Jordan Peterson: “There was plenty of motivation to take me out. It just didn’t work” | British GQ

Jordan Peterson: “There was plenty of motivation to take me out. It just didn’t work” | British GQ

how much responsibility do you feel you
have particular it’s the OLT right who
as you say some of them have enjoyed
your work and so now I’m not one of you
I’m not one of you guys I’m not with you
can they haven’t enjoyed my work I’ve
definitely read bits on the Indian War
you’ve sold two million copies of 12
rolls for life you have 800,000
followers on Twitter 1.4 million
followers on YouTube what is it that
you’re selling that so many people want
to buy I don’t think I’m selling
anything well I went to a show where you
were swear you were selling tickets to
your show so people are willing to pay a
lot of money to see you speak you know
what is it that you think that people
are hungry for they want to hear from
you they are 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 of freedom and impulsive
pleasure those are all useful in their
place but they’re shallow and that’s not
good because if people are more
shallowly than storms wreck them and
storms come along so I’m talking to
people about how they can build a
foundation underneath and that works and
and people need to know that because
otherwise their lives are harder than
they need to be well what is it but you
have that no one else has what are you
offering that no one else’s right now
well I think I think that is what I’m
offering that that’s not part of the
public discussion
you know when it’s grounded in my
clinical knowledge so I’ve been a
clinician for a very long time and I’m
familiar with the works of most of the
great 20th century clinicians and a
reasonable amount of philosophy and a
good swath of literature and I’m a
credible scientist and so I can bring
that all together and I’ve tried to
bring it all together and to make a case
for the significance of individual life
and the psychological necessity of
courage and nobility and responsibility
these things that sound old-fashioned
our old fashioned in the best sense
their old-fashioned because they’ve
lasted forever and they’re absolutely
necessary and people need a call to
responsibility because they need to
mature they need to want to be adults
you know and I don’t think we do a very
good job in our culture of making a case
for why it’s a good thing to be an adult
and two things really made you famous
which is first of all is the book twelve
rules for life the second one I think
was an interview went viral Kathy Newman
of Channel four News which she talked
about all right he’s got a big big
following but that was I think really
fascinating that interview because it
was specifically about men and women and
you said at the time you know YouTube
skews very male and your fan base is
very male is that still the case are you
still mostly primarily talking to men I
would say the stalks are probably 6040
6535 male to female the book sales I
don’t know I doubt it because it usually
it’s women who buy books although men do
buy them nonfiction if they buy books we
don’t know the demographics on the books
but the book has definitely expanded my
audience I would say and that’s a good
thing as far as I’m concerned I mean I
never set out specifically to talk to
men my students for most years at the
university have been primarily female I
think most of my graduate students have
been female it might be about 50/50 but
I think it would probably tilt more in
the direction of female so it wasn’t
like wasn’t something I set out to do I
think though that as I said earlier well
I can’t tell how much of it is merely a
consequence of the fact that YouTube
skews so male it might also be something
to do with the call to take on voluntary
responsibility I’m not exactly sure why
that would be more necessary for men
right now I think it might be because
our culture confuses men’s desire for
achievement and competence with the
patriarchal desire for tyrannical power
and that’s a big mistake those aren’t
the same thing even a bit so and it’s
very inappropriate psychologically and
sociologically to confuse them so well
one of the things I want to come back to
is this idea so that you say in the book
you know there is masculine or
and feminine chaos that’s no actually I
say that those are symbolic
representations of the two things all
right okay so why why is order masculine
um I think it’s because our primary
social hierarchy structures are
fundamentally masculine and that’s not
the patriarchy well it’s not the modern
idea of the patriarchy that’s for sure I
mean that’s oh that’s my idea of the
patriarchy which is a system of male
dominance of society yeah but that’s not
my sense of the patriarchy so what’s
yours well in what sense is our society
male-dominated the fact that the vast
majority of wealth is owned by men the
vast majority of capital and is owned by
men women do more unpaid labor every
tiny proportion of men and a huge
proportion of people who are seriously
disaffected or 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 men most people who
die in wars are men people who do worse
in school are men it’s like where’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 the of
Western society there’s nothing about
that that’s vaguely appropriate and I
could say equally want the most rape
victims are women you know terrible
things happen to people of both sexes
and you could say that with perfect
utility but that doesn’t provide any
evidence for the existence of a
male-dominated patriarchy well that just
means that terrible things happen to
both genders which they certainly do but
there are almost no women who rape men
for example so that is an asymmetry
there in sexual violence well yes
there’s a nice if there’s an asymmetry
in all sorts of places but that doesn’t
mean that Western culture is a
male-dominated patriarchy the fact that
there are a symmetries has nothing to do
with your basic argument no but you
might be this is a trope that people
just accept Western societies of
male-dominated patriarchy it’s like no
it’s not that’s not true and and even if
it even if it has a patriarchal
structure to some degree the the
fundamental basis of that structure is
not power its competence that’s why our
society works it’s only one is when a
structure degenerates into tyranny that
the fun
mental relationships between people
become dependent on power it’s not power
if you hire a plumber who’s likely to be
male it’s not because there’s roving
bands of tyrannical plumbers forcing you
to make that choice and it’s the case
with almost every interaction that you
have at the face of our culture you’re
dealing with people who are offering a
service of one form or another who are
usually part of the broad middle class
and who offer and what you’re looking
for is the person who can offer the best
service and you can find it it’s not a
consequence of being dominated by
anything that’s tyrannical and and then
again our culture Western culture which
is by no means perfect and certainly has
tyrannical elements like all cultures do
is the least tyrannical society that’s
ever been produced and certainly the
least tyrannical society that exists now
so where’s the patriarchy exactly you
know well saying that it’s the least
technical society is not the same as
saying it’s not a tyrannical society
that’s exactly why I said it was the
land to run it but that’s what I mean so
you haven’t debunked the existence of
patriarchy then you said that actually
now is better women to demonstrate its
existence okay well let’s go through it
I’m writing a book about feminism in the
moment until 1919 there were professions
that women were barred from they simply
were not allowed to do it until 1880s
why would you blame men for that because
who was in those professions who was
guarding entry to those professions who
was worried about losing their status if
women became doctors the demands of
women in the 20th century just out of
curiosity well a couple of different
things I think it was technology I think
was the pill helped enormously was one
in the 60s great so that wasn’t 1919
no but I also think it was a series of
legal changes that started in Britain
with the married women’s Property Act
which said for the first time women are
full legal beings under the law they can
own property and that to me is a
structure that has continued throughout
from a time when women didn’t have the
same legal rights as men to now when
they mostly do but culture still lags
behind it I don’t think you and I are
necessarily talking at such
cross-purposes it’s just that your
conception of patriarchy as I see it in
the book is that quite a lot of men are
quite nice and they’re do nice things
for women and that’s not my conception
of Pidgeon well you know I don’t require
men or advise them to be nice well you
do talk about the guy who’s the tampon
King the sanitary towel king of India
right wouldn’t call that nice okay well
we’re gonna breathe okay did you read
his life when he was trying to develop
that yeah god it was absolutely
miserable and he did it anyways what
read all sorts of women as a consequence
and I think that was nice
that’s courageous that’s Noble that’s
visionary it’s not nice I think it is
also nice I think it is also something
that is recent you know it is honoring
your social obligations I’m not so sure
that that’s a social obligation because
many other people would have done it had
it been a social obligation it said what
he was concerned about he saw that his
wife was suffering with her monthly
period and had to choose between feeding
her family and taking care of herself
properly and chose to feed her family
and thought he would do something about
that that goes way past nice especially
given what he had to suffer through to
do all the experimentation that produced
his his eventual technology so like I
this whole patriarchy thing I think you
have no idea how pernicious and
dangerous it is well no I don’t never go
throughout history have fundamentally
cooperated to push back against the
absolute catastrophe of existence a
terrible death rate that the probability
of chronic starvation early death
disease the difficulty of raising
children with all the death that was
associated with that and to look
backwards in time and say well basically
what happened was men took the upper
hand and persecuted women in this
tyrannical patriarchy is it’s absolutely
dreadful miss reading of history it’s a
terrible thing to teach young women and
it’s a horrible thing to inflict upon
men I mean I absolutely disagree with
you I think that’s like saying slavery
in the u.s. was actually most people
cooperate well no you didn’t you had a
system where one set of people owned
another set of people and until women
got full legal rights they could own
property themselves they could work
essentially they were owned they were
owned by their fathers and their mothers
to the domination by men yeah and they
said that you thought that what
emancipated women primarily in the 20th
century was technological revolution no
no primarily but that’s one of two I
think there’s new things ‘verily I know
I think the pill was a primary force in
the emancipation of women I think an
extension of of tampons let’s say or
there are the provision of proper
sanitary facilities toilets and that
sort of thing
you’re thinking instead it was the
action of courage
feminists in the 1920s that produced a
social revolution that overthrew the
patriarchy that’s your theory yeah
that’s a foolish theory well I’m very
sorry to hear you say that but I think
to quote you in the Kathy Newman
interview I think it’s a multivariate
right I think there were lots of
different things that all contributed
too well all right assuming that Western
society was a tyrannical Patriot
unabated one of them and then other
things happened as well so you have the
pale you have the dishwasher and white
goods labor-saving devices in the home I
think all of those were really important
but you also have things like campaigns
for the vote yes you also have things
like that yes so how when in a system
that existed in England until 1918 when
I what do you even want to look at
history like that like what what’s your
what’s your goal because I think the
people who don’t look at history are
condemned to repeat it and I think that
we are we’re gonna what are we gonna do
repeat the persecution of women you
think that’s a realistic possibility
here you see that we’re sitting here in
America right well we’ve just had a
fifth judge appointed to the Supreme
Court who is now aunt abortions now
can’t conservative I think that abortion
rights are accidentally fundamental to
women being able to function as full
humans in society and I think that is
now under threat in America I think it
is extremely smug and complacent to
think civilization has peaked it’s all
upwards from here yeah well good luck
with that it’s a living like you know I
there are lots of people who grieve me
there are lots of people clearly who
agree with you I want to go there just a
lot of people I would say who are coming
to listen to what I say because they’re
sick and tired of having their desire to
move forward in the world and to achieve
something and to take their place as
adult males let’s say who are under the
weight of accusations that their
ambition and forthrightness is a
manifestation of something that’s
fundamentally tyrannical they’re not
happy with that it’s not doing anyone
any good and it’s also not true it’s
