird. It's a weird thing, because some of the things that, some of my impulsive moves, so to speak, which have got me in quite a lot of trouble, I'm not the least bit unhappy about. You know, I got, you cannot believe how much flak I got for tweeting out something arguably careless on October 8th.

• 41:22Speaker 04

  What was that? I've not been on Twitter, I never saw that. What was the, what was the?

• 41:27Jordan B. Peterson?

  I think I said, "Give 'em hell Netanyahu." Yeah, yeah, right. So that took like eight months of cleanup work to deal with. Seriously, it was not, it was, and, and, but, but, but, but, and, well, and I got kicked off X.

• 41:45Speaker 04

  Yeah, you're not going to get any dispute from me about that. I mean Netanyahu, just to, just to close the loop on that. Netanyahu is, is obviously a very polarizing figure, and probably a fairly corrupt figure, and he's, he's got lots of problems that have implications for Israeli politics. But I'm not convinced that even the perfect prime minister, who has no optical problems, judged from our side, would have waged this war any differently. I mean, I just don't, I don't know what, what they, they should have done differently at every stage along the way. I don't know that any other prime minister would have taken a different path.

• 42:20Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, the situation to me looks like, and you tell, tell me what you think about this, and then we'll go back to the, to the, to the problem of. AI optimization of grip of short-term attention and the manner in which X in particular falls into that category. So my sense with with the situation, Israel was has been right from the beginning that Iran in particular would and has set up the situation. So if every single Palestinian was sacrificed in the most torturous possible manner to irritate, annoy and destroy Israel and agitate the Americans, that would be 100% all right with Iran.

• 43:02Speaker 04

  I think someone once said that the the mullahs in Iran will fight Israel to the last Arab. I think that's the line that I

• 43:10Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, yeah. Yeah, well, that's exactly. Okay, that well, that's exactly how it looks to me. And so I look at that situation and I say, well, I think, well, like, what what do you do in a situation like that that's moral if you're Israel? Anyways, I don't want to go down that rabbit hole too deeply.

• 43:27Speaker 04

  We might get there, but let's go.

• 43:29Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, yeah, well, but that but, okay, but so I've had this like complex relationship with X and some of it's been real useful because I follow a lot of people there and I keep an eye on the mainstreams of the culture and I extract out my podcast guests and I can see where the real pathology is emerging and I can keep an eye on it. And the price of that is that, you know, now and then I stick my foot in it in a major way and sometimes that's good and sometimes it's not. And and now I've sort of built a variety of fences around me that are part of my organization that, you know, there are there are kind of these intermediary structures that we've been talking about that

• 44:13Jordan B. Peterson?

  put a lag in between what I read and how I respond, you know? Well, that that's one, well, you know, and and this is part of it's the destruction of those things that we're starting to you and I are starting to talk about here because you know, it's there's never been a time in human history where you could publish your first pass opinion about anything to 20 million people in one second.

• 44:41Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right? No one could ever do that. And, and we're not, we're not, we're not neurologically constructed to live in a world where you can yell at 10 million people whenever you want about anything.

• 44:56Speaker 04

  Yeah, the, the problem for me is that, so what's happened now, going back to this, this core topic of, of what, what in particular is wrong with X? And the, the time course at which people are reacting to information and producing information in turn.

• 45:16Speaker 04

  There's a lot wrong with that. And it's what, what it's done to our culture and what it's done to specific people. I mean, again, Elon, for me, is the, is the enormous, the, the 800 pound canary in the coal mine, is that it has, you know, it's effectively made them behave like psychopaths. I'm not saying, I mean, if you, if you just look at X, and this is what, what convinced me to get off of it, you, you would think there were many more psychopaths in the world than there are in fact. I was seeing people who I knew in every other context would be psychologically normal, or at least normal enough, behave like a psychopaths to me, toward me, in front of me. And in some cases, these are people I actually knew.

• 45:59Speaker 04

  There's some people, in some cases, there's people I had dinner with. And I knew what I was seeing on X was, was, would have been impossible across the table from me at dinner.

• 46:12Speaker 08

  What if I told you there's a tiny nutrient missing from your body that could potentially change everything about how you feel? Well, if you've ever wondered why you're feeling sluggish, sleeping poorly, or aging faster than you'd like, the answer might be simpler than you think. That's where Fatty 15 comes in. Our cells need essential nutrients to stay healthy, and most of us are deficient in one critical one, C15. Fatty 15 is a science-backed, award-winning, pure, vegan-friendly, C15 supplement with just one ingredient, and it has three times more cellular benefits than omega-3 or fish oil. Plus, it's free from flavors, allergens, and preservatives. C15 is the only ingredient in Fatty 15, 100% pure. And unlike fish oil supplements that oxidize quickly, Fatty 15 is the only ingredient

• 46:51Speaker 08

  Fatty 15 naturally resists breakdowns both in bottle and in your body. Fatty 15 works by replenishing your cells with C15, which repairs cellular damage,

• 46:55Speaker 08

  in Fatty 15, 100% pure. And unlike fish oil supplements that oxidize quickly, Fatty 15 is the only ingredient

• 46:59Speaker 08

  boosts energy production, and activates your body's natural repair mechanism for better sleep, mood, metabolism, and heart health. Plus, it comes in a beautiful reusable glass and bamboo jar with eco-friendly refills delivered quarterly. Fatty 15 is on a mission to replenish the C15 levels in your body and restore your long-term health. You can get an additional 15% off their 90-day subscription starter kit by going to fatty15.com/peterson. Fatty 15, essential nutrition for healthier cells and a healthier you.

• 47:27Speaker 00

  Everyone wants healthcare to be simpler and easier. That's why UnitedHealth Group is fast-tracking more than 60% of children's procedures that used to need pre-approval, so more kids get the care they need when they need it. And speeding up procedure approvals and payments for more than 1,500 rural hospitals, so they can focus on caring for their communities. And that's just the start. Learn more at uhd.com access.

