research survey

View Poll

Dude, so let’s chill for a sec and talk about American politics, right? Picture yourself in your cozy spot, maybe with some snacks—gotta have those munchies while diving into this heavy stuff. You’re scrolling through the news, and it hits you how wild and complicated it all is.

Now, the idea of a Black woman becoming president? Man, that’s both super exciting and a bit nerve-wracking. Like, we’ve seen some major strides, especially with Kamala Harris making history as VP. But then you think, “Is that really enough?” It’s like every time we take a step forward, there’s some crazy backlash trying to pull us back, you know?

And the more you look at it, the more you wonder—what’s really going on behind the scenes? It feels like there are so many forces at play, and sometimes it’s hard to tell if they’re working for us or against us. You start to think about how the system can be rigged, keeping certain voices from breaking through, and that paranoia creeps in. Are they just letting a few people through the door to keep the rest of us from pushing in?

But here’s the thing—every time someone like Kamala steps up, it sends a message, right? It shows that change is possible, and more folks are starting to demand representation. You can almost feel the energy shifting, especially with younger voters who are all about inclusivity and making their voices heard. It’s like the tides are turning, man!

Still, you can’t shake the feeling that the road ahead is gonna be bumpy. There’s a lot of work to do to really break down those barriers. But imagining a future where a Black woman is leading the country? That’s like a dream, man. It’s hopeful but also tinged with the reality that we’re not there yet.

So, you sit back, munching on your snacks, and you think, “Maybe one day, we’ll see that happen.” And when it does, it’ll be a huge moment—a sign that we can rise above all the craziness and really embrace the diversity that makes this country what it is. It’s all part of the journey, and who knows what the future holds, right? Just gotta stay hopeful and keep pushing for change!

When I think about the concepts of the little 's' self and the Big "S" Self, it feels like they represent two sides of our internal world that we’re constantly navigating. The little 's' self captures those in-the-moment impulses, driven by immediate needs and instincts that we often don’t stop to think about. These instincts, or what I call unconscious Wills, guide much of our day-to-day actions and reactions without our explicit awareness. For instance, the Will to Gluttony might drive us to grab a cookie without questioning why we’re reaching for it, or the Will to Anger might cause us to lash out without considering the consequences. These unconscious Wills are like echoes from our animal ancestors, essential for survival but often at odds with our more reflective aspirations.

That’s where the Big "S" Self comes into play. It’s not just an in-the-moment self but rather the accumulation of all those moments where we make choices, reflecting who we strive to be over the long term. It’s tied to our higher-order Wills—those unconscious values that motivation us, that we've adopted from those that we admire, and are driven to cultivate. These are the Wills that aren’t about momentary satisfaction, but about embodying values that align with who we want to become. The Big "S" Self is where our aspirations live: things like being kind, patient, disciplined, or understanding. It represents that larger narrative we tell ourselves about the person we want to be, not just now but as we grow and change.

The thing is, both the little 's' self and the Big "S" Self are largely unconscious forces. This might seem surprising since we tend to associate long-term aspirations and values with conscious reflection, but often, they too can be deeply embedded and go unnoticed in our day-to-day lives. This is why a quote by Carl Jung’s often humbles those who hear it:

“Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.”

Our little 's' self and Big "S" Self are always active, pushing and pulling at us, but without conscious awareness, we’re often at their mercy. When an unconscious Will like Gluttony or Pride takes over, we might rationalise it later, calling it fate or saying, "that's just who I am.". In this sense we are rational beings in that we can rationalise our behaviour, not because we act rationally.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. The idea is that we can bring these unconscious Wills into the light of conscious awareness, so they don’t continue directing our lives from the shadows. By cultivating self-awareness, we start recognising these Wills as they arise and gain the opportunity to choose whether to follow them or not. This brings us into that space of Free Will, where we can make deliberate choices instead of simply reacting to whatever our instincts push us towards.

