Transcription
Why should you care about this book summary of Beyond Order by Jordan Peterson? Well, if you aren't familiar, Peterson was a professor of psychology at Harvard University and then at the University of Toronto. He's been heavily influenced by the works of Nietzsche, Hume, Jung, and Dostoyevsky. At one point in his career, he was seeing 20 patients a week in his clinical practice. He's come to be a father figure for millions of people, young men in particular. He has nearly 4 million YouTube subscribers and contributed to global discussions with names like Sam Harris, Vince Shapiro, Joe Rogan, and more. He became widely recognized after he criticized Bill C-16, which was basically him calling out the dangerous implications that lawfully enforcing the use of gender pronouns would cause. Although some people want to burn him at the stake, he's also earned massive respect and admiration for his character and wisdom he provides to navigate today's world. He has a quirky way of conveying practical life advice through the ideas of lobsters, dragons, and cleaning a room.
Speaking of dragons, thank you to Raid: Shadow Legends for making this video possible. Make yourself, from Peterson proud, by slaying the archetypal dragon in the Dragon's Lair dungeon. This game is perfect for you if you like leveling up, upgrading characters, and obliterating things. Use my links below to download Raid yourself to your mobile phone or PC for free.
The Bannerlords are basically medieval knights with a massive kingdom in the west of Talaria. They're arrogant and warlike and believe themselves to be on the side of good, but the Orcs, Ogran, Skinwalkers, and the Lizard Men would disagree. The lands of the Bannerlords were taken from the non-humans by force and kept through centuries of persecution with the help of the Sacred Order. Now, with the Bannerlords weakened by wars of their king, the time may be at hand for these races to right an ancient wrong by whatever means necessary. Bannerlords are cool, but you can choose any faction you want. My favorite are the Dark Elves because they have the ability to cast spells. My favorite champion is Kale because when I see blue robes, a badass staff, and white hair, I see a mage with wisdom, and I love wisdom in fantasy games like this. I've always found the mage best matches my personality. The mage uses wisdom and intellect to their advantage. I like to spend time in Arena mode, battling it out with other players, as opposed to Campaign mode. It makes the experience more real for me. What you choose to upgrade and the timing of your attacks requires strategic thinking, unless you want your characters to die, of course.
This month, Raid's just released a ton of amazing new clan features and improvements. There are brand new quests for you and your clan members to work on together, new benefits for every clan member just for being in a clan, and even a brand new clan shop that gives you access to some incredibly powerful items. This month's also got new champions to collect from fragments in the Doom Tower and a load of events and competitions to take part in. If you want to get a huge head start in Raid, all you have to do is hit the link in the description or scan my QR code, and you'll get an epic hero, Chonuru, who is amazing in the Doom Tower, 200,000 silver, one XP boost, one energy refill, and one ancient shard, so you can summon an awesome champion as soon as you get in-game.
With that said, let's dive into the video.
Rule One: Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or creative achievement. A social institution is a group of social positions connected by social relations that perform a social role. Government, school, college, family, church, the company you work for, McDonald's – these are all social institutions. Denigrate them means to criticize them unfairly. Here's why that's bad. Peterson shares the example of a young man who was a server at a restaurant that was part of a larger chain of restaurants. He was at the bottom of the hierarchy and so felt his position was of low value, a seemingly valid reason to criticize a system he was part of. But the young man had come to realize that every place he might find himself in had more potential than he might first see. His position of a server gave him the opportunity to learn, to get along with the cooks, to be polite and engage with customers, to show up on time, and much more. If you take on this attitude and happen to be working in a functional institution, then you'll make yourself difficult to replace. You may develop gratitude and humility. The higher-ups will pay attention to you, and from there, more doors will open for you, whether that's an increase in pay, an introduction to a mentor, or some other form of career advancement.
