All Episodes
June 12, 2025 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
04:07
Jordan Peterson on Imperfectly Consistent Logic
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Right?
So, I haven't actually added any truth value.
I've just defined something as being true no matter what.
kind of goal or output, this thing is good.
So I want to figure out how...
There's an element of that that's true.
So, for example, in the story of Job, Job is unfairly tortured.
In consequence of a bet between God and Satan.
So Job is emblematic of someone who's being hurt for no apparent reason.
Okay, so Job's response to that is that he refuses to lose faith in himself.
I've watched so much Kevin Samuel that I'm like, what kind of wig is she wearing?
Refuses to lose faith in the ultimate goodness of being.
Okay.
And those are like, those are axiomatic decisions.
They're not exactly evident.
So I'm essentially trying to figure out, do you believe that something can be good, like stance independently, something that can be good?
I don't know what you mean by stance independent.
You mean independent of people?
Independent of people.
We can use that, or more so.
I want to be more specific.
Something that can be good.
Yeah, so, I mean, logic exists independent of people insofar as entities in the world are not self-contradictory, right?
I mean, I'm not doing this show while sitting on your lap at the same time.
That's just for donors as a whole, and that's on my OnlyFans page.
But things, objects in the world, right?
This thing that I'm holding is a fork, right?
It's a fork.
It's not a fork and a dragon and a concept and on fire and a gas at the same time, right?
So logic...
Gravity doesn't both attract and repel at the same time.
So, and if I leave this fork here, I come back tomorrow, it's still a fork.
It hasn't turned into a dove, right?
So, the stability and predictability of matter is the basis for the consistency, stability, and predictability of logic, right?
Two and two is four, yesterday, today, tomorrow, everywhere in the universe, and so on, right?
So, the consistent behavior of matter and energy exists prior to humanity defining logic in the abstract.
Logic is imperfectly derived from the consistency of matter and energy.
And by imperfectly, I mean if you have something that you call logic that is self-contradictory or inconsistent across time and space, then it's not logic, right?
Because the behavior of matter and energy is never self-contradictory.
And is consistent across time and space.
So logic is derived from the behavior of matter.
And of course, if matter didn't have that level of stability and predictability and consistency, we never could have evolved to develop our brains, right?
There wouldn't be enough if people just randomly burst into flames, whatever, right?
For no reason then.
All right.
Right, regardless of any end goal.
It's just good.
Yeah, something that is intrinsically good in and of itself without being goal-oriented, right?
Because the problem with making morality, I mean, you guys know, right?
What is the problem with morality being outcome dependent?
Why can something not be moral based upon Jordan Peterson's argument for good or bad outcomes?
What's the problem with consequentialism with regards to morality?
Tell me.
If people are going to have to type now.
I used to tell all these Bible stories to my daughter when she was very little, and we used to have a pretty hilarious retelling of these various stories and so on, right?
So, I worship the consistency of matter and energy.
What we kind of do, in a way, right?
Because if matter and energy were not perfectly consistent, perfectly consistent, perfectly consistent, then we wouldn't be here.
We wouldn't have any foundation to build our brains on.
Export Selection