• 47:59Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right, right, right. Well, that's, that's an interesting, interesting definition of, of a pathological subenvironment, isn't it? Like, you can tell a family is pathological when the rules that apply in the family don't generalize to the outside world. And, and you're, you're making, you're, you're pointing out that the, the game dynamics of Twitter have that aspect, is that the game that's being played in Twitter doesn't suit the world well. It's not an interable game in the world. And, and it, it could easily be the fact that it maximizes for short-term emotional

• 48:39Jordan B. Peterson?

  reactivity is exactly what gives it that psychopathic edge, because the definition of a psychopath in many ways is the person who will sacrifice the future and you for immediate gratification, right? That, that, that's the pathology of the, of.

• 48:58Jordan B. Peterson?

  Psychopathy is a form of extended immaturity.

• 49:01Speaker 04

  Yeah, well, there's a lot of aggressive immaturity on display on X. And again, Elon is one of the primary offenders. I mean, so the one instance for me that made this especially clear and the role played by X especially clear was when he jumped up on stage during one of these campaign events, or I forget if it was campaign or I guess the election had already been won, but some event with Trump and Elon, you know, quite famously, quite infamously, did what appeared to be a Nazi salute twice to the crowd

• 49:41Speaker 04

  and got a reaction from much of the world of horror and insult. And now, honestly, you know, as his former friend and as somebody who just imagines his worldview has not, you know, fully disintegrated into a tissue of weird internet memes. It was impossible for me to believe that he was sincerely announcing his solidarity with the project of Nazism by making those salutes, right? So I didn't view those as Nazi salutes, even though just ergonomically,

• 50:25Speaker 04

  they were in fact Nazi salutes. I just thought, okay, I don't know what he's doing, but the idea that he's picking this moment to say, "I'm a Nazi," seems frankly impossible. So I was interested to see what he was going to do in response to the controversy. What he did in response, and again, this controversy is coming in a context that doesn't look at all good for my very charitable interpretation of his behavior, because it's in a context where he's funding the far-right party in Germany, assuring us that there's absolutely nothing wrong with that party, whereas the party does in fact contain whatever Nazis there are to be contained in Germany.

• 51:10Speaker 04

  Not that it's only a Nazi party, but it is in addition to everything else. It's got the Nazis. It's, he's...

• 51:19Speaker 04

  Playing footsie with lots of fairly aggressive antisemites on his own platform. He's great fanfare. He had brought back Nick Fuentes and Kanye and these people are antisemites, if not actual Nazis. So he is facilitating a very unhappy recrudescence of antisemitism on the platform he owns. And now he's doing Nazi salutes in public. So what is a genuinely not antisemitic, well-intentioned person who cares about his reputation and is still capable of embarrassment do in the aftermath of this?

• 52:02Speaker 04

  Well, it would have been just trivially easy for him to have said something totally sensible and apologetic that would have been honest and would have taken the sting out of the moment perfectly. He could have said, "Listen, I know how that looked. I don't know what I was doing up there. I was just captured by the energy of the moment. Obviously, I was not doing a Hitler salute. I'm not a Nazi. I've got no interest in amplifying their message on X or anywhere else. If you're a Nazi, please don't follow me. I hate your whole project. You're completely wrong about everything." Right? End of tweet, right? He did nothing like that.

• 52:46Speaker 04

  All he did was troll his audience, making Nazi jokes and puns on X. So you can fault his character for that, but what I also think we should fault is the medium itself, right? This is the way his brain is conforming to the technology. Yes, yes.

• 53:08Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, look, you know the fundamental attribution error. It's like the one thing social psychologists have discovered that's actually valid. That's a bit of an exaggeration, but... But the fundamental attribution, yes, a dozen things. The fundamental attribution or error is the proclivity to attribute to character what's actually a consequence of situation. You know, in these, we, we should be very careful, and I think we are at the moment, be very careful to assure that our first presumption is that it's the pathology of the technology that's the fundamental driver.

• 53:42Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 53:43Jordan B. Peterson?

  And that people are swept along in it.

• 53:44Speaker 04

  That's, that's my account of what has happened to Elon almost in its entirety. I think, I think Twitter has, you know, he, he is the, the greatest living casualty of what Twitter does to someone who becomes properly engorged by it. And that's, uh, yeah, so, but, and, and one of the reasons why I got off frankly, was apart from my own misadventures on the platform, which were nothing like Elon's, um, I, uh, I looked in the kind of the funhouse mirror of what was happening to him in his life, and I thought, you know, here's a, here's a very smart guy who's got much better things

• 54:26Speaker 04

  to do than fuck up his life in this way, and yet he can't seem to stop. How much, how much am I like him? How much, how much is there this component of addiction and dysregulation and, and failures of impulse control? And a need to just, you know, get, get my thoughts out on a time course of seconds rather than more carefully, you know, over the course of days? Um, I mean, cause it was so, and, and, and so then I yanked it for that reason. And, and the one thing I've found is that when you don't have it as an outlet, right? When you literally can't publish that quickly, um, then things have to survive a much larger informational half-life.

• 55:09Speaker 04

  So then there's this thing online that happened that I'm tempted to react to. It has to survive until I do my next podcast, which might not be for three or four days, right? And so, and, and, you know, obviously 90% of the things I thought I had to react to don't survive that, that time course.

• 55:26Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah. You know, I made a deal with my wife, um, that was like that because...

• 55:33Jordan B. Peterson?

  You know, I can see things going sideways. I think with fair degree of accuracy and that disrupts me emotionally now and then. And I made a deal with my wife several years ago that I can't complain about anything I won't write about.

• 55:52Speaker 04

  That's a good filter, yeah.

• 55:55Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, it's the same thing and it bears on the same issue that you're describing is that if it's not important enough to write about, then you should ignore it, right? You're not actually, it's not significant enough. It's not significant enough to sacrifice some genuine time and thought. You shouldn't be commenting on it. And that's kind of a maturity, but it's also, it's a weird thing because it's not exactly like, it isn't something that people had to contend with previously because you couldn't publish immediately.

• 56:38Jordan B. Peterson?

  There were barriers of cost and difficulty and gatekeepers and distribution. And so that wasn't something you had to think up for yourself, like how do I put a lag in my life before I communicate with a million people or five million people? And so you're basically building these inhibitory structures out of whole cloth. And now, you pulled out of Twitter quite a while ago now, it's a couple of years ago.

• 57:09Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 57:10Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right?