If you retain a negative attitude and see an issue with authority above you being in power, like your boss, consider Peterson's words: If the problem is real, then the people who are best at solving the problem at hand should rise to the top. That is not power; it is the authority that properly accompanies ability. If you've ever played a team sport or a team-based video game like Overwatch, you'll know that to win, a team is benefited by selecting a role according to that person's strengths, whilst also keeping in mind how their role affects the rest of the team. In Overwatch, a damage dealer is known to be the most popular because people seem to love blowing stuff up, so everybody tends to take on the role of dealing damage to the enemy, even if they aren't good at it. The problem is that without anybody playing a tank or healer role to support the damage dealers, the team gets demolished. If your aim is to win, then let the team member who is best at damage play the damage role while you play a tank or support character. Instead of seeing them as the selfish and power-hungry person, realize that it is for the greater good. The same principle applies in business, in government, in schools, and in your own workplace.
Peterson also discourages criticizing creative achievement, which in the context of the book seems to mean the act of voluntarily modifying the existing rules of a system or social structure to better accommodate the goal at hand. In Peterson's own words: "The solutions of yesterday and today upon which our current hierarchies depend will not necessarily serve as solutions tomorrow. Thoughtless repetition of what suffers in the past, or worse, authoritarian insistence that all problems have been permanently solved, therefore means the introduction of great danger when changes in the broader world makes local change necessary." For example, you might work at a restaurant, but then a deadly virus suddenly infects the town in which it's in, and so there's a threat to the safety of customers. And so, if you are creatively inclined, you may suggest an idea to limit the number of customers or find a creative way to accommodate all customers safely within the confines of the restaurant.
Regarding politics, Peterson shares his view on conservatism, also known as the right. Conservatives have a tendency to continue doing what has worked in the past, but occasionally creative changes are needed. This approach can sometimes be violently opposed and seems to be unjustified in Peterson's view, which you can read in his own words by pausing this video.
[Music]
Recall the scene in the first Harry Potter movie where Professor Quirrell storms into the Great Hall at Hogwarts to alert everybody that there is a troll in the dungeon. Students are instructed by Dumbledore to follow the house leaders back to safety in their dormitories, but Harry realizes that his friend Hermione is in the bathroom, and so she isn't aware that there is a troll that could put her life in danger. So Harry decides to disobey Dumbledore's orders and runs to the bathroom with his good friend Ronald Weasley to save Hermione. They succeed, even though their professor is disgruntled when she comes to learn that they have broken the rules. She recognizes the creative decision as a necessary one by awarding them points, even though she has a conservative tendency to follow the established rules.
Although Peterson emphasizes creative change, too much push for it can also be problematic. The overly liberal anarchist may vouch for freedom, but what lies beneath their trumpeting cry is a deflection of responsibility, and responsibility is ironically essential to freedom. I think Jocko Willink says it best in three words: Discipline is freedom. So remember, Rule One: Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or creative achievement.
Rule Two: Imagine who you could be and then aim single-mindedly at that. Stories are embedded into movies, plays, books, and art. They typically show the process of characters becoming more than they originally were, like a hero. A hero is an exemplar of what Peterson calls a fully developed personality. Imagining who you could be and then aiming single-mindedly at that is what will help you to become the hero of your own life, or at least someone who doesn't procrastinate by scrolling through subreddits for three hours a day. Children seem to learn lessons from watching movies more than they do being told this or that. Take the DreamWorks movie, The Prince of Egypt, for example. It's based on the biblical story of Exodus, you know, the one where Moses miraculously parts the Red Sea to help the Israelites escape the tyranny of an Egyptian Pharaoh. Peterson says the biblical story of Exodus is probably regarded as archetypal, more paradigmatic or foundational by psychoanalytic and religious thinkers alike, because it presents an example of psychological and social transformation that cannot be improved upon. I've linked the movie trailer in the description below this video, along with other relevant videos that you might like to watch later, like Part Two of this video.
It's not just movies and Bible stories that showcase the process of becoming; it's also music, poetry, plays, and art. If you've ever been to a museum to look at paintings, you may have taken on the attitude of Chip Diamond. Here's a video I've chipped to show you what I mean. "What's this one called? Dead Flowers. That's crap. These suck. I can do way better than this." If you have this attitude, I challenge you to contemplate artwork deeply. Look at this piece called "The Rebus." It might look like a random amalgamation of images, but according to Peterson, there's a powerful story being told that reflects a fully developed personality that can emerge from the pursuit of what is meaningful, dangerous, and promising. Peterson explains: "Atop the round chaos perches a dragon. This is because what is interesting and meaningful and noble and unexpected, as they all go together, manifests itself in a form that is both dangerous and promising, particularly when its grip is intense and irresistible. The dangerous, of course, signified by the presence of the immortal predatory reptile. The promise is hinted at as a dragon archetypally guards a great treasure." Thus, the drawing represents a psychological progression. First, you find yourself interested in something. That something, the round chaos, contains or is composed of potential or information. If it is pursued in court, it releases that information. Out of that information, we build the world we perceive, and we build ourselves as perceivers. Thus, the round chaos is the container from which both matter, the world, and spirit, our sites, emerge.
