Name: Joe Rogan Experience #1769 - Jordan Peterson
Uploaded: 2022-01-25T00:00:00.000Z
Description: Watch the stand-up comedy video 'Joe Rogan Experience #1769 - Jordan Peterson' from PowerfulJRE on Comedy Buff. Published 2022-01-25. Transcript available.

Watch the stand-up comedy video 'Joe Rogan Experience #1769 - Jordan Peterson' from PowerfulJRE on Comedy Buff. Published 2022-01-25. Transcript available.

Joe Rogan Experience #1769 - Jordan Peterson

that state of intense concentration on that before you can really manage it i
think there's
mental endurance involved too because i think that are we up i think there's
mental endurance
that comes with uh anything that you do on a day-to-day basis whether it's
writing
whether it's uh doing podcasts whether it's uh doing stand-up comedy i think
anything we have to
think and and manage like complex ideas and manipulate your language and your
the way you're
speaking and and be able to engage in the dance between two people i think you
got to do it all
the time i think if you just do it every now and again like especially like if
you took time off of
speaking to people like if you hadn't talked to anybody in a long time and then
you talk have
you ever done that we haven't talked to anybody in a long time then you talk to
them it feels odd
it feels awkward because i think there's like a thing where you have to get
used to it you got to
get used to all i found that was particularly the case with the podcasts is
that it's hard to do that
sporadically yeah you also lose that rhythm of preparation because you get it
well i did i'm not
sure how do you prepare for your podcast like if you have an author come on i
usually read their book
it depends on um within like i'm on i have two books that i'm reading right now
that are future
uh people that are coming in february so they're a lot ahead yeah they'll be
well you know it's like
one of them is a climate change book and it's it's intense and so it's
requiring a lot of thinking
and then i have to like look at the criticisms of this guy and criticisms of
the work and you know
you know who believes that in 10 years miami's going to be underwater who
believes that this is
probably hyperbole and that it's a gross exaggeration and the reality is you
know the world
sort of always goes through these cycles of change but human beings are
definitely having an effect on
it but a small effect compared to cows and other other things it's like it's
hard to sort out the
climate change one is a weird one so that well that's because there's no such
thing as climate
right climate and everything are the same word and i that's what bothers me
about the climate change
types it's like this is something that bothers me about it technically it's
like climate is about
everything it's okay but your models aren't based on everything your models are
based on a set number
of variables yeah so that means you've reduced the variables which are
everything to that set well how
did you decide which set of variables to include in the equation if it's about
everything and that's not
just a criticism that's like if it's about everything your models aren't right
because your models do not and
cannot model everything what do you mean by everything when you say well when
but that's
what that's what people who talk about the climate apocalypse claim in some
sense we have to change
everything it's like everything eh okay what and it's same with the word
environment that word doesn't
mean it it means so much that it actually doesn't mean anything like when you
say everything in a sense
that's meaningless right because well what are you pointing to well i'm
pointing to everything
well what's the difference between the environment and everything there's no
difference what's the
difference between climate and everything well there's there's no difference so
this is a crisis of
everything it's like no it's not or if it is well if it really is then we're
done because we can't fix
everything well what we have to what they mean specifically is the human what
what human beings
are doing that's causing the earth to warm right right but you have to include
all these factors in the
models to determine that all these factors well what can you not include well
then by deciding what you
you don't include you decide which set of variables are cardinal and you have
to make that decision in
some sense before you even generate the models this is a big problem it's it's
partly
it's not the only reason but this
there's another reason that another problem that be devils climate modeling too
which is that as you
stretch out the models across time the errors increase
radically and so maybe you can predict out a week or three weeks or a month or
a year but the farther
out you predict the more your models in error and that's a huge problem when
you're trying to model
over a hundred years because the errors compound just like interest and so at
some point it's all
error in fact it's already the case that even if the climate models are right
the error bars are so
wide by a hundred years out that we'll never be able to measure the effects of
the changes we're making
now we'll never know if the changes we're making you know to save the climate
actually worked we can't
measure it the errors are too large a hundred years out what do you mean by the
errors like what errors
well prediction error so look um imagine that you're going to predict how your
life goes okay well
you can kind of do that no you kind of know that tomorrow is going to be
somewhat like today
okay but how much is next year's day going to be like today well somewhat but
less certainly because
you might get sick for example and over and then over a five-year period well
there's much more that
has to be accounted for and so the probability that your prediction is correct
decreases as you move
forward in time that's why we discount the future right so if you ask people
you want five dollars an
hour do you want five dollars in a month they're going to say well i want five
dollars now well you
think well why is that well if i have it now it's certain a month well there's
a lag in there and
anything could happen and you can play games with people this way and because