• 57:11Speaker 04

  Okay, so. Two and a half years, something like that. It was actually right when Elon took it over, but it wasn't because he took it over. I mean, the timing there was fairly accidental. I was getting ready to pull the plug and then I just saw how much chaos was being introduced into his life around it and I just thought, all right, this is a sign. And so I yanked it and...

• 57:36Speaker 04

  I mean, one of the benefits, apart from just introducing this different time course into my life by which I interact with information, I just don't like, you know, there's this, there's this phrase, you know, the Twitter isn't real life. And then at a certain point, many of us realize, okay, that's, that's too sanguine a thought because we're noticing people losing their reputation so fully that, you know, they get on an airplane, like the, I think it was the Justine Sacco incident where she got on an airplane and then half the world was tweeting about her and she arrived and at her destination only to find that she had been properly canceled and lost her job, et cetera, et cetera. So, so obviously Twitter can, you know, whether you're on it or not, it can, it can, under the right

• 58:19Speaker 04

  circumstances or the wrong ones, become real life. But the truth is, given the platform I've built, given the, I mean, just frankly, how lucky I've been to find an audience and to build a, you know, a readership and a podcast listenership, Twitter really isn't real life for me, right? Like, I, like, I'm still, Elon still attacks me on Twitter by name, and I find out I'm trending on Twitter, you know, years after I've left. And it matters not at all for my life. It matters not at all for my business. Nothing happens, right? And yet, if I were on Twitter, there would be this illusion of emergency, right? If I was on there looking at it and looking at the, you know, looking at the biggest, literally the biggest bully on Twitter has just punched me in the face, and I'm seeing

• 59:04Speaker 04

  the aftermath of it. The temptation to respond to that and to make, and to, and to feel that not only do I have to respond there, but I have to respond on my podcast, and, and then now this is how I'm spending my week because this thing just happened on Twitter. It would be almost impossible not to be taken in by that and not to, not to be just convinced of the necessity of it because all of this is really important. I mean, we're talking about millions of people. Like, I mean, like, literally, there, there are videos.

• 59:37Speaker 04

  Denigrating me for things I've never said or believed that Elon has amplified, and these videos have 50 million views, right? And I just happen to be lucky enough to have built a life and a career where that matters not at all, right? But for somebody else finding themselves in that situation, I can, I can well imagine, all right, this is just, this is the destruction of my reputation in a way that matters and...

• 1:00:04Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, that's what it looks like, sure. And, and like you said, it's virtually impossible to, to, to resist that temptation. I mean, who are you to deny the impact of the opinion of 50 million people? You know what I mean? I mean, that, that looks like an insane pride in a way to ignore that. But the point that you're making is that it's very difficult to, to...

• 1:00:29Speaker 04

  Well, it's, it's very easy to ignore it when it actually isn't making contact with my views, right? It's like, if I had said something...

• 1:00:38Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right, but it's hard to see that it isn't, like, because it's so, it appears so powerful. You know, we've found as a social media platform that Twitter is the worst of all social media platforms for sales conversion.

• 1:00:51Speaker 04

  Yeah, I can imagine.

• 1:00:53Jordan B. Peterson?

  In our experience.

• 1:00:54Speaker 04

  That's because you're next to...

• 1:00:55Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, it's interesting.

• 1:00:56Speaker 04

  You're next to some, you know, somebody getting beaten to death in, in a liquor store. I mean, like, the, the, like, when I go on Twitter, since I don't have an account, I'm not, you know, so I have a naive account, it's not following anyone, and I, and I almost never click anything. So I really see this, the pure algorithm, when you just kind of, just look at the homepage scroll, and, or as pure as it gets, I mean, maybe it's got some information on me based on my, you know, IP address or something, but, well, if I ask myself, what is this algorithm, algorithm trying to get me to be or to believe? Honestly, I can tell you that it is trying to get me to be a racist asshole, right? It's, it's, and, and a fan of Elon's, right? So it's given me a lot of Elon, and then it's given me a lot of...

• 1:01:42Speaker 04

  Like, black teenagers beating up white, you know, a single white teenager, or, or people of color robbing stores and getting shot in the face. I mean, it's just awful, like 4chan level awfulness. And then the, and then the occasional, you know, unlucky brand advertising to me in that context. I mean, it's just, it's a, it's a monstrosity of a platform from which to, to actually try to sell things. So, um, it's, uh, but, yes, if I were, you know, on Twitter, following 2,000 smart people, as you are, and, and feeling that they are curating for me, uh, you know, that their best, the best of their information diet, I would have a, I, I know what that experience is like,

• 1:02:27Speaker 04

  because that's what I was doing. That's why I was on it for whatever, 12 years, and couldn't convince myself to get off it. Uh, it seemed, it seemed like a professional necessity. It seems, it seemed so good, in the sense, the, the incoming stuff was so good, because again, I, I had chosen who to follow, and all these people were reading great articles and forwarding them, and, and having great short takes on them, and it was, all that stuff was great. But I have managed to, to get a surrogate of that in the way I find information otherwise, and, um, and what I don't have is, is the emergency. Like, I mean, the ruined vacation, where somebody, you know, like, somebody, some genius over at the New York Times has called me a racist,

• 1:03:10Speaker 04

  and now I have to, you know, spend the rest of my vacation with my family, trying to figure out how to respond to this. Uh, I've tweeted back at them, and blah, blah, blah, blah, it's escalated, and now we've just nuked each other, and, um...

• 1:03:28Jordan B. Peterson?

  And it looks real.

• 1:03:29Speaker 04

  Yeah, it looks real, and it, but it feels real, and it, it is real if you spend your time that way. And that's the thing, if you spend your time that way, which I did for years, it is real, it is the, it is the substance of your life. It is the, the, the manner in which you, it's the thing you bring back to the conversation with your wife, you know, five minutes later, or five hours later, more likely, uh, and it's in your head. And I just, it was, it was a ghastly use of attention. That's, that's what I finally realized.

