One and the Other

Ying and Yang

Cain and Abel

Peterson and Fry

I listened to a very thought provoking podcast a couple of days ago, a conversation between Jordan Peterson and Stephen Fry. The two are very intelligent and have very different and persuasive views of the world. Fry describes himself as a luke warm leftist, while JP is a moderate righty. They have both delved recently into the stories of the past (Fry - Mythos, Heroes and Try, JP - The Bible) for what would seem similar and different reasons. The common major trait that they both share is an epic level of curiosity, the steam engine which drives their work.

It was a strange experience listening to the podcast. One would put forth a theory or argument or point of view in a very persuasive manner (they are both masters of the arts of story telling and rhetoric). You'd go 'wow, that makes a lot of sense, sign me up, I'm convinced'. Then the other would counter with an even more compelling discussion. That pattern continues until the end of the podcast when I personally needed a break to go and do something else (let the diffuse brain process).  

After having a few days to digest - my thoughts are as follows. My summary is below (note this isn't there actual words, this is the crux of the point I believe they were trying to get across)

JP: We need some rules of thumb - in terms of morality, values, decision making - to live safely and effectively. God and religion pass down some of these rules, but in today's society, with atheism and nihilism on the rise, these rules are being neglected. I think this is dangerous. Shouldn't we protect the 'valuable' rules?

SF: There are no definite everlasting rules. Rules change - depending on situation, circumstances and knowledge. You have to think, be aware in the moment. I'm an empiricist and relativist. Dwell on this for a moment - even a generation we still have contact with, they couldn't get divorced or live with the person they loved. Think of how far science has taken us. In the 14th century God was the cause and reason for disease. Now we know its science.

JP: Yes but what about the fundamentals. For example - 'truth is to be sort after instead of falsehood.'

SF: Well yes, but even then effectiveness can be considered the measure of truth. What is effective in one situation may not be effective in another situation.

JP: People need something to build up off. They need rules of thumb. I've seen enough aimless, faithless people spiral into death and destruction. Something is needed to protect people, show them a path out of misery.

SF: The formulas you try to provide aren't life. It's like getting on a scenic tour bus ride, having the shutters down, and only listening to the guide at the front explain the scenery. Forget the formulas - open the shutters and look for yourself.

JP: People's lives are hard man. They are hard. They get attacked via marketing, they are bombarded with stimuli and addictive products. It is a complicated and fierce place. Plus some people don't have the IQ or the EQ to deal with a lot of what life throws at them. Trauma leads to delusion. Mindfulness is excellent, but some people just don't have the opportunity or capability or temperament or capacity to be mindful. They can't tell whether it is Cain or Abel whispering in their ear.

SF: I got bed each night worried about what I have done that day, who I may have offended. I think that is human nature. We still need to aspire for mindfulness. Forget the rationalists way of coming up with theories for everything and then fitting solutions to them. Experiment, try things, search for what works. Be curious.

I've written the word 'curious' twice now on this post. As mentioned above - I think that is something that binds these two together. Different ways of approaching the world - curiosity is what brings them through.

Like everything life is a balance - and it works on different levels.

Zoom in - On a micro level when I am tired, possibly fighting off a cold, have little sleep because children have kept me up the night before, brain is tired, soul is tired, how do I respond to an insult? I go to a rule of thumb which is "It is to one's glory to overlook an insult". I hold the principle of forgiveness as an important value. I'm in Kahneman's System 1, and I can't tell the difference between whether Cain or Abel is whispering in my ear, so I go to my playbook.

Zoom out - On a higher level, when I have energy, I've just meditated and I'm feeling good and in nature, I'm more likely in Kahneman's System 2 state. A situation may occur. I might meet a friend who is having trouble with reducing alcohol in take. I may just let the words flow from my mouth in that moment. I've got the energy to sense that I'm listening to Abel. The higher self is flowing through me.

It's a balance.

What kind of system is that? Ambiguity abounds.

Well I don't think we were evolved to have as much stuff thrown at us as we do in today's age. This drains energy and leads us to being in System 1 more often. Hence why I think a good set of principles is vital for today.

BUT

It isn't everything. In fact the aim is to get more mindful, to operate more often in System 2. Awareness. Naval talks about getting you rich so you can stop worrying about money and (basically) have more time and energy to operate in system 2. De Mello talks about letting go of attachments, the stupid crap that drives a lot of behaviour, resulting in selecting situations of low energy system-1-ness.

JP is trying to find a neat solution that can rely on rules. That is important. It is just not everything.

SF is a very intelligent man, who is now very wealthy and probably can reside in System 2, where he has more time to connect with his higher intelligence to guide his actions. This is the best state - the problem is most people aren't in the same situation. What he has to say is important also. It's just not everything.

Funny how the best explanations in life seem to be paradoxes. Curious.