really a terrible thing to do to young
men and it’s happening all the time
that’s why they’re bailing out of
universities like mad from be a man left
in the social sciences in ten years in
the Universities and there’s no bloody
wonder it’s an unsuitable place and it’s
unhospitable
precisely because of this doctrine said
that throughout history the fundamental
relationship between men and women was
one
power essentially slavery it’s like fine
believe it if you want it’s not gonna do
your relationships any good I can tell
you that so okay well well we’ll see how
that one goes on I’m currently married
but it new oh well I’m raising with him
um I think the universities example is a
really fascinating one because you talk
in the book about the fact that now
women are a majority on two-thirds of
college courses in the US and you know
I’ve also seen you saying would you
believe in equality of opportunity but
not equality of outcome maybe but only
that I don’t believe in equality of
outcome I think it’s an unbelievably
pathological wish and dr. Wright but the
dangerous history has demonstrated
exactly how dangerous it is equality of
opportunity is something that anyone
with any sense would support but
equality of outcome it’s so what’s your
problem with then not doing beyond
belief to choose to support equality of
outcome okay so what’s your problem were
there not being enough men in the social
sciences perhaps women are just cleverer
perhaps that’s why there are more women
at university right under your doctrine
I don’t think that but that’s I think
the logical extension your daughter
isn’t the fact that there’s an unequal
distribution the problem I have with it
is that the reason that men are bailing
out is because of the prevalence of the
doctrine that you’re exposing that’s the
problem I have with it but doesn’t
matter that much they will be allowed I
don’t see any way that the universities
who are going to redeem themselves in
the next decade so and maybe that will
be fine but I doubt it
let’s see that seems extremely
pessimistic when the majority of numbers
of people going to university just
generally are going up yeah well that’s
not going to last for very long why not
because it’s too expensive and the
universities are doing all sorts of
things that aren’t acceptable mostly
racking up the price ratcheting up the
price so and decreasing the quality of
what they’re offering and playing into
the hands of the people who are
ideological acolytes of the identity
politics routines and playing postmodern
stunts and pushing neo Marxism and all
these things that are characteristic of
of the social sciences and the
humanities primarily see this is what I
find you you fascinating to me because
you know you talk in these apocalyptic
terms I think that you know someone who
will listen to that and think wow
there’s a really big problem but what
we’re really talking about is some
irritatingly postmodern professors and
some students with blue hair and funny
about gender in a handful of courses
around America Western about no one
would have paid attention to me for more
than about 15 minutes so you might see
this as some surface manifestation
that’s irrelevant but that isn’t how
most people view it ah I already the
case to that this identity politics
battle of ideas was a determining factor
in the last American election if Hillary
wouldn’t have played identity politics
played cozy with the identity politics
type she would have kept the
working-class and she would be president
now so these aren’t trivial issues by
any stretch of the imagination it’s not
just some kids having a decent time
while they’re being creatively
rebellious at university it’s a much
deeper problem than that the doctrine
the doctors that I’m opposed to are
predicated on well one assumption
they’re predicated on is probably the
primary assumption is that the best way
to view history is as the domination of
a tyrannical male patriarchy and that’s
true also particularly of the West which
is a doctrine I find absolutely
unpalatable and historically absurd the
biologically ridiculous and ungrateful
among other things his Lord whose
ungrateful sorry and that who is being
ungrateful look at what you have Ryan
lived in the best society that’s ever
been created you know I was reading
about something do you mean me as a
woman or me as a 21st century person in
the world I mean us yeah I mean I’m
incredibly grateful what I have but to
me the politics instruction of the
tyrannical patriarchy you’re grateful
for the productions of a tyrannical
patriarchy how does that make sense
because I think life is good
I think it could be better that that’s
their main reasonable proposition but I
guess that isn’t commensurate with your
claim that you’re the beneficiary of the
tyrannical patriarchy why no how can it
be good if it’s the consequence of a
tyrannical patriarchy tyranny isn’t good
is it I mean that’s the definition of
tyranny something that isn’t good
and yet it’s produced all these things
that you’re grateful for like doesn’t
that contradict in contradiction bother
you where did where did what was good
come from where is well I think from I
think I’m benefiting actually from a lot
of things that I don’t support that are
unearned privileges in my life I think
that’s absolutely change your job like I
have a very good job I had of loving
family I don’t think that’s gonna do the
world any good is that’s a hell of a
fine rationalization for your privileged
position oh well fair enough but now you
know if you could trade it off with
someone who’s less privileged I can’t
you start I could I could do that and
and but I don’t I don’t want to and I
won’t and I don’t want to be expected to
why not is it okay for you to occupy a
position of privilege in the patriarchal
tyranny and if it is is it because
you’re female or is it just because it’s
convenient let me tell you my political
philosophy I’m a I guess I’m a Social
Democrat so what I believe is that you
should if you have a good life you
should try and pass that on I believe in
a progressive redistribute of tax system
for example it was once said by Lord
Mandelson in British politics you know
but New Labour was okay with people
being filthy rich as long as they paid
their taxes now I’m kind of less okay
with people being filthy rich but if
wanted to be rich
well I think it would leave it’s
probably in the top one-tenth of 1% of
people who’ve ever lived on the planet
that would constitute filthy rich by
historical standards okay but I’m not
aware that every line exactly able to
help the Neanderthals at this point
really by giving up some money but this
is my point is that what I believe is
and I believe in a structure in which
people who have had a good life and had
lots of advantages should pay that back
pay that forwards which i think is the
message that you preach as well right
you have responsibilities and if you’ve
had like us a very advanced civilization
as a tyrannical patriarchy it’s not
purely a tyrannical business purely not
and that’s exactly the issue but why do
you live as a tyrannical patriarchy then
you make a case that it’s purely that
and that’s exactly what’s ungrateful why
not purely that at all why saying
something has elements of this medicine
what is it easy self humanely that isn’t
what’s being said merely to define it as
a patriarchal implies
unit unit unit dimensionality and to
insist that that’s also tyrannical
doesn’t offer a balanced viewpoint at
all well I think that’s probably where
yeah I think that’s probably where your
disagreement comes with this which is
because I do not see it in that way I do
not see that is univariate at all I see
is white white for the patriarchy
because it describes an overarching
structure does it and what if the
patriarchy is fundamentally composed of
women is it still patriarchy no that
would be a matriarchy would it so let’s
say we take a patriarchal structure yeah
the medical profession and we fill it
primarily with women is it then a
matriarchal structure what makes it a
patriarchy begin with
at the hierarchical structures that is
it the fact that it’s mostly men
is it the sociological structure or is
it the fact that it’s mostly men well I
think that’s really interesting because
male primary school teachers for example
only 15% of them are men and I
interviewed some of them for my book and
you know what they report exactly the
same things that women do in
male-dominated offices right they say
people have conversations that I feel
excluded from I feel stigmatized like I
shouldn’t be here people look at me
askance when I say I’m a primary school
teacher and I’m a man you know they kind
of reel back we will make those implicit
associations sense so if it is if it is
a structure that’s dominated by women
that it’s also a tyrannical patriarchy I
think in that case then men have a way
of they should be able to complain about
the fact that a very female dominated
office leaves them feeling out – yeah
being left out so how do we get
something that isn’t a tyrannical
patriarchy if it’s composed of women and
it’s a tyrannical patriarchy and if it’s
composed of man it’s a tyrannical
patriarchy we’re kind of out of options
all right but well you can have a blend
and office than which a blend of people
of both so 5050 then it’s not a
tyrannical picture no 5050 I’m saying
that 40/60 I’m saying that son there is
clearly when it is only 15% of male
primary teachers they do feel
marginalized and excluded so you think
the defining hallmark of tyrannical
social structures the predominance of
one gender and if that was if that was
relatively quiet and all of a sudden it
would be a free and an open institution
I don’t think that the male primary
school teachers been terrorized I do
think they have been marginalized and I
do think that they feel excluded and so
what to do about that well this is what
I mean I think actually and I’m
surprised you don’t agree with me on
this that actually having more male
primary school teachers would be a
really good thing because boys need role
models actually people particularly boys
who don’t have a father figure in their
life that’s really important them to
have a stable adult who shows them what
it’s like to be a man around the place
could be but you shouldn’t achieve it as
a consequence of preferential hiring no
I don’t even need necessarily need to be
preferential hiring I think it would
nest
down the stigma to entering that job I
think teaching is a really interesting
example it was seen at the Turner’s when
I was 18 19 right there were no men in
it and how did that make you feel I
loved it ya know what the kids I used to
wrestle with the kids which of course
can’t do now because everybody knows
that that would just be a catastrophe
and I used to draw them pictures of
monsters and they’d line up for that and
I like working with
kids quite a lot and I didn’t care
whether it was a female-dominated I’ve
been in female-dominated my profession
is my whole life very I think it felt
marginalized as a consequence well then
you have been lucky and I have total
favor I’d be like the opposite I’d be
careful can conduct as well
explain that more to me well why would
you assume that it would be luck well if
I say that you know there is a
statistical analysis and I talk to a
broad range of people and you know you
can always expect outliers at either end
some people who had a really terrible
time some people who had a really
brilliant time everyone else and things
that I strive to do is not to become
resentful well okay that’s very good I
have to say that your Twitter feed does
not give me that impression you come
across as somebody who takes criticism
very much to heart is that true I don’t
think you have any grounds for that
suggestion I mean you see my interviews
online if I was someone who took
criticism at heart I’d be in a lot more
trouble than I am now
in what way well I’ve been criticized
endlessly for two years I’ve been in
scandals I probably been in I don’t know
how many scandals in the last two years
and had unbelievably contentious
interviews with journalists online on TV
on radio in podcasts if I was someone
who couldn’t tolerate criticism the
evidence for that would already be clear
I Twitter is a strange social network
I’ve kind of pulled myself away from it
so it’s not an easy place to conduct
yourself with as much grace as you might
and I think it’s it sort of rewards
impulsivity because it’s maybe it’s
because of the constraint on on
characters or something like that so I
think that people tend to show their
worst on Twitter and and some of that’s
a consequence of the of the structure of
the technology I think I said any agree
with you I think that’s something that
we agree on that I think people are
rarely at their best on Twitter no and
you know I pulled myself away from it
quite a lot in the last month mostly for
to see why you know I kind of kept an
eye on Twitter all the social medias
media networks for the last few years
partly to see well I’m trying to monitor
what’s happening around me I suppose is
probably the right way of thinking about
it and to see if I’m making mistakes and
how they might be rectified
but I don’t think Twitter’s been good
for me and I don’t think it’s I don’t
think the reply function on Twitter is
useful and I think the fact that so many
people on Twitter are anonymous is not a
good thing at all do you think you’d be
less angry if you went on Twitter that’s
something I think quite a lot
I’ve been dissed I would be coming to