• 1:03:59Speaker 08

  There's been some concerning research about the true safety of the abortion pill that's worth discussing. A recent report suggests that serious adverse effects from the abortion pill may be more common than previously understood, potentially affecting around 11% of patients, according to their findings. Given that the abortion pill now accounts for about 60% of all abortions in the US, with roughly a million procedures annually, this could impact tens of thousands of women each year. This raises important questions about how we approach reproductive healthcare. Organizations like the Preborn Network are taking a different approach. They reported helping over 67,000 women last year by providing comprehensive support that addresses both physical and emotional needs, while also offering spiritual guidance through their faith-based perspective. What's interesting is they're finding that when women have the opportunity to see their ultrasound

• 1:04:44Speaker 08

  and hear their baby's heartbeat, it increases the likelihood that they'll choose to continue their pregnancy. They've structured their program so that a single ultrasound costs just $28, and $140 can help support five women and their babies through their decision-making process. To support Preborn's important work, you can donate by texting BABY to pound 250, or visit preborn.com/Jordan. All contributions are tax deductible.

• 1:05:09Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, you made an allusion when you were talking about what you regard as the unfortunate effect of X on Elon, and maybe on other users, so let's assume that, that you were afraid that this, the sort of things that you were seeing happening to others, more than merely Elon, let's say, in your estimation, were also happening to you. And so, what do you think, in retrospect, what do you think it was doing to you? You just talked about the effects on your family, on vacations. I've experienced a fair bit of that. I understand exactly what you're saying. And it does seem like the world's burning, and you better

• 1:05:52Jordan B. Peterson?

  do something about it right now. And it's no wonder it seems that way, because it's lots of people, and generally in our normative ecosystems, if lots of people appear to be upset with you or around you, you should pay attention. But Twitter isn't the real world. We don't know what the hell it is, you know? It looks more and more like a world of demonic bots, and God only knows what that world is. But what did you see, especially now that you've been away for a while? What, what elements of your character do you think were pathologized and that were brought to the forefront that?

• 1:06:28Speaker 04

  Well, yeah, so first of all, yeah, I was, I was, I considered myself a fairly careful user of it. I mean, I, I was not at all like Elon. I was not, you know, addicted to it in that way. I was not tweeting hundreds of times a day. I think I averaged something like three tweets a day over the course of my use of it. And that would come in spurts. I mean, so I would, there would be, I would not tweet for three days and then send out a dozen tweets, you know, because it was some hot topic. I was always fairly careful so that I, I honestly don't think I ever said anything on the platform that I regretted,

• 1:07:09Speaker 04

  right? I mean, if I ever made a mistake, I apologize for it. But I was, I, I never, you know, I treated it like writing. I treat, I was aware I was publishing in that channel, however quickly and impulsively, I was, you know, I'm a much, I'm enough of a writer and an academic to feel like, okay, this is yet another occasion where embarrassment is possible and you don't want that. So I never, I'm not, I don't remember ever really screwing up on the platform. And yet, what happened there was, I mean, I can honestly say that for a decade, the worst things in my life, and in some sense, the only bad

• 1:07:52Speaker 04

  things in my life came from Twitter, came from my interaction with Twitter. I mean, apart from like a fam, you know, family illnesses, you know, that's leaving something, leaving that aside. My life was so good, and yet I had this, you know, digital serpent in my pocket that I would consult a dozen times a day, 20 times a day, maybe 100 times a day. So I, again, I might have only posted once or twice, but if something was really, you know, if the news cycle was really churning, I might be looking at this, this, my consulting of this, this news feed effectively.

• 1:08:31Speaker 04

  Was interrupting my day, you know, not just every hour, but maybe every five minutes of many hours, right? Or four, 10 minutes of that hour. And, um, so it was segmenting my day, however good that, or productive that day was or should have been, I was constantly chopping it up by how I was engaging with this scroll. Um, again, mostly consuming, but you know, often in response to the one or two things I had put out. Um, yes, there was a dopaminergic, uh, component to that, obviously, you know, I said something that I thought was clever, that was perceived as clever by my fans, you know, and perhaps to the detriment of my enemies and, you know, that all that seemed, you know, exactly what it, what I wanted in the moment.

• 1:09:15Speaker 04

  But even when it was at its best, right? Even when there was just good information coming to me and I was responding happily with good information back, even the, even the non-toxic version of it was a, a style of, of, of, was frag, was, was intrinsically fragmenting of my life. You know, it's like, I, I like, I don't pick up, I don't, I don't read a book that way. I don't, I don't have a book that I pick up for two and a half minutes and then I put down and then try to have a conversation with my kid and then say, okay, hold on one second and pick up the book again. It's like, that's not how you, that's not, not how anyone reads a book, right?

• 1:09:57Speaker 04

  Um, and yet Twitter, it, it far too often became that sort of thing in my life.

• 1:10:03Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right, right. It's like a parasite. It's like it parasitizes the exploratory, um, instinct. It's something like that, right? Because, and, and maybe, look, you know, for a long time, I didn't have a, a cell phone. I was a late adopter of cell phones and I didn't watch the news probably really from like 1985 till about 2005. I had cut myself off from news sources. I didn't read newspapers. And the reason that I didn't do that was because I realized-

• 1:10:37Speaker 04

  A few things happened in there. Did you catch 9/11? Did you miss that?

• 1:10:41Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, you know, I used to read, for example, I would read some credible magazines like The Economist when I still was credible, because I don't really think it is anymore.

• 1:10:50Speaker 04

  Wasn't that amazing? Isn't it amazing to consider that magazines like Time and Newsweek could wait a week, like could expect that their audience would wait a week to be informed about the news of that week? That just seems extraordinary to me now.

• 1:11:05Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, my conclusion about that was that if it isn't important in a week, it's not important.

• 1:11:13Speaker 04

  Right, yeah.

• 1:11:14Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right, and so I substituted these longer lag time news aggregators for TV in particular, or radio. It's like, if it's today's news, it's not news. Maybe if it's not important in a month, it's not news, right? And that's part of that intelligent filtering. And I guess part of the reason that X is dangerous and social media is dangerous, X in particular, is that, you know, that proclivity to forage for information is is in general an extremely useful instinct, right? It's the instinct to learn. But what we're learning,

• 1:11:58Jordan B. Peterson?

  you might say that the shorter the period of time over which the information is relevant, the more like pseudo-information it is. And so then any system that optimizes for the grip of short-term attention is going to parasitize your learning instinct with pseudo-information.

• 1:12:19Speaker 04

  Yeah, it's also-

• 1:12:20Jordan B. Peterson?

  And the algorithms are going to maximize that.

