✶Explainer08:30
Nietzsche on morality as cowardice, and why the best people are dangerous
Tim raises Peterson's use of Nietzsche's claim that most morality is cowardice. Peterson unpacks it directly: if you do not have the courage to commit a crime, not committing it does not make you moral, it just means you are afraid. He extends the point to mob violence — people riot because they do not think they will get caught, which reveals that their ordinary law-abidingness was fear of punishment rather than morality. Nietzsche, he notes, was careful to distinguish mere obedience from morality, and did not regard obedience as always a form of cowardice, because it can also be a source of discipline. Not committing a crime because you are too afraid to is probably better than committing it, but it does not speak to the essence of morality. The constructive version Peterson says he learned in part from Nietzsche is that there is a real utility in being able to do virtually anything and then controlling yourself. His exemplar is a close friend who has been a rock to him: also from northern Alberta, from a poverty-stricken background, worked in lead smelters and on oil rigs, went to university, then spent years as a social worker with delinquents across Canada. Tough as nails and a good disciplinarian, and also a very compassionate person — a moral person, in Peterson's judgement, because there is a real danger to him and he keeps it under control.
- Nietzsche's point is that an uncommitted crime you were too afraid to commit tells you nothing about your morality.
- Rioting exposes the difference: remove the expectation of punishment and the behaviour changes.
- Obedience is not always cowardice — Nietzsche allowed that it can also be a source of discipline.
- The transferable standard is being able to do virtually anything and then controlling yourself.
- Peterson's exemplar is a friend who is tough as nails, compassionate, not a coward, not afraid, not weak.
“well if you don't have the courage if you don't have the courage to commit a crime it doesn't mean you're moral for not doing…”
“there there's there's a certain utility in being able to do virtually anything and then to control yourself and that's something i learned in part…”
“the best people i've ever met are dangerous people”
#nietzsche#morality#courage#self-control#character
✶Explainer14:30
Consult your resentment: it is revelatory
Tim reads back Peterson's own line — consult your resentment, it is revelatory — and asks him to distinguish anger from resentment. Peterson points to rule 11 of Beyond Order: do not allow yourself to become resentful, deceitful or arrogant, which he calls the evil triad. Resentment is a bad emotion but a useful one, because you can learn a lot by noticing that it occurs. It tells you one of exactly two things: either someone is treading on your territory and something needs to be done about it, or you need to grow the hell up and stop complaining. It is not obvious which, and figuring that out is the work. The cost of leaving it unresolved is both moral and physical — you can harbour resentment for unlived life for a very long period and all it does is corrupt you, and because the body hyper-prepares for conflict you burn psychophysiological resources maintaining it. His prescription is to aim at a resentment-free existence, which means taking up enough space in a world where everyone competes for everyone else's attention and time. He also names the subtler failure: because it is easy to think you are better than you are, an insult that should register may not, so you never say anything, never do anything, and never fix it.
- Rule 11 of Beyond Order names resentment, deceit and arrogance as the evil triad.
- Resentment carries a binary message: your territory is being encroached, or you need to grow up.
- Which of the two applies is not self-evident, and determining it is the actual work.
- Unresolved resentment for unlived life corrupts you and burns real physiological resources.
- The target is a resentment-free existence, which requires taking up enough space.
- Wanting to think well of yourself can hide the insult from you entirely, so nothing gets fixed.