contact with less things that annoyed me
on a daily basis oh I think there’s no
doubt about that yeah yeah I I think
that’s definitely the case and I’ve
talked to other people who’ve pulled
back from Twitter and experienced the
same thing I don’t know what it is
exactly but there’s a there’s something
about Twitter that seems to really
heighten the desire of people to be
provocative and maybe it’s the case that
only people who are feeling irritable
respond you know we don’t know you know
like if you put up a post and a thousand
people read it certainly a thousand
people don’t respond a few people
respond well maybe maybe it’s skews way
over to those people who had a bad day
like we have no idea right because it’s
a communication channel that no one
understands we’re not evolved to
understand it we’re not evolved to use
it we don’t we can’t interpret it plus
you’re interacting with random strangers
which is something you never ever do and
it’s never the same set of random
strangers and you don’t react to Twitter
like it’s random strangers Iraq to
Twitter like it’s a person that you know
and it isn’t you right in 12 rules for
life about having had violent impulses
that you didn’t act on and I think in
maps of meaning you elaborate on that
you sabes fantasize about stabbing a
classmate in the neck and you submit
you’re very clear about the fact that
you you know you’ve never ever thought
you would take those seriously but it
just does make me think whether or not
are you somebody who thrives on anger
who finds anger to be something that
they need in their life that they find
motivates them to do the things that
they need to do those are two different
questions okay you can answer them but
one is whether I thrive on it then the
answer to that is most certainly not so
I actually don’t like conflict
how are you ended up doing this as a job
which is arguing with people right just
because you know that’s not my job it’s
not to argue with people okay so my job
is to not do things that I
think I should do right and my
government made the mistake of assuming
that compelled speech was acceptable as
long as motivated by hypothetical
compassion and that’s not happen for me
so I made that point it wasn’t because I
wanted to or because I enjoyed it I
don’t really like conflict I’m actually
a rather agreeable person which is
partly why I’m a clinician and so I find
the the constant conflict exhausting but
that’s not the issue and you’re not
morally obligated you’re morally
obligated to do things other than that
which you like so now I really do enjoy
the lecture series that I’m doing and
the reason for that is that it’s not
political in its essence I’m trying to
do everything I can to bring people who
are trying to develop a vision for their
life together and to encourage them to
act more responsibly but but not in a
finger wagging sort of way but because I
come to understand that the meaning that
sustains you in life is mostly to be
found through responsibility and through
the voluntary adoption of responsibility
you’re very likely to find your
fundamental strength and I think that
that’s clinically unassailable
observation and so and that’s all very
good and I’m very pleased to be doing it
and it seems to be having a salutary
effect as far as I can tell and but but
it’s not because I thrive on anger I
mean you were at my show what – on
Thursday night yeah how much anger was
there in there well I thought it was
fascinating because it was in Long
Island
I drove we drove to it and we went past
a Lamborghini dealership a Porsche
dealership this is not a poor area the
audience was I would say very liked as I
was surprised how many women there was
pretty mix it was overwhelmingly white
and I thought you talked you know you
said that we ni there’s more incoherent
than I normally am you ranged across
quite a range of subjects from you know
status in monkeys to perception but the
things that the crowd clapped and they
applauded where you where you went oh
you can’t say that that’s a
microaggression or multiculturalism is a
you know it’s discouraged that is
sweeping Canada
and what I got was the strong scent that
has swept Canada okay well what I got
was a very strong sense of people whose
lives ever said that it was a scourge
that swept Canada either I wouldn’t have
said that okay well sure I will go back
and check your exact wording what you
said but you definitely not in favor of
it as a fundamental doctrine right I
don’t think it’s a scourge so I wonder
if you and I didn’t mean the same thing
when we talk about multiculturalism
because you have a First Nations room in
your house right you have a lot of First
Nations stuff how is the coexistence of
the honorary member of a First Nations
family isn’t it wonderful I have a First
Nations artist and when I’m from when I
went to Canada last year but that to me
is the essence of Canadian
multiculturalism living that culture
being preserved and living alongside the
Anglophone culture that in some sense is
supplanted it how is that not
multiculturalism
well multiculturalism is the idea that
the cultures can all be put together in
a single place with no overarching
structure or undergirding structures
like that’s not the case how can that
possibly be the case that defines the
situation in the world and the world is
full of war so how does the how can that
possibly work if you’re going to bring
people together and they’re going to be
and they’re going to exist together in
harmony
they have to be playing a game that
everyone plays that everyone knows the
rules for it can’t be ten different sets
of rules for different people how’s it
going to work so it’s absolutely naive
to believe how if that worked the world
wouldn’t be full of war well before we
had you know multiculturalism we still
did have war or in fact war is Steven
Pinker I’m sure you register even pinger
says you and this is the least violent
time in human history so something is a
consequence working Oracle tyranny well
if you think the patriarch he’s been
eroded over the last hundred years maybe
that’s what it’s down to maybe you could
give some credit to it for that yeah I
actually didn’t say that the patriarchy
being eroded well and you know because
you don’t believe it exists in the first
place fair enough but I my definition of
multiculturalism is citizenship based
right so you can be both Canadian and
First Nations you can be both québécois
and also Canadian you know what that
means that everybody in the multi
cultural milieu is one thing and another
they’re all one thing and another yeah
minister said well there is no Canadian
identity it’s like well okay what is it
that unites us well nothing we all
protect our cultures it’s like well that
leads to war okay it doesn’t only lead
to war obviously but unless you have
people operating within a shared
framework of perception and value they
can’t cooperate and compete peacefully
there’s I don’t understand how that’s
even a disputable topic that’s how you
organize people okay I I think if that’s
what he said that’s what Reno said that
is a dumb thing for the Prime Minister
of Canada to say when you are Prime
Minister of Canada oh yeah you might you
might say that would agree much more
with what Barack Obama said when he said
you know I’m trying not to make her red
states America or blue states America or
a white America black mare I’m trying to
make a united states wreck and that to
me the Democrats are very good at that
well maybe they tried identity politics
for the last 20 years well they’ve done
is inflamed tribal tribal tendencies as
far as I can tell so he could say that
but it isn’t obvious that it’s the case
and it’s not obvious to me and all that
one of the consequences of Barack
Obama’s presidency was a reduction in
racial tension in the United States no I
wouldn’t agree with that either I think
a lot of people friend having a black
college-educated professor very alarming
and threatening to their ideas is there
to stop them from voting for him twice
no that is very true but again it’s
fundamentally true right it’s it’s
really the crucial issue at hand here no
but he built a big coalition of white
well-educated liberals and people of
color I mean none is that that is the
Democrats alike how do you explain the
rise of racial tension in the United
States then well I think it’s caused by
a lot of things not released in one of
which is the Republican Party in flaming
it you talk about the left plain
identity politics I think the right play
identity politics all the time the right
doesn’t dominate the universities no but
it dominates Donald Trump is president
so really stormy Trump is hardly a
typical Republican no he iced and say
that he hosted for most of his life if I
remember correctly he was a Democrat
right I don’t think he’s going to blame
allegiance tweet wing okay but I’m gonna
say the rest of the Republican Party are
also quite happy to play I would say
white identity politics they go they did
not dump him as their candidate when he
said Mexicans they’re not sending us
their best people here they’re rapists
right the whole idea of the United
States it said I think a beautiful
all men are created equal but it meant
men and it meant specifically white men
women and black people could not vote
the US was founded on identity politics
this is not some new concept that has
come along in the last 20 years the
United States wasn’t founded on ideas
yes it was that’s absolutely absurd
proposition the United States was
founded on the same principles that what
would you say that that played their
powerful role through the development of
English democracy and that was nested
inside the judeo-christian view that
fundamentally presumed that both men and
women were made in the image of God and
that all people had divine value and it
took a long time for that set of ideas
to fully manifest itself in the
political realm but to consider that a
manifestation of identity politics is I
I can’t imagine why you would possibly
do that I don’t consider that a
manifestation might enter politics I
consider having a constitution that says
only some people are citizens to be a
manifestation of identity politics well
what do you think changed it across time
and look let’s get our definitions
straight here
you can’t lump all occurrences of non
equal treatment into the category of
identity politics identity politics this
is very specific thing it’s really only
existed since the 1970s
you can’t go back into 1770 and say that
the founders of the American
Constitution were playing identity
politics my politics that was based on
identity that’s my definition of
identity that’s the north the definition
of identity politics unless you pay play
fast and loose with the definition
identity politics is something that’s in
no one talked about identity politics 20
years ago or 30 years ago it’s a new
term you can’t say that people’s
proclivity to identify with their group
is identity politics that’s just
tribalism and that’s like who knows how
old that is a million years old
five hundred thousand years old and
you’re gonna call tribalism identity
politics well that’s not helpful if you
want to talk about tribalism we could
talk about tribalism but identity
politics is something that’s nested
inside a particular political view of
the world it’s got a Marxist basis and
it manifests itself in post-modernism
and it emerged in the American unit
first in the 1970s and then has swept
through the American Universities and
increasingly the rest of the West since
then that’s identity politics if you
want to talk about tribalism that’s fine
I’m not a fan of tribalism which is why
I don’t like the identity politics types
and I don’t care if they’re on the right
or the left I think the right wing use
of identity as the primary marker for
human categorization is as reprehensible
and dangerous as it is on the left my
problem with the left at the moment the
fundamental problem with the radical
left is that they’re hyper dominant in
academia and that’s not good
and that’s not my opinion you can go and
look at Jonathan Heights data and see
for yourself and he’s as martyr to
person as you could hope to find and
probably less prone to anger than me and
I agree with you I find a lot of
students phenomenally irritating but I
would question how much power they have
it’s a contrast to the things I find
more worrying that happening in the
world today right or even the
professor’s right even for 20 year-olds
don’t have that much power but they’re
not twenty forever
ten years later they’re thirty and one
years later they’re 40 right and
whatever happens in the university
happens everywhere five years later and
very very sadly for people in my
politics left-wing politics what happens
people as they get older is that they
traditionally got more conservative so I
don’t think you can make a case that the
the current where people are where
they’re twenty today is actually going
to be the ideology that takes them all
the way through their life that’s never
been it’ll be around long enough to do
plenty of damage like it already is okay
but even if we accept that students and
their pomo professors are quite annoying
which i think is probably I agree
something I dunno just annoying like
they’re destroying the universities and
that’s not a good thing and they’re
particularly destroying the social
sciences and the humanities the sciences
are saved so far but not for long
because the scientists in particular are
terrible at politics and the left-wing
activists are great at politics and so