When we’re driven purely by those unconscious Wills, like Gluttony, Anger, or Sloth, it’s easy to fall into reactive behaviours—those little 's' self's impulses. But when we bring awareness into the mix, when we reflect on these impulses and consciously choose whether or not to act on them, we shift from reacting to intentionally shaping our actions. We step into the space of the Big "S" Self. This isn’t just a one-time decision; it’s an ongoing practice of reflecting on our motivations and making deliberate choices to embody higher Wills, like the Will to Abstain or the Will to Patience.

The way I see it, self-control isn’t just about denying those base impulses—it’s about understanding them and choosing how to respond. The more aware we become of the unconscious Wills that are pushing us, the more equipped we are to decide whether we want to follow their lead. Through self-awareness, we can recognise when we’re being nudged by a craving or a flash of anger, and consciously choose to act in line with our higher values instead. It’s a process of balancing the little 's' self’s immediate desires with the Big "S" Self’s long-term vision.

The Buddha’s teachings on Vipassana meditation fit well into this idea. Vipassana teaches us to observe sensations in our body without immediately reacting to them.. These sensations are often the first signals of an unconscious Will at play, and by observing them, we can create that essential space between sensation and reaction. For example, when we feel hunger, the Will to Gluttony might push us towards easy comfort foods, but through awareness, we can reflect on that urge and decide to make a healthier choice—or to abstain entirely if the hunger is rooted in something other than physical need. These sensations we feel aren't just physical, they can also be emotional, as well as thoughts. The practice of observing sensations helps us build self-awareness, which in turn strengthens our self-control and lets us choose which Wills to follow.

As we build this self-awareness and self-control, we strengthen what can be called our Will Power. Neuroscience backs this up; studies have shown that exercising discipline strengthens regions in the brain associated with self-control (anterior mid-cingulate cortex), while giving into temptations weakens them. It’s as if every choice we make either builds or erodes our capacity for Big "S" self-control. So, when we consciously resist lower-order Wills like Gluttony or Anger, we not only resist them in that moment but also make it easier to resist them in the future.

This combination of awareness and self-control doesn’t just impact our own growth—it also ripples out into our communities. When we act out of unconscious impulses, we often harm others or fail to live up to our responsibilities. But when we intentionally align our actions with our higher values, we contribute to the well-being of those around us. It’s a shift from living reactively to living deliberately, guided not by fleeting cravings or emotions but by the person we aim to become.

The more I reflect on it, the more it feels like Free Will exists on two levels. There’s the microscopic view, which is about the immediate choices we make in response to an impulse or situation—whether to eat that cookie or not, whether to lash out or take a deep breath. But there’s also a macroscopic view, where Free Will involves choosing which Wills we want to embody and cultivate over time. It’s not just about resisting individual impulses, but about shaping the kind of person we are becoming.

Ultimately, the little 's' self and the Big "S" Self are both parts of who we are, constantly in this internal battle to direct the organism. When we give these unconscious wills our conscious attention, we increase our propensity to favour one over the other and if we so desire can make the deliberate choices that align with the person we aspire to be. As Carl Jung put it, “Until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate.” The unconscious battle of wills between those of the little "s" self, and the Big "S" Self have directed our ancestors all the way back to the beginning of life itself. Now with consciousness, it seems to be our task to shine a light on those unconscious forces, not to rid ourselves of them, but to transform them into intentional actions that lead towards growth—for ourselves and our communities.

https://preview.redd.it/gymmkk7ttzxd1.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=b87157d80ff652f708c6538efecf8a0669ff2dd2

There is considerable debate with regards to what is the truest perspective. Many people have come to a conclusion that there is no objective truth and there is only subjective truths, but ironically those same people tend to claim that their perspective (no objective truth) is better than others, however they may try to coat it.

There are ways of determining what is true and what is not true. There are ways to determine what comes from an ideology or dogmatic rigid thinking, and what is actually free from ideology and cultish thought.

One good indicator is if there is no pressure to get you to conform or be converted to a collective conformity. If your entire group believes the same thing, and they want you to believe it too, then that is not truth, that is peer pressure or peer pressure adjacent.