• 1:12:23Speaker 04

  The half-life is one thing, but also the culture that is informing these algorithms, the actual human behavior that the algorithms are skimming and boosting is increasingly-

• 1:12:40Speaker 04

  A bad faith style of conversation. I mean, it's just people are, so many people, especially the anonymous people, are in the misinformation business. I mean, they will just cut together a clip that is designed to mislead, and that is the clip that will get spread to the ends of the earth.

• 1:13:00Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, maybe, is it designed to mislead? Or is it designed to optimize their particular grip on short-term attention for their own grati- for their own aggrandizement? Like, the psychopathic move, and let's say that it's facilitated by these short-term attention aggregators that are driven by bots that are learning how to do this. The, like, the psychopathic proclivity, the narcissistic proclivity, is going to say whatever puts you at the center of attention. Whatever it is. Now, if you're governed by some kind of ethos

• 1:13:40Jordan B. Peterson?

  that is outside of attention-seeking, then that's a different story. But the game, if the game is that the machine optimizes for short-term attention, then it's going to reward all the players that are doing whatever it takes to grip short-term attention.

• 1:14:01Speaker 04

  Yeah, but the thing is, people, whatever it takes, though, is to get somebody seeming to say something totally outrageous. And in context, it might have made perfect sense, but, or at least be a very different point than the one that's being advertised by the clip. But the clip, shorn of context, is just, is calculated to mislead in that the person who has edited that clip knows that... The naive viewer is, can only draw one conclusion from the utterance as presented. Right? And they're not, and even if they're, you know, well intentioned and fairly alert

• 1:14:44Speaker 04

  to this problem, almost no one is going to go back to the original podcast and look at the comment in context. I mean, this just happened to Rogan, I believe. I think he had Bono, the singer for U2, U2 on his podcast. And Bono said something critical of Elon, I believe. And this got chopped up in a clip that was, it made it look like Joe really disagreed with Bono and was critical of him. And so, and the clip just got exported as like, look at, you know, look at Bono getting owned by Joe Rogan or whatever. But that's

• 1:15:25Speaker 04

  not what, that's not what the conversation was at all, right? Like Joe conceded, you know, had most of the point that Bono was making. It was just, it was false. It was a false picture of what happened there. And the person who makes that clip just knows that, that if they, if they frame it as a smackdown, people are going to love to see that. And it doesn't matter that they're lying about what happened and damaging people's reputations in the process.

• 1:15:53Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah. Well, and that's especially true if they're anonymous and their reputation bears no consequence of their lies. You know, well, the other thing that's happening, I don't know how much this is happening to you, but, and this is another example of the parasite problem. So increasingly, my voice and my image are being used, not exactly in the way that you're describing, although that's happening a lot.

• 1:16:22Speaker 04

  Yeah. I'm selling cognitive enhancers somewhere as an AI version of myself.

• 1:16:27Jordan B. Peterson?

  Okay. Okay. Well, that's happening a fair bit too. And sometimes worse than cognitive enhancers. But it's, the worst thing that's happening now is that these sites that are operating under my name, using my image and my voice, are providing pseudo philosophical content and pseudo psychological insight, as if it's me.

• 1:16:56Jordan B. Peterson?

  And so it's, it's, it's, it's, it's like what I've said has been put through a filter of stupidity and reorganized in my voice. And this is happening constantly, like YouTube has already taken 65 channels down that are doing this. And so this is another example of that parasite problem, right? You store up a reputation and then the parasites swoop in and pull off the attention that the reputation has garnered and monetize it. And they can escape into the ether because they do it anonymously. And so like this is going to become a stunning problem.

• 1:17:41Speaker 04

  I think it's, it's, it's a big problem. I can see that, you know, the, the perfect version of it is, is at most a year away. I mean, it might only be a couple of months away.

• 1:17:51Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, yeah, yeah.

• 1:17:52Speaker 04

  We've experimented with this on our side too. Uh, just like for instance, in my meditation app, waking up, we're now experimenting with translation to other languages and you know, they've got, AI has got me speaking 22 languages perfectly in my voice and it really sounds like me speaking those languages. Uh, and the translation from what we can tell so far is, is fairly impeccable. So we're going to roll out a, you know, a Spanish version of the app, uh, in the not too distant future, just to see what happens. But it's like, it's, it's, it's getting, it's getting too good. So I, I think what, the, the lesson that, that, that consumers of information who care

• 1:18:33Speaker 04

  to have real information are going to have to learn is that you can't trust, if you're, if you're looking at Jordan Peterson on YouTube, you simply cannot trust that it really is Jordan Peterson unless it's coming through one, one channel that you know you can trust, which is, so now we're back to the age of, ironically, we're back to the age of gatekeepers, right?

• 1:18:57Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

• 1:18:58Speaker 04

  If it's not on your channel or Joe Rogan's channel or you know, Chris Williamson's channel, uh, if it just purports to be them, but on somebody else's YouTube account, you can't trust it.

• 1:19:10Speaker 00

  Everyone wants healthcare to be simpler and easier. That's why UnitedHealth Group is fast-tracking more than 60% of children's procedures that used to need pre-approval. So more kids get the care they need when they need it. And speeding up procedure approvals and payments for more than 1,500 rural hospitals. So they can focus on caring for their communities. And that's just the start. Learn more at UHD.com/Access.

• 1:19:40Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, well, it might also be, Sam, that the real solution to that is payment. Like if it's, the rule is gonna be, maybe this is the rule, the rule is gonna be, if it's free, right, if it's free, it's a lie.

• 1:19:56Speaker 04

  Right, yeah.

• 1:19:58Jordan B. Peterson?

  That's the world we're rapidly moving into. And, or if it's-

• 1:20:01Speaker 04

  Except someone's gonna be able to create, and until you find them and stop them, someone will create the fake Jordan Peterson Academy that has a paywall, right? That looks like you, sounds like you, and, you know, it's only $5 a month. And so they'll monetize that way, and that'll, that'll still be the problem.

• 1:20:22Jordan B. Peterson?

  Has that been happening with your, with your meditation app, with your, with your enterprise, yet?