they’ll win eventually the National
Science Foundation is already
introducing diversity requirements for
hiring in mathematics and universities
it’s like good luck with that that’s not
going to work there are hardly any
mathematical geniuses if you start
putting all sorts of arbitrary
restrictions on their hiring you’re just
going to not and you’re going to end up
not
the ones that there are so besides I
totally wasn’t really because if you say
there were very few months magical gene
molded well I’m next year I’m gonna be a
fellow Oxford University so I spend time
talking to academics I’ve talked to a
lot of academics for my book I do agree
with you there is an illiberal strain
that is sweeping through a lot of
universities I don’t think it’s an
existential threat and I certainly don’t
think it is to me the biggest issue in
world politics today it’s the one that I
would choose personally what do you
think is the biggest issue I think that
the rise of strongmen authoritarians
around the world is very worrying and
that’s one the reasons I find the
subtitle of your book
listen editing because you’re it’s
called an antidote to chaos why isn’t it
an antidote to order which you also say
in its excessive manifestations is bad
well you can’t write a book about
everything no no but you’ve specifically
chosen antidote to chaos so why is chaos
300 lectures online and I talked plenty
about the pathology of order in those
lectures okay but I’m just a fan of
authoritarian strongmen that’s for sure
well that’s good but I do think that the
way that you talk about order in the
book is something that people will take
away from it be specific
okay so let me think the way that you
talk about natural dominance hierarchies
and lobster’s let’s get on to the
lobsters because I think that the thing
that people take away from that is male
lobsters compete for female upstairs and
that says something about society now
that’s that men need to be dominant in
in society because if lobsters do it
then there is something that we can read
about humans from there’s nothing in
their chapter at all that suggests that
the way that men should succeed in human
hierarchies is a consequence of the
exercise of power there’s not one line
in that entire book that’s that claims
that because it’s not what I believe
most human hierarchies as already
pointed out our hierarchies of
competence not power okay so that’s why
we don’t live in a patriarchal tyranny
and so if you want to be a successful
man then you should be competent and
that will move you up to the hierarchy
and that will make you attractive and
for good reason unless you want an
incompetent mate which is possible and
and and happens but isn’t something that
I would recommend people will sometimes
choose an incompetent mate because
they’re intimidated by competence and so
they’ll settle for someone who they
don’t respect because they feel that
they
can master them and they won’t be
intimidated but it’s not a recipe for a
happy life I can tell you that so there
isn’t a line in that chapter that talks
about power as as as the proper means of
conducting yourself in life there’s not
a line in the book and there’s nothing
in anything I’ve ever said that suggests
that okay no I’m so that it’s really
important because people have read this
chapter and they make exactly the
argument that you make and it’s a
misapprehension so it’s it’s a
misapprehension of the book okay but if
so many people are getting the same miss
out branching could there are so many
people than we’re getting it there’s two
million people that have bought the book
and there’s a very small handful of
people who have a particular ideological
perspective who enjoyed developing that
perspective because it indicates just
what sort of reprehensible individual I
am but it has absolutely nothing to do
with what I wrote or what I’ve said or
what I believe I don’t believe that our
fundamental hierarchies are based on
power I don’t believe that the way that
you move up our hierarchies is as a
consequence of manifesting power its
competence okay might be problem with
the lobsters is that it’s scientifically
bollocks
right it’s just you cannot read across
from lobsters and what they do to what
humans share had that’s why serotonin
works on lobsters it was in two
different ways so if serotonin makes a
lobsters more aggressive it makes you
know what makes them less aggressive
right that’s not that’s not right that
serotonin makes human beings more
dominant but less aggressive and the
only reason it makes the more dominant
is because they’re less irritable and
they’re less defensively aggressive so
it’s not bollocks I know my neuro
chemistry so if you’re gonna play in
neural chemistry let’s go and do it okay
we use the antidepressants work on
lobsters yes they do any make a lobster
that’s been defeated in a fight more
likely to fight again that’s not the
same mechanism that that’s the same
humans depressed as the way the human I
think your anthropomorphizing intuitive
ridiculous degree these are creatures
that urinate out of their faces I think
that the fundamental issue among
knowledgeable animal behaviorists is
that anthropomorphize ation with animals
is generally the appropriate tactic
unless you have reason to doubt it which
is because there’s continuity between us
and animals rather than discontinuity
and the idea that the anthropomorphize
ation of animals is inappropriate is
something derived from nineteen
these behaviorism the highly trained
effective neuroscientists and people who
studied motivation and emotion as well
as neural chemistry know perfectly well
that there is biological and behavioral
continuity across the animal kingdom and
way down into the kingdom as well which
is exactly why I chose lobsters to
indicate that there is so much
continuity in the systems that allow us
to estimate status position that we
share it with creatures that are a third
of the billion years old and the reason
that I made that argument was to put
paid at least into part in part to the
absurd Marxist proposition that
hierarchical structures are a secondary
consequence of Western civilization and
free market economies which is as
preposterous a perspective as you could
possibly develop about anything
hierarchies are third of a billion years
old you can’t blame them on the West or
men or capitalism and we’re wired for
hierarchical perception in ways that you
can hardly possibly imagine even our
ability to rank order a set of objects
seems to be tightly linked to our
ability to assess the relative status of
people in our in our social millou’s so
and the biochemistry is very very
similar and the reason we know that is
because most of the drugs that are used
on people are first tested on animals
now it’s not often animals as primitive
as lobsters but it is plenty so a lot of
what we know about neurological
structure for example is a consequence
of studying the flat room worm which is
much more primitive organism than the
lobster continuities they is the rule
okay so what can we learn from killer
whales that live in matriarchal pods
often led by a grandmother someone who’s
been through a menopause why isn’t that
an example you pick to talk about in the
book it’s because lobsters say the thing
ideologically you want to talk about
which is your belief that there is a
kind of Marxist ideology to say that the
point that I was making the point that I
was making with lobsters I just said
what it was that hierarchies have been
thrown for who genuinely really today is
arguing apart from maybe three mad
Marxist academics that there is no such
thing as hierarchy hierarchies they’re
not they’re not that there’s no such
thing as hard oh there’s anything as
hierarchies oh they’re plenty of them
argue
really because I see that almost never
in the wild as an as an argument
I see people think that hierarchy should
be based on merit and they say what do
you call the demand for equality of
outcome is if it’s not an attempt to
flatten hierarchies or to have to
eliminate them what else could it
possibly be and you don’t think the
neo-marxists and the postmodernist think
that hierarchy is a social construction
okay you’re not talking about the same
people that I know that’s for sure and
everything’s a social construction for
the social constructionist including
hierarchies but I just don’t think that
is a very widely held view in the world
it might be much liberal a percent 20
percent of social scientists identify as
Marxist and abandoned that statistic
from look it up but look it up in in
Heights work okay you know I’m
interested I know I’ve checked it out
quite yeah yeah I’m just I’m perfectly
valid statistic I don’t have the
reference at hand yeah so it’s one in
five and they’re the the number of
conservatives or even liberals for that
matter in the social sciences and
humanities is not only vanishingly small
but getting smaller and you think the
social constructionist believe that
hierarchy is built into biology they’re
not very good social construction is if
that was if that’s what they believe and
the post modernists and the neo-marxists
are radical social constructionist
because they wouldn’t believe that human
beings are infinitely malleable and and
and that we can be recreated in in
whatever image the ideologue might want
to recreate us in if they didn’t think
that and it’s much more prevalent than
you’re admitting I mean there there
isn’t a competing position on campuses
except among the evolutionary biologists
and the evolutionary psychologists let’s
say and they’re under a complete attack
they’re certainly next on the chopping
block as far as I can tell I’ve been
warning them for the last two years
social constructionist don’t like
evolutionary psychologists and they
don’t like biology and I I really don’t
understand why except that it interferes
with this idea that human beings are
infinitely malleable and stops them from
being able to blame hierarchy on the
West look if you’re really concerned
about the poor as a social democrat
let’s say the first thing you should do
is abandon your presupposition that the
dispossession produced by hierarchies is
a consequence of the patriarchal
structure of the West it’s a way deeper
problem than
so there’d be maybe dispossessed forever
way before capitalism okay I think I
would agree with that so if if it is way
deeper problem than that’s how do you
tackle it
I don’t know well that’s a bit I mean
that for someone who’s intelligent you
that just throw their hands up and go
maybe something lots of things I don’t
hold tackle I don’t know how to tackle
the fact that people range range
extremely widely in their cognitive
ability either these are big problems
but we can start with a register beauty
of tax policy right where people who
earn a lot pay more tax than people
lower down the income scale to reduce
treat income that was a fairly obvious
way that you could make poor people less
poor it’s something that you know the
Labour government did they almost I
think they have child poverty it is
possible to do things and we do have
mechanism well I wouldn’t I wouldn’t
make the immediate presumption that it
was the redistribute of tax policy that
have child poverty you know that
absolute poverty in the world has halved
between near 2000 and 2012 and you can’t
attribute that to redistributive
policies no I can’t how many talking
about Britain on took him in that
particular government which had you know
then there are fiscal analysis that have
been done but I think let’s move on from
from lobsters I mean in that chapter is
about people becoming responsible and
confident not about them becoming like
dominant and powerful okay not at all
but my problem is I think you got
criticized by a lot of marine biologists
by and by a lot of geneticists for one
okay well I can name it PZ Myers is one
who’s criticized you I’m Adam Rutherford
who’s former editor of nature as
criticize that chapter there are you
know that is not but what I think
biologists dispute the fact that most or
organisms organize themselves into
hierarchies and that the fundamental
biological mechanism for the regulation
of hierarchy is the serotonin system
that’s not disputable now you can find
animal organizational structures that
vary from that from that what would you
call it fundamental pattern but the
existence of variants isn’t proof
against the existence of a fundamental
pattern like I don’t I don’t know how
you can sit there and be skeptical about
this if you know the literature on
hierarchical structure you understand
that across the entire animal kingdom
animals tend to organize themselves into
hierarchies and at the neural chemistry
different types of hierarchies right so
there’s up you haven’t
we know they’re hiring yeah but the putt
like you say the pattern is if that you
know the hierarchy is the pattern right
okay and that’s fine so chimps have one
very obvious social structure and
bonobos haven’t it’s not as different as
people have made it out to be the
bonobos are a lot more violent than the
right and then you’d be much slower
right observers of the bonobos have
admitted okay but nonetheless you say
that as if the deep lows these little
details don’t matter is if there can’t
be such a thing as a hierarchy that is
much worse than another okay that’s why
I understand that at all there’s clearly
hierarchies that are worse than other
right baboons have terrible hierarchies
for example animation radical
hierarchies aren’t my cup of tea
that isn’t the point I was making the
point I was making was that hierarchies