When the message is simply " know thyself" and there is no judging or wanting to prove you wrong, then that is going to be more true than someone who is trying to loudly proclaim who you are and what your motives are.

SYMPTOMS OF TRUTH

The symptoms of truth are when you feel empowered and inspired. When you are not suffering and you feel in harmony with the universe, then know that your perspective is more true than someone who suffers and feels disconnected. Misery loves company and there are lots of miserable people that will want to win you over to their perspective so that you can be miserable together.

It is common sense that Truth and Love are both positive. They make you feel good. Anyone who tries to claim that love and truth are neither positive nor negative, goes against proveable common sense. When you believe something you can't rationally prove, that tends to be more ideological.

Love is what everyone needs, even the people who say they don't. Truth is inspiring to everyone, even to those who say it doesn't. The reason that these statements are true is simply because only those minds who don't yet know truth and love would disagree.

As I was listening and reading about the recent Jordan Peterson's and Richard Dawkins's interview, it got me thinking about the role of symbols, metaphors and the point of mythological stories, and how differently symbols, such as dragons etc., are viewed not just between Peterson and Dawkins, but also in Eastern and Western cultures.

It's a prime example of how the same symbol can hold vastly different meanings across various people and cultures, since people tend to interpret the symbols of other cultures through the lens or framework of their own cultural backgrounds and experiences.

For example, * in the West, dragons are usually seen as fierce, fire-breathing beasts that hoard treasure and terrorize villages. Think Smaug from The Hobbit or Maleficent’s dragon form in Sleeping Beauty. They’re often symbolic of chaos, greed, and destruction, and heroes are often tasked with slaying them.

• However, in Chinese culture, dragons are revered as powerful, sacred and benevolent, and are associated with good fortune, wisdom, and protection. They are seen as guardians of rivers and seas, and they are thought to control rain and floods, and, consequently, dragons are often depicted in Chinese art and architecture, especially adorning palaces and temples, signifying their importance in Chinese culture.

And I think this difference in symbolism is quite fascinating! It seems to reflect differing cultural values and beliefs, such as, * Western culture has often emphasized individualism and the conquest of nature. Dragons, as embodiments of nature's power, often represent a force to be overcome, and thus, European cultures typically view the dragon as a symbol of evil and malevolence.

• In contrast, Chinese culture emphasizes harmony with nature and the importance of community. Dragons, as powerful but benevolent forces of nature, represent a source of protection and prosperity.

Whereas, while Peterson talked about the dragon only in the negative sense, as a metaphor for something evil and manevolent, a deep-seated archetypal "abstracted predator," representing the primal fear and chaos that humans have confronted throughout their evolutionary history, which Dawkins, coming from the framework of a literal scientific materialism, rejected as unnecessary and unimpressive since we already have the word "predator".

So, what do you guys think? Why are dragons viewed so differently in these cultures? What other examples of contrasting symbolism have you come across? Why is it that what might be a sacred and revered symbol in one culture could be seen as negative or even offensive in another? If transforming direct experiences into symbols, whether through sound, taste, literature, numbers, or visual representations like cave drawings and architecture, is considered the most characteristically human activity, why do different cultures do it in so vastly different and sometimes in seemingly opposing ways?

There was a very famous case of Joanne Dodd (who glassed a man at a pub for guessing her age incorrectly). It has articles on every major news outlets............except Yahoo.

I was able to find one trace of a Yahoo article on through google search, and when I clicked on it, it tells me that its been removed.

So a high profile public story of assault......and no mention of it on Yahoo (which is supposed to be one of the world's biggest news platforms).............interesting.

Yet when there is a case of male-on-female assault, Yahoo is the first to report on that. They just don't care when it happens the other way around.

I know most Peterson's fans are beyond reason, but I want to make the less radicalized ones think about the latest idiocies he said to Dawkins.

Is a dragon real because it represents a predator or danger? What do we mean by real? We mean that it exists empirically. An empirical object is real.

Now, can a methaphor (such as a dragon) be real? No, because if we consider pure abstractions real, then we no longer have a demarcation criteria between reality and fantasy. This means that we can throw science out of the window, Example: are you sick? Then make this sciamanic ritual instead of taking this medicine, after all they're all in the realm of reality, so they're equal, right?

