Is the West Going Through a Crisis of Meaning? Talking About New Theism 

I think Matt Johnson is deliberately missing the point of the statement, "the West is going through a crisis of meaning". Of course you have lots of things from which you are able to derive personal meaning. What the statement refers to, however, is what is known as "shared meaning". If through much of Western history the shared meaning amongst the majority was derived from Judeo-Christian theology and politics. With Christianity and Judaism at all time lows in the West, what takes the place of our previous shared meaning? New symbols of shared meaning are what replace them. Those symbols all reflect a single new ideology: Woke-ism.

Japan, South Korean and Singapore are bad examples. All three countries were heavy influenced by either Americans or Brits. - Japan after WW2 and being under American occupation drafted it's constitution that emphasized liberal values. The occupation heavily influenced it's government and culture. - South Korea likewise was massively assisted by the Americans post Korean War to draft up their current system of government, AND there's about 1/3 Christian population. - Singapore's entire's common law system is haevily based on the Brits. These countries didn't emerge out of nowhere to get to their current state and value system, but rather we're either controled (Singapore), invited (Korea) or forced (Japan) to adopt a more Westernized value system.

The human soul is greater than any religion or religious tradition, and perhaps it is what drives the specific path of meaning that each person has through their life. Depending on the need of the soul so to the tools it is given throughout life to learn what it has been sent here to learn; which may include a specific religion or a lack thereof, or any other number of circumstances.

Great interview.

7:50 horrible argument, what is the common denominator in the origin of Japan and Korea's liberalism

Peterson's right, we're conditioned by the culture we're born into, even if one renounces the the religion, its precepts are still there and will take more than a few generations to shake off

I am not really concerned about what any particular person BELIEVES. You may believe that there is an old man with a white beard perched in the clouds, that the Ultimate Reality is a young blackish-blue Indian guy, that the universe is eternal, that Mother Mary was a certifiable virgin, or that gross physical matter is the foundation of existence. The ONLY thing that really matters is your meta-ethics, not your meta-physics. Do you consider any form of non-monarchical government (such as democracy or socialism) to be beneficial? Do you unnecessarily destroy the lives of poor, innocent animals and gorge on their bloody carcasses? Do you believe homosexuality and transvestism are moral? Do you consider feminist ideology to be righteous? If so, then you are objectively immoral, and your so-called "enlightened/awakened" state is immaterial, since it does not benefit society in any way.

Speaking as a liberal, atheist, humanist, and (I discovered 3 minutes ago) cultural Christian, I'd love to be a real, believing Christian, because life would be *so* much simpler, and so much more certain; if only there were a shred of evidence for his/her existence. (Aside to God: given that you're omniscient and omnipotent, so they say, you only have to perform a minor, private miracle that can't be explained by science ... you know, just between ourselves ... and I'll believe.) So I have to base my entire morality on the idea that I treat others as I'd like to be treated myself, and that I have a respect for my environment. It's actually a lot tougher, because you need to think about problems, rather than just going to a history book, and reading what some geezer wrote down a couple of millennia ago. (Or 1446 years ago, depending on which religion you've been marinaded in ... love it!) Joking apart, it *is* actually difficult, because as a scientist, I recognise the advantage that unquestioning belief confers in inter-group conflict, in colonisation, and worry that the West's growing lack of belief, and its tolerance for intolerant zealots, will be its undoing. But sadly that won't be enough to make me pretend to believe in something for which there is no evidence.

At 62 i like being a athiest after being a christian for years. Science

No

I disagree with this guy. Secular humanism is 100% Christianity.

Which enlightenment values and thinkers do we want to adopt? In philosophical terms, the Enlightenment brought forth great arguments for religious pluralism, empiricism, and individual liberty; but it's a massive reach to frame it as a movement of secular humanists vs religious theocrats. Many enlightenment thinkers grounded their rationalism, empiracism and philosophies of liberalism and tolerance on Christian theology and philosophy. This is the point made again and again by figures like Tom holland, who Matt is disagreeing with. At the end of the day, you have to justify secular humanism without reference to Christianity if you want it to have intrinsic 'meaning'. Just saying you prefer it, or you like it's outcomes, doesn't suffice for a philosophical justification. Enlightenment values work fantastically in a culture that presumes some system of Christian ethics and values, but just look to see how well it flourishes in other cultures to see what the future of it looks like if we abandon our cultural presuppositions. I invite anyone who doesn't think we need Christian cultural norms to ground our western enlightened values to consider Judaism as an ethnicity, culture, and religion. A shockingly large number of atheist Jews attend Synagog and have a bat/bar mitzvah. Their disbelief in God isn't particularly relevant, because participating in the religion is an important part of the culture of Judaism. Jewish families and cultural groups that disengage from the religion tend to quickly assimilate culturally, and disappear as a distinct ethnicity. So what then happened when we reject the foundational cultural context for the enlightenment, but assert enlightenment values in this ad hoc way? The fruits are pretty obvious. Religious tolerance, free speech tolerance, and even valuing empiricism are declining.