can’t be blamed on capitalism or the
West they’re built into our biology that
the neural the neural chemistry is so
old that we share it with with
crustaceans so that’s a third of a
billion years which is the proof that
hierarchies aren’t a recent constructive
proof like that needs to be needed needs
to be provided and that the best way for
people to adopt a strategy that will
move them up the hierarchy which is a
desirable thing in most regards is to
face the suffering of the world
forthrightly that’s what that chapter is
about and the people who’ve been
criticizing it read it as if it’s a
defense of the Western patriarchy it’s
like there’s there’s no defense of the
Western I drug I don’t know it’s true I
think the way that people criticize it
is the and I think this happens a lot
with evolutionary psychology is a which
is not quite what the lobsters are but
is where other stuff in the book is
other things you said for example like
women wear Rouge because it reminds men
of ripe fruit right well first time do
you think women wear Rouge I have
absolutely no idea right okay that’s
really not a very good answer well yeah
you said before there were a lot of
things you don’t know the answer to but
I tell you I think you’re I’m most right
sizing your perspective on this you’re
criticizing mine so I mean alternative
idea what women why do you think where
women wear makeup they’re enormous not
let me let’s let’s go back to why women
marriage because it reminds men of not
ripe fruit okay first of all not all
ripe fruit is red why would you want
color vision to detect ripe fruit do you
want to eat women no I
unless men having sex marries them
that’s not really where and where is the
evidence that women who are redder in
the cheeks are more have more offspring
what do you think happens during that
sexual flush but that’s the key point
isn’t it is that you would expect
actually if this is a sexual selection
that women who are ready for children
we’ve got progressively ready by the
time hallmarks of youthful skin is the
proclivity for it to flush red and yes
use youthful women have more children
it’s a primary sign of fertility that I
think your wait a second here what do
you think women wear makeup for come on
if you’re gonna go after me on this okay
let’s let’s let women people say well
women wear makeup to feel better about
themselves that’s not very deep analysis
why make up a facial makeup I’ll tell
you why I’m wear makeup which is to stop
the comments that are again if I didn’t
wear makeup
am i gender I always say my gender is
low maintenance right I don’t particular
particularly like a woman inside I don’t
really know what that would mean but
what I try and do is try and look you
know in the same way that you get black
women you talk about the problem with
natural hair is it seen as
unprofessional right and as a woman if
you don’t wear makeup that is seen as a
political choice that is seen as
something that you know you want so you
wear makeup to protect yourself from
from what from judging men but in achill
women as well I would say I think women
don’t very harshly judged each other’s
appearance and there are very good
reasons for that
probably because they’ve learned that
from oppressive men no I don’t think so
I don’t why do you think it is then I
think that women are encouraged to be
seen as being in competition with each
other
encouraged you don’t think that there’s
anything about that that’s naturally
well I would be reluctant to get into
that because I think you could talk
about sexual intrasexual competition and
that’s a very big deal among the social
sciences and evolutionary science it’s
not my particular competence but yeah I
wouldn’t my conception the patriarchy is
not that men are beastly to women it is
that there is a structure in which women
participate to that overall privileges
and benefits men in order to control
female reproduction and I think those
are two very different things you write
in twelve roles that you skipped a grade
in school and you were small for your
age do you think that shaped your
personality in your experiences of life
I did to some degree made it difficult
for me to participate in sports
I didn’t really do anything that was
fundamentally athletic till I was in
graduate school so my parents are guilty
about that because they felt that it
wasn’t good for me but I’m not unhappy
about it I go through school faster I
wasn’t a fan of school and the faster I
got to it the better I think it might
have encouraged me to do two other
things which was I probably hung around
with rougher kids that I might have
otherwise as a partly as a compensation
I suppose for being smart and
academically able and also small so I
probably exaggerated my roughness I
suppose and it made me more verbally
more capable of verbally defending
myself but other than that I don’t think
it had much of an effect I think I
pretty much left all of that behind
that’s very good
oh so on the other thing I was really
interested in was that you married your
teenage sweetheart mm-hmm yeah well I
met her when I was eight so we’ve known
each other for 50 years yeah so this is
I think really fascinating so I read
that and I thought that was quite moving
and then I was reading the bit about um
you know the animal kingdom and it’s bit
free take away from the lobster section
is that you know what happens if your
top Lobster is that you get to
impregnate all the female so that as
being evolutionary successful as a
lobster right um your that’s proclivity
towards polygamy which is one of the
things that pulls on human society all
right and you’re now the pretty big
lobster and yet you are monogamous
you’re faithful to your wife you don’t
you know you don’t want to go around
impregnating every woman that you see
right no no woman trouble right so so I
think that’s really to me that was
really interesting because that’s a way
in which we are very obviously very
different from Animal Society and tomato
takes that different I mean there there
are plenty of societies where exactly
that happens right but you’ve been able
to overcome that biological urge right
and so in the sense that maybe there are
other biological urge such as men’s
propensity towards violence that might
also be overcome well it’s not
self-evident that you want it to be
overcome I mean you don’t know what goes
along with it you know I mean
obviously first of all defining violence
isn’t that straightforward
how about use of force in self-defense
does that constitute violence I think to
me that’s a separate category well but
it’s not that easy to distinguish them
like if you’re what what you want to do
with a child who’s aggressive is
socialize them so that they become
sophisticated in their manifestation of
their aggression you don’t want to
inhibit it you certainly don’t want to
socialize little boys to be more like
little girls that’s first of all you
don’t know how to do it to begin with
but second of all it’s not very it’s not
an advisable strategy so well I find
that really really interesting because
in the book you say that HT if you
feminized men that might give them more
of having more of an allure towards you
know there’s very fascist about that
that’s that’s standard psychoanalytic
that’s like psychoanalysis 101 if you
repress something it comes back with a
vengeance okay so tell me what you mean
by feminizing in that sense because to
me if you don’t mind me saying so you
are a man who is quite feminine you are
in touch with your feminine side you are
very well-dressed you talk a lot about
you die you’ve talked about your
emotions you’re talking about my diet
right but you cry in public you you
enjoy spending time with your kids you
know all of these things that are much
no no sad isn’t it but they’re not
stereotypically male and I think that’s
very admirable pretty strange behavior
for a patriarchal tyrant well that’s why
I think that you’re probably in some
ways you’re not a patriarchal tyrant
although actually all of our programming
if you want to call it that in biology
is it’s overcome a ball because you are
not integratable right but you are a man
who some people would say has a lot of
feminine traits like that and I don’t do
you think that means that you are now
being in the allure of authoritarian
fascistic ideologies because you’ve you
know you’re baking cakes oh I notice the
allure and then what do you do with that
work to live such that there’s no
temptation in that which is also what I
recommend to everyone else right if you
see any temptation in that then you
should straighten yourself up real quick
so and that’s what I’ve done for decades
so of course you have to see the allure
in that if you don’t see the allure in
that you’re a fool just like if you
don’t see the allure in the radical
leftist ideas I mean if they didn’t have
if
if you didn’t understand the allure you
couldn’t understand the ideas they’re
dangerously alluring you know it would
be lovely if there was a strong man who
could solve all our problems and those
who deserved it got exactly what was
coming to them it’s not something that I
would recommend as a wish so but that
doesn’t mean you you know you want to be
blind to its attraction you want to see
what the dark parts of you are attracted
to it helps you keep an eye on where
things can go if they go badly sideways
so I don’t think it has anything to do
though with my with my what would you
say more classically feminine interests
not as far as I can tell I mean I have
all sorts of classically masculine
interests too so right and it seems to
be reasonably well balanced all right so
you talking about socially efficient
socialized little boys like little girls
but actually you know I have lots of
starett I’m interested in politics which
is overwhelmingly male-dominated you
have lots of classically feminine
interests why we know what is the
problem here with people having
personalities that are a mixture that
there’s no problem with that at all the
problem is when it’s dictated by Fiat
well I mean who’s who’s Fiat about the
education system so in in in schools you
think you know that there is a lie
outlined I can’t remember the
psychologists name at the moment but he
was quite influential in the 1980s who
recommended as a control for male
violence that boys be socialized more
like little girls and I don’t think that
that’s a particularly unpopular
viewpoint so on that the the emphasis on
competition for example in in games the
increase in in in the rise of
competitive games where scores aren’t
kept that sort of thing is all a
manifestation of that kind of theory as
far as I’m concerned the idea that
there’s something intrinsically wrong
with competition it’s a very foolish
idea especially if you want to motivate
relatively aggressive boys because
they’re competitive while competition
that’s not good someone has to lose it’s
like well you’re not gonna get very far
looking at the world that way I’m afraid
you know maybe you want to generate a
plethora of games so that everybody has
a shot of winning that’s a good idea but
you surf ik don’t want to devalue the
notion of winning if you’re doing
something necessary you should reward
people who are particularly good at it
it’s part of the definition
that being necessary so and that the
continue don’t want to control
aggression any more than you want to
control sex you want to integrate it and
and if it’s integrated that’s the
integration of the shadow from the Union
perspective and something I talked a lot
about in my lectures it’s like you need
to have the capacity for danger you need
to be dangerous but you need to learn
how to not use it except when it’s
necessary and that is not the same as
being harmless harmless that’s a
terrible virtue it’s like a rabbit
there’s nothing virtuous about
harmlessness it just means you’re
ineffectual I mean I think I would agree
well I think there are some people who
through the homelessness become iconic
and they become symbols I think the
Ghandi in the principle of non-violence
not harmless
he just transcended his deep violence
that is completely different thing I
thought his without that capacity there
would have been no way he would have had
the strength of character that he had he
was an integrated person not a harmless
person okay that’s a very very different
thing did you have different ambitions
for your daughter and for your son some
of them were different I encouraged my
daughter in her desire to be a mother
which is not something I did with my son
did you encourage him in his desire to
be a father absolutely right so you
encouraged both of them to be a parent
right but those are different yeah so I
know and yeah I mean and in some sense I
think it’s it’s harder for young women
because of course the the problem of
integrating family with career is a more
complex problem for women to solve so
and I spend a lot of time talking to her
about how she might solve that I
wouldn’t say that we came up with
anything that was spectacularly original
or successful but I at least let her
know that whatever pathway she chose was
fine with me if she as long as she was
being honest with herself about what it
was that she wanted but also that you
know I’m not a fan of the idea that the
most fundamental orientation that a
person is likely to have in their life
is career I don’t believe that’s true
for most people I certainly don’t
believe it’s true for most women and I
think the evidence supports that claim
quite straightforwardly so
however it is the only thing that you