• 1:20:28Speaker 04

  Not, not that I'm aware of, no. I mean, I just think, I'm just aware of seeing short clips of me seeming to hawk, you know, psychotropics that, that I've never heard of. And it's just like, an AI version of my voice. It's real footage of me stolen from somebody's podcast, and then an AI workover of that, you know, that turns into like an Instagram ad.

• 1:20:57Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, well, I talked to some lawmakers in DC about a year and a half ago about the fact that this was going to happen, hoping that they would, well, it takes a long time to take notice and, and take action, but, you know, it's essentially the digital, it's the digital equivalent of kidnapping. Like, I think people, people should be put in prison for a long time for stealing your digital identity and monetizing it. Like, it is very much akin to kidnapping, because what they're doing is- They're draining the value out of your reputation. That's essentially the game. You know, and so... So what's happened to your life? You... You... There's a couple of things I'd like to investigate here first.

• 1:21:41Jordan B. Peterson?

  You know, the first, I'd like to return to something that you and I talked about, that we beat... That we wandered around a fair bit in our previous conversations, you know? You had, partly because you were concerned about the distinction between good and evil. And let me put words into your mouth. You were hoping to find a objective basis for morality, a way of grounding morality in the objective world. And I have a thought about that that's relevant to our current conversation. You know, so tell me if you accept this proposition. Part of the pathology of Twitter is that it operates by game rules that not only don't apply in the real world,

• 1:22:26Jordan B. Peterson?

  but that when exported to the real world, pathologize it. Is that fair? Yeah, I like that a lot. Okay, okay, right, okay. So here's a way of, I think, bridging a gap between the way you've been thinking about the world

• 1:22:43Jordan B. Peterson?

  from the moral perspective and the way I've been thinking about it. So, you know, I've always been...

• 1:22:54Jordan B. Peterson?

  I've understood that you had a very deep concern about moral judgment and that your attempt to provide a scaffolding of objectivity for morality was grounded in that even deeper concern. And I thought that I could understand why you did that. And I didn't agree with the conclusions that you'd drawn, but I agreed with the overall enterprise. And it struck me...

• 1:23:27Jordan B. Peterson?

  Recently, and I think we've already obliquely made reference to it in our conversation, that there's another way of conceptualizing this relationship between morality and objective fact, and that it might be more fruitful to look into the realm of something like, well, it's like theory of iterability and generalizability. It's maybe a variant of something like game theory. Like, imagine that... So, let me give you an example, Sam. It's a pretty famous example. You know those trading games where behavioral economists sit people down and say, to people,

• 1:24:11Jordan B. Peterson?

  they say, "I'll give you $100, you have to make an offer to the..."

• 1:24:15Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:24:16Jordan B. Peterson?

  Okay. So, the finding across culturally is that people generally approximate a 50%, 50/50 split, right?

• 1:24:24Speaker 04

  Yeah. And they're highly... They're not game theoretic with respect to unfair trades. Like, they don't want to accept unfair trades even when it would just narrowly be to their advantage to accept them.

• 1:24:38Jordan B. Peterson?

  Exactly, exactly. Okay, okay. And that's true even if they're poor. So, if you put a poor person in a situation where they have to accept an unfair trade, that would be to their immediate economic benefit, they seem even less likely to accept it. Now, I think the right way to construe that is that if you and I engage in an economic trade, we're doing two things at the same time. The first is, what the classical economists would say, is we're trying to maximize our short... our gain, let's say. But the problem with that notion is that we aren't playing one game. Or, while we're playing one game, we're also setting ourselves up to play a very large and unpredictable sequence of games.

• 1:25:23Jordan B. Peterson?

  Those are happening at the same time. And so, we don't want to just optimize for gain in the single game. We want to optimize our status as players in a large series of unpredictable games. And so, we want to put ourselves forward as fair players so that people line up to play other games with us.

• 1:25:42Speaker 04

  Mm-hmm.

• 1:25:43Jordan B. Peterson?

  Okay. So then imagine that the hallmark of morality is something like generalizable iterability across contexts.

• 1:25:56Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right? Because this would allow for... And so you could think about a more... A truly moral system is the most playable game. And an immoral system augurs in. And like when we've seen... We're talking about this to some degree with regard to X. Because our proposition is that fundamentally, because it's optimizing for short-term attention grip, and it benefits the psychopaths and the short-term gain accruers, the parasites, and perhaps the predators, that it's fundamentally a non-playable game. And that if its consequences generalize outside the world of X, that it pathologizes the environment.

• 1:26:41Jordan B. Peterson?

  And the reason for that is it's not optimally iterable. And so the pattern of morality that would be grounded in the objective world isn't in the world of objective fact. It's in the world of optimized iterability across people and contexts.

• 1:26:57Speaker 04

  Well, I would just say that there are some set of objective facts that subsumes that picture, right? I mean, the world is the way it is. The social world of social primates, such as ourselves, is the way it is. It admits of certain possibilities, and certain other things are impossible, given the kinds of minds we have. Our minds could change in all kinds of ways. They could change by being integrated with technology. They could change by genetically being manipulated at some point in the future. There's this landscape of possible experience that the right sort of minds could navigate. And we're someplace on that landscape, and we're trying to find our way.

• 1:27:41Speaker 04

  And so I view morality as a... At bottom, a navigation problem, right? And it's got this iterative quality that you described. It's... The question is... It's always, you know, where can we go from here? Where should we go from here? Where should we go from here, given all the possible places we might go from here? Both individually and collectively?

• 1:28:04Jordan B. Peterson?

  Okay, well, you know, the reason that I got obsessed with stories, to begin with, Sam, was because I realized 30 years ago that a story was a description of a navigation strategy. That's what a story is. And so, then the question is, okay, let's see if we can formalize this a bit more. The story has to, let's say, an optimized story has to iterate and improve.

• 1:28:38Jordan B. Peterson?