people differ in the
degree to which they discount the future because how seriously to take the
future is actually
a near computationally impossible task to solve how seriously should i take the
future well it depends
on how uncertain things are how uncertain things are are they well i don't know
classic example there's a
chicken and the farmer goes out every day and feeds the chicken and the chicken
thinks man i've got a good
friend in this farmer and then one day it's dinner time and the chicken's the
main course
right and so the poor chicken used induction to derive certainty the farmer
comes every day
he didn't realize there was a massive flaw in his theory and one day that flaw
reveals itself and
everything falls apart well that makes a sense that makes sense when you're
talking about chickens and
farmers but when you're talking about human beings okay so we could play a
future well we could play a
future discounting game so this is how this sort of thing is calculated this
discount curve so i could
say i'll give you five dollars an hour five dollars in a week which one do you
want
and people say five dollars in a week then i say okay i'll give you five
dollars an hour i'll give
you ten dollars in a month it's like hmm okay ten dollars in a month okay i'll
give you five dollars
now i'll give you a 750 in two weeks or i'll give you fifty dollars now i'll
give you a five hundred
dollars in ten years and so imagine you do that with all sorts of amounts okay
over all sorts of
time frames okay then you can compute a discount curve which is how much people
devalue the amount
the amount a dollar is worth as it progresses out into the future and what you
general generally find is
that impulsive people discount the future more heavily that's actually the
definition of impulsive
and you might think well the impulsive people are wrong it's like the ant and
the grasshopper you
know the grasshopper is fiddling all summer and then he starts to death in the
winter and the good old
aunt who packed away the the supplies is he's doing fine in the in the winter
he sacrificed the present to
the future and isn't that sensible yeah it's sensible you should save except
well what if it's 1920 in
germany 1923 let's say and you're you're in a period of hyperinflation it's
like grasshopper won
because he spent all his money before it became worthless so should you save or
not the answer is
it depends and then there's a further answer which is it depends on things that
you actually can't
predict and so it's it's actually a computationally impossible problem to
figure out how much to
discount the future it's actually impossible which is why we vary so much in it
part of that reason is
is the magnitude of our prediction error increases the farther out we predict
yeah but the grasshopper
and the ant analogy doesn't work because they're based on food and the food
that the ant supplied
and and stored and stocked away is still good inflation doesn't mean jack shit
to an ant
because they don't deal with currency well the other way in that but you know
what i'm saying
well fair enough but amino ants also ant colonies also have wars and so it's
just as possible that the
ant will store up all this food and another ant colony will move in and that'll
be the end of that and
this is a huge problem well you're very unlikely to be robbed and pillaged
unless you have wealth
right and so so the ability to store wealth across time
to decrease the risk of the catastrophes of future that's a huge that's the
that's the problem in some
sense that civilization set out to solve how can we stabilize things over a
long term enough to make
long-term investing a reasonable proposition here's a here's a positive spin-off
of that
so i worked on the un committee that wrote the secretary general's report on
sustainable development
i worked on the canadian subcommittee to be technically accurate and i was by
no means the
head of that i worked with the team that worked on that but we we edited and
wrote and rewrote a fair bit
of the document and so i did a lot of work in the background learning what i
needed to learn to work
on that committee with some degree of what would you say uh qualification i
read maybe 200 books on
ecological development and economic development the relationship between the
two and 300 books
oh yeah yeah took i was over about a two-year period and so and uh a lot of it
was on oceanic management
because i did realize that one thing we're doing that's extraordinarily stupid
on the ecological front
is destroying all the marine life within 40 miles of the shores and all the
marine life is with within
40 miles of the shores like you think the oceans they're vast like yeah but
they're empty except for where
the sun can shine to the bottom and that's the 40 to 200 miles say on the
coastal shelves and we've like
trawled those bear like seven times and that's a catastrophe so but that was
the only real environmental
catastrophe that i encountered in all that work that i thought was both
credible and addressable we know
how to fix that you make marine protected areas like national parks that you
need about 15 of the total
coastal territory really protected and that solves that problem essentially and
then everybody has fish
because the fish they don't just stay there they move around you can have your
cake and eat it too
with marine protected areas but mostly what i learned and this was really cool
was that this was so cool
and i really believe it's true uh the fastest way to make the planet sustainably
green and ecologically
viable is to make poor people as rich as possible as fast as we possibly can
because the thing about
poor people is that well first of all they live in they're not resource
efficient they use a lot of
resources to produce very very little outcome and so that's a problem slash and
burn agriculture for
example but even more importantly when you're insecure on a day-to-day basis
you don't know where your next
meal is coming from you're not paying attention to the broader environment that
hated word around you
and you can't even really worry about your children's future in some real sense
because like
n