get paid for under capitalism right man
live but that’s how can you say
something like that it’s so cliched
what’s so painful to hear that maybe
cliche but it didn’t nonetheless it
struck women do my capitalism well for
God’s sake no it isn’t you have to
invest into a child for 18 years before
they have any economic utility it’s a
consequence of delayed economic utility
we don’t know how to monetize it it’s
not a consequence of capitalism it’s a
consequence of the fact that human
beings have an 18-year dependency how do
you monetize that even in principle well
we don’t know we did used to send them
up chimneys to be fair and at that point
well grew really interesting is at that
point children was seen has been much
more the property of the man I mean has
the became economically useless all the
legal studies show but that’s when we
start moving to a model of female
custody right because it was about
caring labour but this is the point I’m
making is model look I’ll tell you there
are plenty of men who are not very happy
about the model of female custody and
that would yes and that would include
the what is it 85% of men who were
essentially denied 50/50 custody when
they divorce and have young children so
I wouldn’t think that one of our major
problems or at least a major unit
dimensional problem is the proclivity of
men to foist off the custody of their
children on to women there’s certainly
another side of that argument there II
know there is and I do think that
actually a lot of anger has been
generated by the way we haven’t in
Britain any way we have in England and
Wales we have an adversarial fault based
or system that’s something that’s
changing but what it does is encourage
people to come in on day one and say if
you want to get divorced you’re gonna
have to make out a case that the other
person has been a bomb it doesn’t matter
because if you move to an on fault based
divorce system then all that happens is
the fault shifts to who should get
custody so it doesn’t remove the
acrimony by any stretch of the
imagination it just shifts it to custody
of the children and that’s what’s
happened in Canada right when in Britain
we actually talked about access rather
than custody because it’s the idea is
not that you own the children it’s that
you actually want to be able to see the
children and spend time with them and I
think that’s really important but
fault-based divorce is is something that
increases the chances of couples having
a bad divorce right that’s the problem
is it it sets people against each other
from the start they have to go into
court and contest that the other purse
has done something wrong which is not a
great base on which to start then an
argument about you think you should be
encouraged to divorce even if no one’s
done anything wrong
no I think that having to prove that in
a court of law is not something that is
going to lead you to a better
arbitration about settling money and
settling you know access to children I
think that’s the point you have a
ridiculous situation where couples who
say well actually we’ve just grown apart
nonetheless unless they want to wait
five years or two years for separation
they have to go in and plead
unreasonable behavior to get a divorce
and start splitting up their assets
that’s the joy of no-fault divorce is
that you don’t have to make those
contested case you can simply say our
marriage is no longer working and part
ways without going into all of the
acrimony that seems quite sensible to me
it also seems quite naive to me well
I’ve seen very few non acrimonious
divorces they’re very hard on kids so I
don’t think anything that makes them
easier is a very good idea it might be
good in the short term but it’s not good
in the long term unless unless you don’t
think that marriage is a useful
institution and if you think that it’s
part of the patriarchal tyranny then you
might think that as well so but it’s a
very useful institution mostly for kids
so I agree that I I’m married I’m modern
marriage has a lot to recommend it I do
also think it is a patriotic uns
institution it is literally why don’t
you think that well because you think
virtually everything that occurs in our
society is a patriarchal institution
it’s easy to think that because then you
only have to think one thing you could
get a one thing answer for everything
you could let part of the patriarchal
institution I don’t think you’re obeying
the rule that says maybe treat people as
if they have something worth hearing so
I’m not making a case for the
patriarchal tyranny I mean I don’t think
you are either I think that you’re
making a case that that’s like a
universally cliched case for the
patriarchal tyranny I don’t I don’t see
too why should we change the names at
all why do women change the names on
marriage traditionally I don’t know
exactly why do you think they do because
it was to symbolise the transfer of
their ownership from one family to
another family that’s why in the
handmade sale you have off Warren Oh God
Margaret Atwood well she was just about
devoured by the feminists last year so
that was something interesting to
observe I think she made a very good but
she wasn’t / all feminist I’m a feminist
I thought what she said about due
process in cases like that is perfectly
reasonable well
many people didn’t know but then you
know guess what this is the on the
Internet you can find someone who
disagrees pretty much anything but so
why do you think women changing the name
so when they get married traditionally
if it’s not about transfer of property
ownership traditionally I don’t know if
I have an opinion about that the
specific reasons for that I’d have to
look into it for a fair amount of time
before I decided it but I certainly
wouldn’t boil it down to a unit
dimensional argument about the ownership
of women by men so ok I just you know
the part of the problem too is with this
sort of discussion is that it’s and this
is why I consider it a manifestation of
ideological possession it’s predictable
well that’s what knowing yours and so on
but having a coherent ideology doesn’t
mean that it is predictable because it
is an ideology this is one logical thing
that flows from another and all those
pieces tessellate together that’s what I
find very interesting about your
thinking I find it quite slightly
baffling is that I don’t really see how
all the pieces fit together you know you
say that you’re not you don’t you
believe in God but there’s a lot of act
as if God exists right but it is
actually my definition of belief ok when
that’s so but that’s in it but that then
doesn’t to me tessellate very obviously
with your insistence that we know
actually it’s just about pure science
and there’s not a you know that you
because well what what insistence that
is just above pure science well you are
wrote maps of meaning there’s no
insistence in that that is just about
pure sorry different you make appeals to
science all the time you say well this
is that what the literature says and the
trouble with God is ultimately you can’t
say this is what the reason which is why
I don’t don’t say anything about this
scientific status of God apart from what
can be experienced maybe under certain
conditions of what would you call
chemical induced mysticism or it seems
to be something that you can say
something scientifically about but I see
that there’s two different realms right
there’s a realm of values in a realm of
facts and in the realm of facts science
reigns supreme but it doesn’t in the
realm of values you have to look
elsewhere that was what the humanities
were for before they got what would you
say hijacked by ideologue x’ and you
know the the idea that that that some
that something should be consistent you
were talking about the necessity for
consistency and ideology it’s like I’m
not hearing what you think I’m hearing
what how you’re able to represent the
ideology you were taught and it’s not
that interesting because I don’t know
anything about you I could replace you
with someone else who thinks the same
way and that means you’re not here
that’s what it means it’s not pleasant
so you’re not you’re not you’re not
drawing you’re not integrating the
specifics of your personal experience
with what you’ve been taught to
synthesize something that’s genuine and
surprising and engaging in a narrative
sense as a consequence and that’s the
pathology of ideological possession it’s
not good and it’s not good that I I know
where you stand on things once I know a
few things it’s like why have a
conversation I already know where you
stand on things I bet you don’t know
where I stand on all things I would hope
that that that was true
okay let’s talk about list of about
transgender issues that’s from what do
you think I think about transgender
issues I suspect that you think that
gender expression gender identity are
fundamentally social constructs but I
could be wrong no I believe that there
are definitely some biological
differences between the sexes we’ve
observed them I do believe that gender
is a hugely powerful social structure
that we have built on top of that it is
largely but not entirely socially
constructed I think when you look back
through the history you know biological
differences have consistently shrunk and
like we were talking they haven’t in
Scandinavia they’ve magnified okay but
we were talking about that’s actually an
important exception because Scandinavia
has gone farther than any other area the
Scandinavian countries in establishing
egalitarian social policy and the
differences in interest and career
choice and personality between men and
women have grown as a consequence not
shrunk which is exactly the opposite of
what the social construction is predict
but also just suggest that the amount of
malleable actually rather than fixed
well of course they’re malleable no one
would ever suggest otherwise so that’s
what I mean it’s not malleable in the
direction that the social
constructionist presumed as you flatten
out the sociological lens
gave you maximize the biological
differences no one saw that coming and
you might think well it’s a handful of
right-wing scientists who are pushing
that’s like no it’s not it’s mainstream
psychology and there aren’t any radical
right wingers in mainstream psychology
and everyone who discovered that was
absolutely shocked by it and these
papers have been cited by thousands of
people and they have tens of thousands
of subjects and they’ve been done on
virtually national level samples
cross-culturally but I also think the
behavior in Scandinavia has changed for
example a lot more men take paternity
leave now that there is a portion that
is reserved purely for men that doesn’t
seem for making them wildly unhappy so I
think there are definitely behavioral
things that are susceptible to nudges by
society by government and by the state
and that do change the way that people
behave so we can possible meet in the
middle of my hope that people can be
educated and that we can develop as a
consequence of learning that’s that’s
certainly not a disputable proposition
and I also believe that there is no
evidence for gender identity in the way
that it is used and by you know as an
idea of a soul I think that’s the way
that it’s often used to me by who by by
transgender activists yes what they can
do about having a female soul and that
to me seems strange I don’t see how you
some something like biological
determinism right and I just very it’s
one of the things that’s so perversely
amusing about these sorts of arguments
is that well but I I attributed to the
lack of demand for logical consistency
as a consequence of postmodern thinking
you can believe one thing when it’s
convenient in one situation and another
thing when it’s convenient for another
so we’re in the perverse position where
if you’re a man born in a woman’s body
that’s biologically determined but if
you’re a woman born in a woman’s body
that’s socially constructed it’s like
okay good luck with that theory right I
don’t believe you can be a man born in a
woman’s body a woman born in a man’s
body what I believe isn’t there are some
people who feel alienation towards their
bodies and they want to remove what
everybody feels that right but they’d
feel it to such an extent that the best
clinically the best treatment for them
is to transition and live as if they
were they yeah well I don’t think that
there’s any evidence that that’s
clinically the best treatment we
certainly don’t know enough to make that
presupposition and I think we’re playing
with fire assuming that that’s the case
the long-term outcome studies certainly
don’t
demonstrate that so it’s not so so I
would make a very big distinction there
between adults and between children I
think that would be a good distinction
to make
okay but I think we are very quick to
diagnose and treat children in a way
that I find we’re not waiting for the
research and that I find concerning yeah
say well the lawsuits will put it into
that in about 15 years so there’s
there’s there’s one place that we found
from which that is something that gets
me a lot of hate I’m sure it does a turf
and a bigot for that so all right I
don’t think that’s something that you
would been able to predict and I think
because that is not now the orthodox
feminist position I agree completely
we will learn something um I just wanted
to talk quickly about my behalf
meaty movement mhm tell me your reaction
to what’s happened pulled it over the
last year I won’t put words in your
mouth you tell me well there’s certainly
no shortage of evidence for