You are quite right Japan and South Korea are excellent examples of liberal countries without a Christian background. Vice versa you have countries like Russia or Venezuela that are Christian, but not very liberal. What also gets forgotten is the extensive wisdom that originated in the far east and the influence of the ancient Greek and Roman cultures.

Looking forward to seeing the full interview 💜. I read as much of the article that was offered for 'outsiders' 😂, (the reason I don't subscribe to magazines is because there is very little that I would read on an ongoing basis so it is not viable for me to subscribe on a monetarily for something that I may get very few articles of interest from). That said, this is an interest of mine and in my opinion, I believe that religion has shot itself in the foot with all of its control and dogma. People I find, move away from religion because the bible is not a book of reality and there are so many different interpretations of it that people see the holes in it. Creationism is ridiculous and the fundamental premise that a 'Holy Father', is up there judging and controlling us without any clear reasons as to why things happen, in other words, the ambiguity of the teachings, are among reasons for the decline in the following. Critical thought is the enemy of all religions and critical thought is necessary for the evolution of man because blindly following a doctrine that dismisses actual scientific evidence for example, that the world is older than 6000 years, is not conducive to growth of the human being. Critical thought is here to stay however, you cannot deny the existence of intuition and personal spiritual experiences of those both inside, and outside of the church. Even as a child I felt that religion was off somehow. I loved the community and the singing however, some things did not sit right such as, the 'worship without question', vibe that was permeating through the whole structure of these teachings. I am 57 years of age and have explored so many 'spiritual teachings', and have had very personal spiritual experiences, and in the end realise that you do not need the church nor the bible to connect with your own spiritual guidance and moral compass. Just because you do not subscribe to a 'religion', does not mean you cannot find meaning and love and support in your life. It does not mean your family values are nonexistent and that you are not a good person capable of great things. That said, the political and 'free market' claims of capitalism has gone askew but that is not necessarily because of an absence in religion (many of these greedy, morally devoid politicians and business men are religious 😂). It is through greed and control and fear and ancestral abuse (much of that religious abuse, which is a whole different comment section in itself), and a every man for himself, style attitude when it comes to business and social recognition. This has nothing to do with a 'devil', or demons fighting for our souls, it is simply the darker side of human nature. Freedom of religion is important which means that religion itself needs to be out of politics because religion by its very nature is controlling and dogmatic. Human critical thought and knowledge cannot tolerate that any longer, so there will eventually need to be a happy medium so to speak, reached where business and politics reflects the values of family and love and mutual prosperity for which, we do not need religion to develop. There is a spirituality within the very fabric of who we are and there is also a scientific intelligence and if both could at least find a meeting point then maybe we could develop a 'framework' of society that is not built just on belief or science, but an enmeshment of the two for balance and the betterment of all. Is this a crazy utopian myth I speak of.... maybe, but it is better than considering devolving into embracing an outdated, nonsensical fairy tale that the bible offers us. The 'values' the Jesus teachings (whatever is left of the original words he spoke, before man got a hold of them), offer us a basic foundation to work with however, I argue that these values are inherent in us all, even if you have been living under a rock and have not heard of Jesus. Freedom of religion is just that, freedom to follow religion or not follow religion or find some other spiritual meaning in life. The key is, how do we stop the runaway train that is political and controlling due to greed and power hungry individuals and organisations, without adopting another controlling corruptible framework such as communism or religion, and find a place where mankind can express what is inherently within us all, love and joy, family and fairness, along with building a society where all can find purpose and achievement. I do not have the answer, and I do not think there is 'an answer'. I feel that things may get worse before they get better however, I have 'faith' in humanity. There are far more goings on than the media would have us believe that restores my faith in human beings and their inherent bravery, love, courage and desire for peace and family. You do not need religion for that. The time of law based, controlling dogmatic faith is coming to an end and for good reason. I also feel people are waking up to the institutional and political greed and power mongering running rampant in the majority of the world. It will be interesting to see what happens.

I think the speaker misrepresents by lumping a lot of thinkers on a pile and making the connection to christian belief. A few thinkers do that and others have a very historic and nuanced thinking about it.

This, and soon comes Pascal's wager