Can you see the problem with this? Can you see where the actual application of such a criteria would lead us? Say goodbye to engineering, medicine, and all the other disciplines that make our life what it is now, because if dragons are real, so is magic. And I, as a magician, can sell you this wonderful incantation that will make your cancer disappear.

And is fire a predator? No, obviously, because a predator is a specific category that designates a living animal that poses a threat to another. Fire can be dangerous, or useful, but it's definitely not a predator.

Now I know that the more radicalized members of the cult, being completely devoid of even basic notions of logic and education in general, will not bother with this. But I hope the less radicalized one will think about it, and especially about the consequences I highlighted.

An important point to the lobsters: If dragons are real and fire is a predator, in other words if words don't mean anything anymore and they can be used to indicate whatever you want, then you can be sure that a man can be a woman and a woman can be a man. Right? You don't get to play with language while telling others that their categories don't reflect a state of the world.

Right?

The joke's on you now, you are best buddies with the people you despised for so long. Congratulations!

I was bored. So, I asked ChatGPT to pretend it is Jordan Peterson and to talk about the psychological significance of Minecraft. The results were... entertaining, to say the least.

Don't forget to put on your Jordan/Kermit voice while reading this.

"Alright, alright, let’s dig into this because Minecraft—Minecraft is fascinating, right? It’s this seemingly simple game where you’re placed in a world with almost no instructions and given the freedom to create, to explore, to survive. And what does that remind us of? Well, it’s life, essentially. It’s a kind of stripped-down simulation of life itself, but in a way that captures some of the most fundamental aspects of human experience.

First, think about the concept of “Survival Mode.” In Minecraft, you’re dropped into this world with nothing. You’ve got no shelter, no tools, no food. And it’s a dangerous world—there are monsters that come out at night. You’re forced to confront the unknown, to develop skills, to build tools, to protect yourself. And this mirrors the human condition. We’re all, in some sense, dropped into a world that’s indifferent to our survival. We have to figure things out, we have to build a life from scratch, we have to secure ourselves against chaos. That’s an archetypal experience.

And then there’s the creative aspect. Minecraft gives you this raw material—blocks of dirt, wood, stone, iron—and with those materials, you can build… almost anything. It’s pure potential. And in that sense, it’s almost like an artistic endeavor. You take the raw chaos of the world, and you impose your vision, your order, on it. You make something meaningful out of it. And this act of creation, of taking unformed matter and building something purposeful, is central to human psychology. It’s part of what makes life meaningful. We’re creators, each of us, and Minecraft taps into that drive on a deep, instinctual level.

Now, let’s talk about exploration. Minecraft is, in part, about venturing into the unknown—into caves, into the Nether, into new biomes—and dealing with whatever you find there. And that’s exactly what we do in life. We push into the unknown, we take risks, we confront danger. And what happens in Minecraft if you’re not careful? You die, you lose everything. And that’s a powerful message about the consequences of venturing beyond your competence, right? You need to be prepared, you need to learn, you need to develop skill and discipline.

And, crucially, Minecraft is open-ended. There’s no final goal, no real endpoint. You can keep building, keep exploring, keep creating indefinitely. And that’s a bit like life too, because you’re never “done.” There’s always more you can create, more you can learn, more you can explore. It’s a game that encourages you to take responsibility for your world, for your experience in it, and it rewards that responsibility with the ability to shape your environment in a way that reflects your own values, your own desires.

So, at its core, Minecraft is a digital arena where players can experiment with these fundamental aspects of existence—survival, creation, exploration, responsibility. It’s almost a teaching tool for life, in a way, because it reinforces that we’re all capable of shaping the world around us, of making order out of chaos, but it’s up to us to do it. And that’s no trivial thing. That’s… that’s significant."