reprehensible sexual behavior on the
part of people who can use power to get
away with it so that’s not so good
the me to movement I suspect it probably
did some good things and some terrible
things so I would say that there is a
dangerous proclivity to abandon the
concept of the presumption of innocence
so in university campuses for example
we’re moving towards a preponderance of
evidence model I’m not very heart being
with that model I think that’s a very
big mistake the presumption of innocence
is nothing short of a miracle and we
abandon it at our extreme peril so I’m
not happy with that
I think the believe the victim idea is
something that only a fool could could
could conjure up because it opens the
door to to unbelievable opportunity for
manipulation I think I was disagree with
you in slightly on that because I think
what that means is what people are
arguing for is don’t instantly dismiss
or disbelieve the victim right which is
very matter and that’s partly whatever
there’s plenty of people who are arguing
for the fundamental attitude to be
believed the victim so some people are
arguing to not automatically disbelieve
the victim
which is a perfectly reasonable thing to
argue for but that isn’t where it ends
so ok climate change
I saw you posting a link to a study
suggesting that you know a lot of the
the weather it’s talked about has been
overhyped what do you what do you what
are your beliefs about well I spent a
lot of time I don’t really have beliefs
about climate change I wouldn’t say I
mean I think the climate is probably
warming but it’s been warming since the
last ice age so I don’t accelerated in a
lot even in the last yeah maybe possibly
it’s not so obvious I spent quite a bit
of time going through the relevant
literature ice I read about 200 books on
ecological what would you call it on
ecology and economy when I worked for
the UN for about a two-year period and
it’s not so obvious what’s happening
just like with any complex system the
problem I have fundamentally isn’t
really the climate change issue it’s
that I find it very difficult to
distinguish valid environmental claims
from environmental claims that are made
as a what would you call it secondary
anti-capitalist
front essentially so it’s so politicized
that it’s very difficult to parse out
the data from the politicization so I
saw there’s a line in 12 rules which
says people stricken with poverty don’t
care about carbon dioxide
yeah there’s that’s definitely the case
and I think that’s not an unreasonable
point to make because you think about
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs right people
if you can’t eat then actually you can’t
really worry about what’s happening in
50 years to the planet however I don’t
think that’s a reason not to tackle
climate change because those same people
people in the global science it’s partly
a reason is it though because people in
the global several generated plants stop
people from starving so yes it’s partly
a reason and it’s certainly the case
that making energy more expensive
obviously makes things more difficult
for poor people so yes it’s definitely
an issue and I would say you know it’s
kind of a conundrum for those on the
left it’s like what’s it gonna be clean
air or hungry people think well we don’t
have to choose it’s like okay
oh renewable energy or whoo good luck
with that Oh nuclear power happy find oh
well we doesn’t look like we’re moving
in that direct
very fast but that is it that is a
solution and then while it worked for
the French yeah I was fascinated David
Adom is something kind of close to a
national religion in Britain so there’s
a bit where you say population control
advocates like him you can fend to Eric
Harris one of the Columbine killers why
then is it virtuous to propose that the
planet might be better off if there are
fewer people on it and I found that
completely boggling that you have elided
their population control through people
not to being born and the mass slaughter
of people who are already alive
motivation that I question right tell me
more about that well what kind of
statement is the planet would be better
off with fewer people on it first of all
there’s an easy solution to that you
could leave unfortunately much the best
efforts of Elon Musk that is not yet an
option
permanently I mean that’s what I meant
yes if you’re very concerned about your
carbon footprint there’s a very fast
solution to that so and I think it’s
disingenuous to what’s the other people
or maybe it’s the people who haven’t
been born yet it’s like I don’t I’m
there’s a this is also the problem I
have with much of the environmentalist
movement is there’s a powerful stream of
anti human sentiment that motivates it
and masquerading under the guise of
virtue on a planetary scale it’s like
could be I mean it’s not like we’re not
fouling our own nest you know but that’s
why I’m fascinated by where you come
from is because the book you know is so
much about things being in balance and
harmony right an order and chaos
outweigh each other
well what overpopulation has done is got
to this which says we have
overpopulation well I think it’s very
difficult to see under the current model
of fossil fuel based capitalism sorry to
use that word I know I’m set to you but
that is what you until we’ve until we’ve
run it when we run out of fossil fuel
yeah that’s not gonna happen well it
will happen yeah because they’re people
I’m saying that’s going to happen for 50
years and now that now the United States
is a net exporter of fossil fuel all
right and so no one saw that coming did
they but it happened and you’re right
that might be the case but at the moment
I would say that you know China is
putting up new coal-fired power stations
you know by the bucketload it was
entirely possible that the stuff that
the developed nations did
that nidavellir nations did and then it
concerned about clean air when they get
richer that’s what the data indicate
once you get GDP up to about $5,000 per
year people start to become concerned
with environmental issues so if we make
that might have enough I don’t think so
it’ll happen too late for some things it
looks like we’re gonna top out at about
9 billion I think we can handle that I
think probably people one of the
problems that will be set us in a
hundred years assuming there are even
creatures like us around in a hundred
years is that there’ll be too few people
not too many
you know the projections talk about at
about nine billion it’s only two billion
more than we have now or there’s every
reason to assume that we can cope with
that especially given the rapid
decreases in poverty around the world at
the moment there’s a bit of a bottleneck
they’ll probably be some more extinction
what we’re doing to the oceans by
overfishing doesn’t seem very smart but
we’ve only been aware of our role as
planetary stewards since 1960 I would
say and we’re not doing too bad for
people who just woke up to the fact that
we actually have that were actually a
planetary force and I don’t think that
we’re overpopulated I think all the
arguments that all that all the people
who made those arguments in the 1960s
like Paul Ehrlich I think he wrote the
Population Bomb predicted mass
starvation by the year 2000 he was
absolutely and completely wrong we’ve
been very lucky with things like golden
rice for example genetic engineering of
crops I think maybe that’s not luck well
no it is it is I agree there a human
ingenuity is a huge part of that death
right well then more people you know
more ingenuity you know in Bjorn long
burg who I really admire The Skeptical
environmentalist who’s actually going a
very long ways to trying to figure out
what we could do at a planetary level
that would actually be useful and
productive his research has indicated
the best the best possible investment
isn’t carbon tax isn’t cessation of
utilization of carbon-based fuel it’s
probably investment in early infant care
around the world especially in
developing countries seems right to me
he’s done the analysis very carefully
one more area that you talked about
that’s caused controversies gay
parenting you said the devil is in the
detail you want to see
more studies on that what do you think
might be the adverse effects of having
same-sex parents well I don’t think we
know what modeling is optimal for
children that’s really the issue I mean
I suspect that two parents are better
than one suspect right I don’t know one
parent is definitely worse than two we
know that but we don’t know what
exposure to role model saying is
necessary for the continuity of maternal
behavior or for the adoption of
functional gender roles we don’t know
any of that and so that’s the variable
obviously you don’t no one knows what
the consequence of being raised with two
people of the same sex is maybe none
right so there doesn’t seem to be any
evidence so far that’s that’s what all
the literature review suggests that
absolute there wasn’t there were a
couple that work did show problems but
they were in in in my couple domes that
had already broken down right so so
there is no as net no evidence maybe
there will be some fine but at the
moment there is no evidence that there
is any problem with having gay parents
yeah I never said there was I somebody
asked me I believe it was a question
like if there was a problem what would
it be
it’s something like that no I mean you
can make a very strong conservative case
for gay marriage I think yeah not that I
would necessarily be motivated to make a
conservative argument David Cameron our
former prime minister said I’m support
gay marriage because I’m a concern yes
right right so you know it’s it it’s
obviously homosexuality is it’s been
around forever also what’s the
appropriate social response to that well
conceivably bringing as many people as
possible into something approximating
the same game I think you could make a
reasonable case for that what’s the
consequence of that for children in
those families I don’t know I mean what
I would say is while the obvious risk is
that there’s no one of the opposite sex
around I mean it doesn’t take up
what do you hear doesn’t take the
perception of genius to come up with the
observation that that might be a problem
now maybe it’s not and my suspicions are
there’s probably far more relevant
problems with regards to what happens to
children that isn’t good than that so
this is a way in which you know that is
now conserved addition to hold I think
it’s about 20 years ago that would have
been another mature mainstream well
people were concerned with the
deterioration of marriage and believed
that any additional transformations
would further weaken it and I think that
that’s not an unreasonable position
given how weak it’s become and I don’t
think that that’s been good for people
overall okay let’s talk about free
speech to finish on you wrote in your
book about Nietzsche who became the
Nazis favorite intellectual and you also
talked about a professor he threw his
sister’s mistranslations of his work
right but you talked a little bit as
well about another professor whose ideas
you thought led inevitably to kind of
maoism and you said I don’t know how he
can’t be more worried about where his
ideas lead do you worry about wait you
know where your work might be taken and
used by the people I saw you propose II
worry about that all the time with a
Pepe flag I can’t believe you brought
that up right but I just think it’s
seriously I can’t believe you brought
that up you should go online yeah I do
there there’s a believe me I do there’s
a video called
I think it’s called is Jordan Peterson
and darling of the all right have you
have you written have you watched the
video of the person who put up that Pepe
flag with me he’s online but I got watch
it I have seen what you wouldn’t I would
say why are you concerned about Pepe
anyways Jesus he disappeared like three
years ago it is and most of that was
trolling by young guys who were trying
to drag the media into idiot accusations
like the idea that this was a white
supremacist gesture which I was asked
about on CBC it’s like no it wasn’t it
was Fortran trolls playing the media for
fools which worked and much of the pepe
thing was that as well but the problem
with people ironically pretending to be
Nazis on the internet they weren’t
pretending to be nice but no this is a
separate phenomenon and a fortune
definitely do ironically return to be
all the worst things they can possibly
be is that some people take that very
seriously there was a case in America
recently of a guy who stabbed his
because he had thought that his father
was a Democrat he’d got better he was
writing stuff for a conservative website
he’d got very into the pizza gate
conspiracy theory who’s probably
paranoid right so there are people very
very seriously I mean latch on to it
what’s your point I’m I saying that you
know how much responsibility do you feel
you have particular it’s the OLT right
as you say some of them have enjoyed
your work and I’m not one of you I’m not
one of you guys I’m not with you can
they haven’t enjoyed my work I’ve
definitely read bits on the integrate
more okay find some evidence I’m
extraordinarily sick and tired of this
particular accusation slash line of
questioning I’m no fan of the
identitarian right the ethno nationalist
the all right first of all what do you
mean by all right exactly do you mean
ethno-nationalism eat white supremacists
no I mean people who are on the right
but have got their power base outside
the traditional media they see