“consult your resentment it is revelatory”
“resentment tells you one of two things one is that you're that someone's treading on your territory and something needs to be done about it…”
“you can you can harbor resentment for for unlived life for for a very very long period of time and all it does is corrupt…”
#resentment#anger#beyond-order#emotional-diagnostics#maturity
✶Explainer37:00
Openness is not a free upgrade: the trait, the tradeoff, and unearned wisdom
Asked whether the openness increases produced by psychedelics would not be straightforwardly positive, Peterson answers: depends on how neurotic you are. He defines the trait — creativity and verbal fluency together, associated with verbal IQ — and situates it among the five: extraversion as positive emotion, neuroticism as negative emotion, agreeableness as compassion versus predatory aggression, conscientiousness as dutifulness and orderliness, and openness as intellect, interest in ideas and creativity. Then he refuses the inference: you might think the more of that the better, but that is not how nature works, and you can undo yourself by being open. His evolutionary argument is that there would not be variation in creativity if creativity were not dangerous, and there are many people very low in openness for a reason. Two costs are named. Open people struggle to catalyse an identity because they are protean, shift shapes constantly and are interested in everything, making it very hard to pursue one thing. And if you are high in negative emotion, openness becomes a curse, because exposure to uncertainty makes the body prepare for anything, which is expensive and physiologically demanding. Peterson diagnoses Tim as unambiguously high in openness given that he is entrepreneurial and interested in ideas, adding the conditional that carries the whole idea: if you can manage it, it is a great trait. When Tim describes the one-dose shift from the 50th to the 85th percentile as a major neurological rewiring, Peterson answers with Jung — beware of unearned wisdom.
- Openness is creativity plus verbal fluency, associated with verbal IQ, and one of the Big Five alongside extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness.
- More openness is not straightforwardly better; you can undo yourself by being open.
- Variation in creativity exists because creativity is dangerous, and low openness has real advantages.
- Open people are protean and interested in everything, which makes catalysing a single identity and pursuit very hard.
- High neuroticism turns openness into a curse, because facing uncertainty forces the body to prepare for anything.
- Peterson's verdict on the trait is conditional: if you can manage it, it is a great trait — and Jung's beware of unearned wisdom is the caution against acquiring it in one dose.
“openness isn't much fun if you're high in neuroticism all right because you continually undermine yourself”
“you might think the more of that the better but no that isn't how nature works you can undo yourself by being open”
“jung said beware of unearned wisdom”
#big-five#openness#neuroticism#creativity#personality
✶Explainer51:30
The hierarchy of values, and why Cain and Abel is one paragraph you can think about forever
Asked whether he recommends studying the Bible to everyone, Peterson declines to recommend anything to everyone but argues our culture grew out of the Bible, so if you want to know why you think as you do, that is where to look. Thoughts, he says, are greater than you are — it is rare to think something no one else has thought, and everyone is the unconscious proponent of some philosopher. Thought exists in a hierarchy organised around value, and a fundamental value is one on which many other values depend. His graded illustration: your wife skips her turn at the dishes and it is a minor league ontological shock, but once does not destabilise you because little depends on it; ten times and you start questioning her commitment, then her honesty, then the relationship; but an affair is a real shock, because you have modelled your plans and even your perception of the world on the assumption of fidelity, and when that is demolished the plans dissolve and uncertainty comes rushing in. The deeper you go, the more the values look religious — the point he says he tried to impress on Sam Harris. His exemplar text is Cain and Abel: a paragraph long, containing fratricidal murder with a genocidal twist, and it is all resentment. You make sacrifices on faith that fate will smile on you; sometimes the reward does not come, and the bitterness can grow until it destroys the ideal.
- Peterson argues the culture is grounded in the Bible, so it is where to look to understand why you think as you do.
- Everyone is the unconscious proponent of some philosopher, and thoughts are in that sense greater than the thinker.
- Values form a hierarchy in which fundamental values are those many other values depend on.
- The dishes-versus-affair example shows how destabilisation scales with how deep the violated assumption sits.
- The deepest values are religious almost by definition, which is the point he pressed on Sam Harris.
- Cain and Abel compresses fratricide, resentment and the destruction of the ideal into one paragraph he says he has never recovered from.
“everyone is the unconscious proponent of some philosopher”
“if your partner has an affair that tends to be quite a shock because you've modeled your plans for behavior and even for perception of…”
“the deepest questions are religious questions and the bible is the best answer we have and if you don't like that well fine do better…”
#bible#value-hierarchy#cain-and-abel#resentment#sam-harris