  So, for example, if you construe your marriage properly, it exists stably, but that's not as good as it could get. It could exist stably and improve as it iterates. And then you can imagine that there's a small world of games that are playable in the actual, natural and social world, that improve as they iterate. And those are, those games, pointers to that, those games are moral pointers. And I think that that's what the core of the religious enterprise

• 1:29:17Jordan B. Peterson?

  dives into and elaborates upon. I think that's what makes it the religious enterprise, is that it deeply assesses, so, I mean, if, imagine this, imagine that your proposition, the proposition you laid out is accurate, is that the fundamental concern is navigation. How do we get from point A to point B? Well, a story, you can think about this and tell me what you think, but I believe that a story is a description of a navigation strategy. If you go see a movie, you infer the aim of the protagonist and you adopt his perceptual frame and his emotional perspective. That's how perception works. And then you can imagine that there are

• 1:30:02Jordan B. Peterson?

  depths of games, some are shallow, and, and short-term, games that maximize for short-term gain, and to hell with everything else, are shallow. And games that are sophisticated can be played in many situations, with many players, they take the future into account and they improve as you play them. And there's a hierarchy of value in consequence of that, that, that, that is obliquely associated with the world of fact, because it has to operate in the world of fact, but that isn't fundamentally derived from, like, data.

• 1:30:41Speaker 04

  That's directly associated with the facts. Well, not operationally, but potentially so, just not in fact. It's just that, that's just not, I'm never claiming when I say that there are objective truths to all of these questions, that those objective truths will be delivered by some guy holding a clipboard, wearing a white lab coat. But there are things we just know to be true, and it would take a lot of explaining to get to the bottom of how we know them to be true. But, I mean, just very, they're very simple claims.

• 1:31:18Speaker 04

  We just, we know that life in, you know, the best and most refined and most ethically, you know, positive, some developed world context, right? You know, you and me and our most conscientious friends at the nicest resort, after having done a great day's work, we're enjoying a great meal, and talking creatively and positively about how to improve the world. We know that's a better game than, you know, trying to find some child soldiers to torture

• 1:31:57Speaker 04

  the neighbors in some malarial hellhole, you know, in, you know, Sub-Saharan Africa, and so that we can extract, you know, the, you know, some heavy metals, you know, the extraction of which is polluting the environment and causing the life expectation to be 30 years lower than it is in where we live, right? I mean, so like, there's, there are different, fundamentally discordant human projects that are available to some very lucky people and unavailable to others, and luck is by no means evenly distributed in this world.

• 1:32:41Speaker 04

  So there are better and worse games, right? By any, any measure of better. You want to, you know, ethically better, artistically better, entrepreneurially better, economically better, it's just to have, you know, better with respect to the health outcomes, et cetera, et cetera. So, we're all trying to play the best game we can be a part of. We're all trying, I mean, some people, I take that back. Many of us are, we're all trying to play the best game we can think of as best, but one of the consequences of my argument is that it's possible to be wrong. It's possible to actually have false

• 1:33:23Speaker 04

  beliefs about what is in fact better or worse. You know, like you can be confused.

• 1:33:28Jordan B. Peterson?

  Well, I also think you're insufficiently pessimistic too, Sam, I think, because I don't think everyone is trying to play the best possible game. I think that there are truly negative games where, and I think the evidence-

• 1:33:43Speaker 04

  Well, no, but people are being rewarded in some way, you know, like the sadist whose favorite game is to just see, to cause suffering in others and enjoy that suffering. The fact that he enjoys their suffering, right, that's a problem with him, right? He's a, you know, he's a neurological monster of a sort, and he's confined to be in the sort of mind that finds that very low-level game more rewarding than the game I just advertised at the resort with us being creative and productive and, you know, positive some.

• 1:34:25Jordan B. Peterson?

  Yeah, well, that's the man who wants to rule over hell, Sam.

• 1:34:29Speaker 04

  Right, right. Yeah, so I'm not saying that doesn't exist.

• 1:34:31Jordan B. Peterson?

  Because he thinks, yeah, okay, fine, fine, fine, fine, fine.

• 1:34:35Speaker 04

  But my point is that there are, there's, we're obviously living in a realm where there are better and worse outcomes by any definition of better and worse that makes sense.

• 1:34:47Jordan B. Peterson?

  Even from within the confines of the games that you're describing?

• 1:34:51Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:34:51Jordan B. Peterson?

  Right? Because one of the ways of deciding that a game is counterproductive is that if you play it, it doesn't produce the result that it intends. Right, right, so that's another kind of universal hallmark of moral judgment. Like, if you're aiming at something and your strategy doesn't get you there, either your strategy is wrong or your aim is off by your own definition. Right, there's no relativizing your way out of that. And then we could say, well, there's a hierarchy of games that that expand and improve as you play them. And there's a hierarchy of games that degenerate as you play them even by your own standards of degeneration.

• 1:35:31Speaker 04

  Yeah, and the games, the more refined games actually refine you as a player. I mean, you get changed by the game you play, you know, to your advantage or to your disadvantage. And it makes you more or less capable of playing any specific game. So this is what learning, this is what education is, this is what skill learning is, this is what interpersonal skill learning amounts to. This is what, the difference between having good relationships versus bad relationships, being in a good culture where its institutions incentivize you to be your, effortlessly be the best possible version of yourself as opposed to,

• 1:36:15Speaker 04

  you know, you having to be some kind of moral hero just to be, just not a psychopath. I mean, this is what's so important about incentives and about contexts like Twitter that incentivize the wrong things. What we want, I mean, we don't want to have to take on the burden of rebooting civilization ourselves based on our own native moral intuitions every single hour of every single day.

• 1:36:45Jordan B. Peterson?

  That's for sure, Sam, that's for sure.

• 1:36:47Speaker 04

  We need systems that make it easy for strangers to collaborate effortlessly in high-trust environments, right? I mean, this is like, we need to offload all of our moral wisdom into institutions and to systems of incentives such that you would have to be a very bad person indeed not to see the wisdom of being a peaceful, honest collaborator with the next person you meet, right? In this, given the nature of the system. You know, whereas, I mean, if you look, I mean, just to sharpen this up because that can sound very abstract. If you take a, an actually normal decent person who just wants to be, be good and have

• 1:37:29Speaker 04

  positive, some relationships with, with everyone he meets, you put that person in a maximum security prison in the United States, that person will be highly incentivized to join a gang that has, you know, has the requisite color of his skin, right, and be essentially a, a monster, because that's the only way to survive in that context, right, to, to, to not join a gang, to not join a racist gang, is to be the, the victim of everyone, right, so what you have in a, in a maximum security prison, is a system of terrible incentives that, where you have to be some kind of, you know, self-sacrificing saint, to opt

• 1:38:09Speaker 04

  out of, of, of ramifying this awful system of incentives further. We, we want the opposite of that, in, in, in situations that we control, and in institutions that we build, and, you know, what, the thing that's so disturbing to me about this contrarian moment, is that so many people have gotten the message, you know, this is really most explicit since COVID, they've gotten the message that, that we don't need institutions, we don't want institutions, we just, we just need to burn it all down, and we're just gonna navigate by Substack newsletter and podcast, and that's just not gonna work,

• 1:38:54Speaker 04

  right, we're just, we, we can't be all contrarian all the time, we need, we need institutional knowledge.