themselves as an alternative so I see
them comes a pretty loose definition
that straight Rush Limbaugh kind of talk
radio right people who see themselves in
opposition to Rush Limbaugh’s not the
alt-right
have been around for 30 years right so
he’s the progenitor of what I see now
Breitbart and things like that other new
media version of that very old media
well let’s define what constitutes all
right first for me there
ethno-nationalism M assists and
generally when people tar me with an
alright epithet the reason they’re doing
that is to associate me with those
people they don’t like me and the reason
for that is that as me I’ve made it very
clear not only in my videos but on
Twitter that I don’t like them I don’t
like their anti-semitism I don’t like
their use of identity politics I don’t
agree with their aims I think that their
notion is something like well if
everybody’s going to play identity
politics we’re going to play it too and
we’re going to win and I can certainly
understand that motivation but I think
it’s a bad game all around and I think
the only reason that I was ever
associated in any sense whatsoever with
anything to do with the alt-right was
because it was extremely convenient of
the radical leftists who I fundamentally
detest to paint me as a representative
of that viewpoint right there other than
that zero now there’s no what I did you
say it so I no point did I say well you
brought up the whole price and I did
bring that but there was a reason I did
that which is that Nietzsche
that I’m an auntie auntie see my right
and yet his ideology and his philosophy
ended up being used by the Nazis so my
question to you is how much
responsibility do you feel about what I
feel it’s not how much responsibility I
feel it’s how much responsibility I take
right right and I take as much
responsibility as I possibly can right
which is why I’m doing what I’m doing
but I’m going around the world I’m
talking in different cities I’m talking
to people as much as I can I’m putting
out content that I think is useful for
people online and I’m clarifying what I
think I have 300 videos on YouTube
virtually for all intents and purposes
every single word I’ve said to students
in a professional capacity since 1992
and despite the fact that I have
innumerable
highly motivated enemies they haven’t
been able to find one thing I’ve said in
30 years that what would you say
justifies any of those accusations or
any other accusations for that matter so
it’s uh it’s it’s quite the phenomena I
mean I understand it to some degree you
know you can you can help me explains
why why did you pose with it what were
your reasons for doing it do people just
come up and bring it to you and yeah I
was like posing with I probably been
photographed with I don’t know five
thousand people in the last two years
and you know it’s one after the other
often in groups of a hundred 150 or 200
people and it just it’s like 15 seconds
right and they brought this flag one of
them had spoken at the event they were
doing it ironically they unfurled the
flag and we took a picture and that was
that would you oppose ironically with a
hammer and sickle flag
I’d I don’t know under the circumstances
how what I would have done I have all
sorts of Soviet art in my house anybody
could get caught out and social
embarrassment is a huge factor and you
don’t want to kind of tell people who’ve
been very nice to you that actual you
don’t want to do the thing I just wonder
if that’s something that you regret now
that you wouldn’t do again if you if you
have the opportunity well I don’t think
it did me any good
ah I don’t think I’ll betray my former
self we’ll just leave it where it is I
made the decision that I made under the
circumstances and took what was there
into consideration I think that I think
that the Pepe formulators did a
wonderful job of trolling the standard
media I don’t think that they were what
everyone presumed them to be I think we
did a wonderful job of trolling you as
well in a sense right recruiting you and
your image and your appeal to people to
to their kind of cause which is ironic I
don’t really think so it is not actually
under you know underneath it all I don’t
find it very ironic actually
what don’t you find out Roenick then a
lot of the kind of 4chan culture which
is saying I’m just gonna say the worst
possible thing that I can say just to
prove that I can say it because free
speech is still alive I think that in
itself is quite poisonous to the
discourse I think I try and conduct
myself online in a relatively civilized
manner I do not always succeed but I do
not think just going into a room and
screaming epithets is something that I
need to do on a daily basis to prove
that free speech isn’t dead right I
think we could probably agree okay it’s
a reasonable reasonable a rare note of
consensus I but I have to come back to
the free speech idea because I think
that whole idea the intellectual dark
web and this came up a couple of times
at your event on Thursday it’s
predicated on the idea that you have
been marginalized for your opinions or a
press for your pain predicated on my
claim of that right it’s predicated on
well I don’t know I’m not claiming I’ve
been marginalized I would never use that
word first of all that’s for sure so but
the idea of Adar don’t feel oppressed
good I’m pleased to hear it but I do
think that the way that you you’ve got
the cheers from that crowd was very much
about there was an idea of taboo
breaking right that all this is a
microaggression but I’m gonna say it
anyway that you know hard work is the
way to succeed and I thought that was
fascinating because to me you don’t look
like somebody who has particularly
suffered an outrageous amount for your
opinions people have certainly disagreed
they’ve been rude they’ve met me or
they’ve in some cases the only reason I
haven’t suffered an outrageous amount
for my opinions is because I’ve handled
the consequence of their utterance
exceptionally
my job was at risk my career was at risk
my family stability was at risk so I
wouldn’t push that one too far and what
way was your job at risk Jesus
last year 200 of my fellow faculty
members signed a petition to get me
fired that was only one of a dozen
things that happened the university
wrote me two letters to cease and desist
letters from their HR departments with
their legal staff three of those in
you’re done they just fired Rick Maeda
in Canada at Acadia University for
talking about many of the same things
that I’ve talked about so the fact that
I’ve come through this relatively
unscathed has very little to do with the
vitriol of the attacks there was plenty
of motivation to take me out it just
didn’t work right and I think the fact
that it didn’t work to me makes me
ultimately optimistic about where we are
because I’ve why because I have to work
I went on I did a panel a while ago with
zarg Inara a Burmese comedian who was
imprisoned for making a joke right and
we are not yet at that stage I think
undoubtedly I cannot we’re damn close
really um how about the guy with the pug
in the UK count dunk EULA that’s the one
right but he did actually I mean that
was a joke i and might not have liked it
I didn’t say it was a good joke I didn’t
say it was an appropriate joke I didn’t
say any of that I didn’t say it was a
well thought through joke but it was a
joke
yeah I don’t I just fundamentally not
don’t believe that it was a joke I
believe that it was coming out as a joke
and that’s what it kind of cares right
well that’s exactly what you would
believe if you were inclined to
persecute comedians no I’m not inclined
to persecute something well you’re
inclined to persecute him I don’t think
he’s a comedian and I don’t think III I
would have to go and look at the
circumstances of that case but I I think
he didn’t like his girlfriend’s pug and
thought he would teach it to do
something reprehensible as a joke right
but I see you getting involved say
tweeting Douglas Murray’s asked all that
Tommy Robinson and I think you see that
as a free speech issue and that’s not
how I see Tommy Robinson’s case at all I
see that as contempt of court someone
who endangered a grooming trial how do
you see that case I see it as very
fortunate that Tommy Robinson didn’t die
in prison I think I would say that about
a lot
people and president I think it’s very
hard to be in prison if you are a sex
offender for example I think our British
prisons are less inhumane an American
presence but there are still brutal
places to be however I do think that was
an appropriate punishment for somebody
who tried to collapse a grooming trial
well but you and I guess you have Tory
you have prison abolitionist no oh right
okay so you do believe that some people
there are offenses for which people need
to go to prison why would you ask me a
question like that I’m someone who isn’t
interested in meeting out appropriate
punishment no but I just thought maybe I
versus made an assumption about you and
I didn’t want to make an assumption
about you um I’m just gonna in with a
quick fire round so I know that this
isn’t well this is YouTube so we have
been able to talk for a really long time
but I just want quick answers from you
who is your favorite author Dostoyevsky
who’s your favorite female author
Margaret Laurence I think I don’t know
her she’s a Canadian author kind of an
antidote to Margaret Atwood in my
estimation okay when did you last cry Oh
God who knows last week probably who is
your smartest opponent
hmm Sam Harris is pretty smart because
you had debates about atheism with him
and about rationality yeah I don’t
really regard him exactly as an opponent
you know I mean we disagree on things I
don’t really tend to think of people as
opponents generally I mean but Harris is
you know Harris is smart he’s good at
making his case and so that’s been
that’s been interesting
what big question don’t you know the
answer to what big question don’t I know
the answer to well god that’s a tough
one there’s so many of them
well personally it’s what I should do in
two years when did you last change your
mind about something important I’m
changing my mind about things all the
time
every time I do a lecture I changed my
mind about something but something
important something big oh well all
right well I can tell you I mean one
thing I’ve learned in the last two years
is that I think I overestimated there’s
an obesity epidemic in North America
perhaps throughout the Western world I
think I overestimated the degree to
which that was a consequence of a
sedentary lifestyle and overestimated
the degree to which a lack of discipline
was contributing to it I think I think
much more now that it’s an illness those
are two different things I want they
discipline is self-control and illness
isn’t something I interview well let’s
say you’re overweight you should
exercise it’s like well actually the
evidence that exercise will thin you
down isn’t that great and maybe the
reason that you’re not exercising is
because you’re ill not that you’re ill
because you’re not exercising so I’ve I
have a lot more sympathy for the
hypothesis that the obesity epidemic is
actually a consequence of a of an
illness of a broad scale illness isn’t
exactly right it’s a dietary problem
fundamentally and their deep causes for
that are you still eating your old beef
diet
unfortunately yes really just just beef
nope can you have like ketchup on it
nothing right yes I wouldn’t it isn’t
something I would lightly recommend it’s
a little hard on your social life makes
travelling quite difficult and it’s dull
as hell but but but what’s it what has
it done for you well I lost 50 pounds in
seven months
I stopped snoring I had some autoimmune
conditions that seemed to have gone away
I’m not taking antidepressants my mood
isn’t perfectly regulated but I’m under
a fair bit of stress
that might have something to do with it
I sleep much less I can work more
[Music]
imaginary you’re insane I don’t I drink
shape I don’t think there’s any evidence
that that I don’t think we have any idea
what causes arteriosclerosis I think all
of the dietary knowledge we have is is
rubbish and if partly because it’s
unbelievably difficult to do proper
dietary studies you can’t do controlled
studies say it’s all correlational and
there’s so many variables I think the
correlational studies are useless so
also the this all meat diet this all
beef diet has apparently cured my
daughter so you can that rheumatoid
arthritis well that was the original
diagnosis then it was idiopathic which
means we don’t know it was causing it
yeah but she’s completely symptom free
so that sort of thing makes you sit up
and take notice because it doesn’t make
any sense well miss the last time you
lied because the book says no lying
do you still lie everybody lies as dr.
house himself told us mm-hmm what is
most important pretty damn careful about
it what is most important to you in life
not being stupid how would you like
making foolish mistakes not being in
cautious yeah that’s tough one yourself
life’s tough man right how would your
life have been different if you’ve been
born female multiple orgasms it’s not a
bad one what’s your biggest regret that
I didn’t take advantage of the
opportunity to learn to play the organ
when I was seven if that’s your biggest
regret this isn’t going to be a great
death bed because that’s yeah well I
know I would have liked it would have
been better for me if I would have been
better musician and finally how would
you like to be remembered
as someone honest dr. Jordan Pearson
thank you very much