We trully live in fascinating times...

https://preview.redd.it/wf1xqoqdrxxd1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=182b16c71286ec21f168383f212dd9912acedb47

Hello, Dr. Peterson. Thank you for your lessons and books, it's been very inspiring to me to get my life in order, as many, many people your ideas helped to save.There's a case to be made for dragons. By watching your interview with Dr. Dawkins, it came to mind the following:

1. There's a case to be made for dragons, because without it you'll anchor yourself to the on reality too much, the current Being will be always that will be, also everything that could be. Many things science was able to make would, at some point, be considered fiction, or out of this reality: a dragon, a concept. It's by exploring "dragonic ideas", that we can expand our possibilities;
2. There's a documentary about the cannibal warlords of liberia, made by Vice 12 Years ago. It's very interesting to watch, because it shows how much a force Christianity can be. It's centered on the experiences of "General Butt Naked", because during Liberia's Civil War he'd go to the battlefront butt naked. That documentary has made it obvious that Christianity (and not science) was able to redeem a cannibal warlord, which admittedly used to practice black magic. That's real power to me, there's nothing like it in this world. That redemption went as far as to a civilization point in which 1^(st) world producers could feel they liked him and wanted to talk to him (on their own words);
3. The effects of Christianity are concrete and real. It has shaped our reality and the way we interact with each other. It's the cement that'll keep people who'd otherwise have every reason to disagree and kill because of their disagreement.

God bless you.

Best regards, from Brazil.

Jordan Peterson’s communication can sometimes create double binds, which is an interesting layer to his messaging. His nuanced views encourage both individualism and responsibility to social norms, which can feel contradictory at times. Here are some ways his communication style might create a double bind for his audience:

1. Individual Freedom vs. Responsibility to Tradition

   • Message 1: “Pursue individual growth, authenticity, and self-discovery.” • Contradictory Message: “Follow traditional structures and values; they provide meaning and stability.” • Double Bind: Peterson encourages people to “become who they are” and reach their unique potential, but he also stresses the importance of adhering to time-tested traditions and societal frameworks. For some, this creates a bind where they feel unable to fully explore their individuality without being pulled back into traditional expectations.

2. Rejecting Group Identity vs. Embracing Community Values

   • Message 1: “Avoid identity politics; focus on yourself as an individual, not as part of a group.” • Contradictory Message: “Value and support cultural and national traditions, which often rely on shared group identity.” • Double Bind: Peterson’s emphasis on individual responsibility can conflict with his calls for preserving collective cultural values. This can be challenging for people who want to focus on personal growth but also feel the need to identify with and defend their cultural or national community.

3. Personal Accountability vs. Systemic Critique

   • Message 1: “Take responsibility for your life; don’t blame external circumstances for your situation.” • Contradictory Message: “Critique modern systems (e.g., postmodernism, certain academic trends) that negatively affect people.” • Double Bind: Peterson emphasizes self-accountability, yet he also critiques institutional structures, such as certain ideologies or bureaucratic forces. Followers might feel confused about where to place blame when struggling, caught between self-improvement and systemic criticism.

4. Promoting Free Speech vs. Speaking Carefully

   • Message 1: “Exercise free speech openly and without fear.” • Contradictory Message: “Speak carefully; words have consequences and can lead to chaos if not handled with respect.” • Double Bind: Peterson advocates for open dialogue and free expression but also stresses that words are powerful and carry responsibility. This can be a double bind for those who want to express their thoughts freely but feel they must self-censor to avoid social or personal repercussions.

5. Balancing Chaos and Order

   • Message 1: “Embrace chaos for growth and resilience.” • Contradictory Message: “Seek stability, discipline, and order in your life to avoid chaos.” • Double Bind: Peterson uses the idea of balancing chaos and order as a central theme. However, the practical application can be difficult, as people may feel unsure about how much chaos they should embrace versus how much order they should impose, especially when both carry risks.

6. Challenge Norms vs. Respect Authority

   • Message 1: “Question authority and think independently.” • Contradictory Message: “Respect tradition, rules, and authority as stabilizing forces.” • Double Bind: Peterson encourages both questioning authority to develop personal insight and respecting established rules for societal stability. This may create confusion, especially in contexts where challenging authority seems necessary but could lead to personal or professional consequences.

