Why should your rights to freedom of speech Trump a trans person's right not to be offended because in order to be able to think you have to risk being offensive I mean look at the conversation we're having right now you know like you're certainly willing to risk offending me in the pursuit of truth why should you have the right to do that it's being rather uncomfortable well I'm I'm very glad I put you well I'm you get my point as like you're you're doing what you should do which is digging a bit to see what the hell's going on saying that is what you should do but you're exercising your freedom of speech to certainly risk offending me and that's fine I think more power to as far as I'm concerned so you haven't stopped that and I'm just right I'm just trying to work that out I mean ha gotcha you have caught me you have caught me.
...established its you know zone of and Utopia downtown it's like well it'll be just like the Summer of Love which by the way ended very badly and that was fine until the lights went off at night and the criminals came to play and you think well they're just victims of an oppressive social organizations like that'll be a real good thing to tell them when they break into your house.
THEN THERE IS SOME HOPE IN THAT MESSAGE, RIGHT? BECAUSE YOU THINK IF YOU JUST ACCEPTED PEOPLE THE WAY THEY ARE THEY WOULD BE HAPPY U.S. NO THEY WOULDN'T BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO SHOOT FOR, PEOPLE WHO HAVE NOTHING TO SHOOT FOR ARE NOT HAPPY, HAPPY IS A CONSEQUENCE OF MOVING TOWARDS SOMETHING THAT YOU ARE AIMING FOR. SO, NO AIM, NO HAPPINESS, THAT IS ANOTHER GOOD THING FOR YOUNG PEOPLE TO KNOW IS TO HAVE A GOAL. TECHNICALLY, TECHNICALLY HAPPINESS OCCURS WHEN YOU SEE YOURSELF MOVING TOWARD A VALUED GOAL, THAT IS HOW IT WORKS NEUROPSYCH LOGICALLY, CHEMICALLY. SO, THE HIGHER YOUR GOAL, THE HIGHER YOUR POSSIBILITY FOR HAPPINESS EVEN THOUGH YOU HAVE TO SUFFER FROM A DISTANCE.
Do not claim divine motivation for self-serving behavior.
There's a line in the old testament; the fear of god is the begining of wisdom. And I think it's more like that, it's not that I'm courageous, it's that I'm afraid of the right things.
I made a case fairly consistently that most people find the meaning that sustains them through the vicissitudes of life not in happiness but in responsibility, and that would bring everyone to a halt...it would always make the whole theater silent it's like 'oh i never thought of that connection'.
Whatever happens as a consequence of telling the truth is the best thing that can happen. It doesn't really matter how it looks to you at the moment, or maybe even across the years.
I think the idea of white privilege is absolutely reprehensible. And it’s not because white people aren’t privileged. Ya know, we have all sorts of privileges. Most people have privileges of all sorts and you should be grateful for your privileges and work to deserve them I would say. But the idea that you can target an ethnic group with a collective crime, regardless of the specific innocence or guilt of the constituent elements of that group… There is absolutely nothing that is more racist than that. It’s absolutely abhorrent.
“That’s a very tiny of proportion of men. A huge proportion of people who are seriously disaffected are men; most people in prison are men; most people who are on the street are men; most victims of violent crime are men; most people who commit suicide are men; most people who die in wars are men; people who do worse in school are men.” “[W]here’s the dominance here, precisely? What you’re doing is you’re taking a tiny substrata of hyper-successful men and using that to represent the entire structure of Western society. There’s nothing about that that’s vaguely appropriate.”
Our culture confuses men's desire for achievement and competence with the patriarchal desire for tyrannical power. And that's a big mistake
The Left's attempt to define western civilization as "purely" a "tyrannical patriarchy," Peterson goes on to argue, is irrational and unjust. Acknowledging that the West has its corruptions and imperfections, some of which are "patriarchal," is far different than trying to cast the entire civilization as fundamentally flawed, which Peterson contends feminists like Lewis are consistently attempting to do. When Lewis says she doesn't describe it as that, he asks her then why she insists on reductively labeling the West as "a patriarchy."
They're hungry for a discussion of the relationship between responsibility and meaning, and we haven't had that discussion in our culture for 50 years. We've concentrated on rights and privileges, freedom and impulsive pleasure. Those are all useful in their place, but they're shallow, and that's not good because if people are moored shallowly, then storms wreck them...
Men are more often alcoholic and antisocial. Women are more likely to have anxiety disorders.
Dostoevsky expresses his doubts about the propriety of Being through the character of Ivan who, if you remember, is the articulate, handsome, sophisticated brother (and greatest adversary) of the monastic novitiate, Alyosha. "It's not God I don't accept. Understand this," says Ivan. "I do not accept the world that He created, this world of God's, and cannot agree with it." Ivan tells Alyosha a story about a small girl whose parents punished her by locking her in a freezing outhouse overnight (a story Dostoevsky culled from a newspaper of the time). "Can you just see those two snoozing away while their daughter was crying all night?" says Ivan. "And imagine this little child: unable to understand what was happening to her, beating her frozen little chest and crying meek little tears, begging 'gentle Jesus' to get her out of that horrible place!...Alyosha: if you were somehow promised that the world could finally have complete and total peace-but only on the condition that you tortured one little child to death-say, that girl who was freezing in the outhouse...Would you do it?" Alyosha demurs, "No, I would not," he says softly. He would not do what God seems to freely allow.
The right hemisphere appears integrally involved in the initial stages of analysis of the unexpected or novel—and its a priori hypothesis is always this: this (unknown) place, this unfamiliar space, this unexplored territory is dangerous, and therefore partakes in the properties of all other known dangerous places and territories, and all those that remain unknown, as well . This form of information processing—“a” is “b”—is metaphor; generation of metaphor (key to the construction of narratives—dreams, dramas, stories and myth) might well be regarded as the first stage of hypothesis construction.
What kind of world is this, where such things can happen? What kind of God would make such a place?