• 1:39:02Jordan B. Peterson?

  Intermediary institutions.

• 1:39:04Speaker 04

  Yeah, that, that work, yeah, so whether we have to build new ones, or perform exorcisms on our old ones, that might, you know, that may be a different answer, depending on the case, but there's no question, we need institutions that, that are better than most individuals, and that may, and that make most individuals, uh, uh, live up to norms that they themselves didn't invent, and would, you know, under another system of incentives, would struggle to emulate.

• 1:39:34Jordan B. Peterson?

  All right, I'm gonna bring it in to land, Sam, I think what we're gonna do on the Daily Wire side, I wanna talk to you, I think, for half an hour about. The antisemitic landscape, on the left and the right. And I want to go down those rabbit holes and explore them with you. So that's for everybody watching and listening. I think that's what we're going to do on the Daily Wire side. And because you, you made some comments earlier about your concerns about the right-wing parties in Europe, for example, and the Nazis that are hiding there.

• 1:40:07Jordan B. Peterson?

  I've seen no shortage of right-wing antisemitism rear its ugly head, let's say, in, in, on X, for example. But I also want to talk to you about the same pathology emerging on the left. Because there's no shortage of unbelievable antisemitism on the left. And we should sort that out a little bit. And so that's what we'll do on the Daily Wire side. Sam, every time we talk, I think we get a little bit... Well, we understand each other a little bit better. Yeah. I, I think there's something very fruitful for us to continue discussing in, in relationship, well, to a number of the things you discussed today about the necessity for intermediary institutions. That's the principle of subsidiarity.

• 1:40:51Jordan B. Peterson?

  It's an ancient principle of Catholic social, what would you say, social philosophy. You have to have intermediary institutions. They're the alternative to tyranny and slavery. The idea that there's a harmony between individual development and proper institutions that has to be established. You know, you can't be a, it's very difficult to be a good person in an entirely pathological social situation. And then this idea that there's a hierarchy of games. Because part of what interest got me interested to begin with in the religious world, let's say, was because I started to understand what constituted the religious as the structure of the depth of games.

• 1:41:35Jordan B. Peterson?

  It's by definition. And I'm not talking about what people think about as superstitious belief.

• 1:41:43Jordan B. Peterson?

  That's not the issue. The issue is that there's a hierarchy of game, from shallow to deep, from counterproductive to productive, from unplayable to iterative. And that that's a real world. And there's a reason for that, that I think is allied with your desire, lifelong desire, to investigate the objective grounds of the moral world.

• 1:42:12Speaker 04

  Yeah. I mean, the one thing I would add, one thing I would add to that is that, also by definition on my account, whatever's true there, whatever's truly sacred, you know, the true spiritual possibility, has to be deeper than than culture. And it certainly has to be deeper than the accidents of ancient cultures being separated from one another based on linguistic and geographical barriers, right? So it can't be...

• 1:42:45Jordan B. Peterson?

  No, no dispute about that.

• 1:42:47Speaker 04

  Yeah, it can't be that Eastern Orthodox Christianity is the real answer versus Hinduism being, you know, the real answer. Because I mean, one, they're incompatible answers at the surface level. Whatever the, whatever deep truth they may be in touch with, that is something we have to understand in a 21st century context that is, that is deeper than provincialism. That's my, my argument against religious sectarianism of any kind.

• 1:43:15Jordan B. Peterson?

  We definitely have a, we definitely have much to discuss the next time we talk. All right, so for everybody watching and listening, join us on the Daily Wire side because we'll go down the antisemitic rabbit hole. And that'll give Sam and I a little bit, a little bit of time as well to discuss the political, which we haven't, you know, which we've conveniently circumvented in a sense, but we had other things to talk about. So join us there. Thank you to the film crew here today in Scottsdale. Thanks, Sam. It's always a pleasure to talk to you.

• 1:43:47Speaker 04

  Yeah.

• 1:43:47Jordan B. Peterson?

  I'm glad you're doing well. It's real good to see you, man. Yep.

• 1:43:57Speaker 00

  Everyone wants healthcare to be simpler and easier. That's why UnitedHealth Group is fast-tracking more than 60% of children's procedures that used to need pre-approval. So more kids get the care they need, when they need it. And speeding up procedure approvals and payments for more than 1,500 rural hospitals. So they can focus on caring for their communities. And that's just the start. Learn more at UHg.com/Access.

• 1:44:25Speaker 01

  Have you heard the news? Balance of Nature's Fiber & Spice Supplement is everything nice. No synthetics, no additives, and no flow agents. Just 100% ingredients of whole food. It isn't just your average fiber supplement. It also has a wide variety of 12 amazing spices. Just 2 scoops of the Fiber & Spice Supplement, stirred into 16 ounces of your favorite drink daily. That's all it takes to get a wide variety of ingredients of real whole food. Every single day. Here's how Balance of Nature Fiber & Spice Supplement worked for one customer.

• 1:45:00Speaker 02

  I have been taking Fiber & Spice for over 3 years. When I first started taking it, I could smell the cumin and the turmeric and the different spices. I tell all my friends about Balance of Nature.

• 1:45:12Speaker 01

  Call now and save 35% on your first order when you subscribe. Use discount code WIRE. Call 1-800-246-8751. That's 1-800-246-8751.

• 1:45:26Speaker 03

  Share comfort and joy this holiday season at Tacovus. Our boots are handcrafted in over 200 meticulous steps and have a broken-in feel right out of the box with styles for everyone in the family. Our expert staff can help you pick the perfect gifts and we have free in-store gift wrapping to help make the holiday season truly special. See you soon at your local Tacovus store or shop with us anytime at tacovus.com.