7. Mental Health Advocacy vs. Tough Love

   • Message 1: “Address and take care of your mental health issues; seek help if needed.” • Contradictory Message: “Don’t let yourself fall into self-pity or victimhood; take ownership and responsibility.” • Double Bind: Peterson’s approach to mental health balances empathy with a “tough love” attitude. This can leave some feeling pressured to “just get over” their struggles rather than seeking support or accepting vulnerability, which can be a source of stress.

These double binds in Peterson’s messaging reflect the complex nature of his ideas, which sometimes seem to pull people in different directions. He often aims to help people navigate these contradictions by emphasizing personal responsibility and conscious choice. However, the inherent tension can still create challenges for his audience, who may struggle to reconcile conflicting expectations in a way that feels authentically aligned with Peterson’s teachings.

If millions of people starve Biden is responsible. He is culpable for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

You can’t claim that this is unacceptable now that Netanyahu has alleged 9 people working for UNWRA out of 13,000 were part of Hamas and may have participated in October 7th attacks. These were allegations not criminal prosecutions that led to guilty verdicts.

Why do I blame Biden? The president of the U.S. can and have placed limits on Israel in the past.

The best example is Ronald Reagan who called Menachem Begin during the invasion of Lebanon in the 1980s and Reagan demanded that Israel pull back its military attacks as too many civilians were getting killed. Yes Reagan, the patron saint of the Republican Party was able to place a restriction on the Israeli government and he wasn’t called a communist or a secret Muslim or the worst of all three a leftist socialist.

This is why Biden is responsible. The U.S. has leverage and can place strict limits on what Israel can and can’t do with our weapons and money.

My opinion and mine alone if Israel bans UNWRA then Israel needs to step in and take care of the 2.3 million Palestinians in Gaza. The Israelis destroyed the Gazan economy and infrastructure. Now they can take care of these people. The same in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/29/gaza-aid-unrwa-ban-guterres-israel-reaction

In a woman in my 30s and I’m realizing how jealous I am of powerful successful men. Men have built everything I have. And they also fix everything I have when broken.
Women do nothing like that. Women are lost and they ultimately just do what some powerful man somewhere (or a group of powerful men) tell them to do. Anyone else agree?

I was just watching the interview between Dr. Dawkins and Dr. Peterson and two ideas from Peterson were really interesting to me.

What does Peterson mean when he is talking about the metaphorical significance of the virgin birth and says "any culture that doesn't hold the image of the woman and infant sacred dies"? What would you all say is the evidence for this? and what does that mean?

The second was when he was talking about the idea that religion was a precursor to science and how science is suffering now because people are beginning to question/disregard the religious foundations that it was built on. What is the evidence for this and what do you all think of this idea?

I'm really curious about both of these ideas, but don't really understand them in a literal / historical sense.

When Jordan Peterson said in his recent X-menhe suspects that Trump only seems like a bully on the outside, because it's a mask for the pain he feels for others in the deepest and darkest tender recesses of his heart, I started to think this whole video was just going to be based on Peterson's gut. Because no proof was provided of this bold claim.

Fortunately, when it came to Peterson's analysis of Elon Musk, his work was much more rigorous. As evidence of Musk's love for humanity, he produced this irrefutable proof.

bravo again, Dr. P : you continue to astound and impress

That’s where we are. Two awful candidates Harris and Trump both supporting war crimes and genocide. Both will do nothing to stop these horrible crimes. There is just endless war and violence in both candidates.

Trump will give Ukraine to Russia and hope Russia will give up Iran so the U.S. can go to war against Iran.

Harris will keep these two wars going.

Neither candidate gives a damn about the American people. They are creatures of the military industrial complex.

Hey everyone, here's a video of JBP analyzing the children's book "If You Give a Mouse a Cookie" (links for whatever socials you have):

TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@motivationbyz/video/7425719888024440095

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/DBHfyTby12P/

Twitter: https://x.com/motivationbyz/status/1849518262201028803