A fine introduction, and a fair one. Peterson’s work has done something few modern thinkers manage: he’s made moral seriousness contagious. His insight that meaning comes through responsibility, not self-expression, has struck deeper than any culture-war slogan ever could.
What stands out in his talks on Genesis and the Gospels is that he treats Scripture not as folklore or mere psychology but as a living grammar of being. When he says that civilization rests on voluntary sacrifice, he’s naming what the Christian tradition calls caritas, that is, love that bears the cost of the good. There’s a reason so many young people who start with Peterson end up reading Augustine, Aquinas, or even the Gospels themselves (talking also about myself). He’s re-opened the doorway between psychology and theology. In doing so, what he does is show that our moral life can’t survive without transcendence. The real question, as your conversation hints, is whether the logic of sacrifice can stand once the Cross is removed from it. Peterson circles that mystery with growing reverence. The task now is not to idolize the messenger but to follow where his questions point (even is the messenger doesnt go there) toward the source of meaning itself, where responsibility and grace meet.
A very interesting conversation, thanks James. Your approach towards the conversation was quite robust, I noticed. Was that a deliberate tactic? I can't decide myself whether it was wise or not, but there was plenty of great content nonetheless.
Yes, the order of reality is interesting and profound. As I tried to mention in my previous comments the question still remains in terms of the Abyss (Chaos) in relationship to Logos. But perhaps as C G Jung put it: ”within disorder a secret order”. I will try to get a copy of Petersons Maps of Meaning to understand him even better.
God bless Jordan.
A fine introduction, and a fair one. Peterson’s work has done something few modern thinkers manage: he’s made moral seriousness contagious. His insight that meaning comes through responsibility, not self-expression, has struck deeper than any culture-war slogan ever could.
What stands out in his talks on Genesis and the Gospels is that he treats Scripture not as folklore or mere psychology but as a living grammar of being. When he says that civilization rests on voluntary sacrifice, he’s naming what the Christian tradition calls caritas, that is, love that bears the cost of the good. There’s a reason so many young people who start with Peterson end up reading Augustine, Aquinas, or even the Gospels themselves (talking also about myself). He’s re-opened the doorway between psychology and theology. In doing so, what he does is show that our moral life can’t survive without transcendence. The real question, as your conversation hints, is whether the logic of sacrifice can stand once the Cross is removed from it. Peterson circles that mystery with growing reverence. The task now is not to idolize the messenger but to follow where his questions point (even is the messenger doesnt go there) toward the source of meaning itself, where responsibility and grace meet.
The fact that you posted this title with a black and white picture of Jordan freaked me out! I was fearing the worst.
A very interesting conversation, thanks James. Your approach towards the conversation was quite robust, I noticed. Was that a deliberate tactic? I can't decide myself whether it was wise or not, but there was plenty of great content nonetheless.
Yes, the order of reality is interesting and profound. As I tried to mention in my previous comments the question still remains in terms of the Abyss (Chaos) in relationship to Logos. But perhaps as C G Jung put it: ”within disorder a secret order”. I will try to get a copy of Petersons Maps of Meaning to understand him even better.
Looking forward to this.
A great guest would be Academic Agent real name Neema Parvini who wrote The Populist Delusion.