The ultimate lesson is to create a big goal. To work towards something is better than nothing. You need a map, so reflect on where you've been, where you are, and how you can get closer to your goal using the lessons you've learned along the way. Otherwise, you'll drown in chaos and uncertainty. You might need to decide to change your path, but I understand that it can be difficult to know what the right decision is. Peterson offers promising advice: If the new path you see forward, after learning what you needed from the past, appears more challenging, then you're probably on the right track.
Rule Three: Do not hide unwanted things in the fog. There's a scene in the movie A Bug's Life where Flik brings a group of circus bugs back to his community on an island. His intention is to have the circus bugs fend off the enemy grasshoppers, but the circus bugs think they are there to perform a show. Flick hides his real intentions in the fog because if they were to find out that their lives were being put in danger, then they might not help him. Unsurprisingly, the truth inevitably leaks out, and all turns to chaos. It can be obvious to you when movie characters are hiding problems in the fog, but it can be more difficult to identify the problems you hide in your fog and then also to confront those problems. Peterson puts emphasis on problems in intimate relationships. He says: "Collect a hundred or a thousand of those, and your life is miserable and your marriage doomed." Do not pretend you are happy with something if you are not. And if a reasonable solution might in principle be negotiated, have the damn fight, unpleasant as that might be in the moment. It is one less straw on the camel's back, and that is particularly true for those daily events that everyone is prone to regard as trivial, even the plates on which you eat your lunch.
Dissatisfaction with your life in relationship can often manifest as a bad mood, sadness, anxiety, or lashing out at your partner. You may not know why, but something feels off. This is likely because you've lost hope and been betrayed in the past. You avoid wanting to know more about your problems and needs because ignorance is bliss, right now. Imagine that you are so afraid that you will not allow yourself to know what you want. Peterson says: "Knowing would simultaneously mean hoping, and your hopes have been dashed. You have your reasons for maintaining your ignorance. You are afraid, perhaps, that there is nothing worth wanting. You are afraid that if you specify what you want precisely, you will simultaneously discover, and all too clearly, what constitutes failure. You are afraid that failure is the most likely outcome. And finally, you are afraid that if you define failure and then fail, you'll know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was you that failed, and that it was your fault." Having your needs discovered by your partner can be scary, too, because if your partner found out, they may tell it to your face, which is confronting if you've been trying to ignore finding out. They could also deny what you want in order to hurt you. Deep down, you probably agree when I say that it's better to confront the harsh truths and let them build up. And one of the best ways to do this, according to Peterson, is to express your feelings under the conditions of trust and maturity. You may find out you've been wrong about a situation or risk being misheard by your partner, but the alternative is to express nothing and let your problems potentially snowball into something worse.
Rule Four: Notice that opportunity lurks where responsibility has been abdicated. Peterson says: "I have never met anyone who was satisfied when they knew they were not doing everything they should be doing." Bonus points if you do something that isn't your responsibility. Perhaps your roommate has some extra dishes he hasn't washed. You can choose to wash them. You might shrug your shoulders at this, but Peterson reminds us that taking on responsibility makes life meaningful. This doesn't mean you should bite off more than you can chew or take on extra responsibilities for the hell of it. Peterson explains: "We are well advised to take on challenges at precisely the rate that engages and compels alertness and forces a development of courage, skill, and talent, and to avoid foolhardy confrontation with that which lies beyond current comprehension."
Rule Five: Do not do what you hate. Do you ever go to class or work and feel like this? In the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus says: "Do not do what you hate, for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven." There's an underlying theme in Peterson's book that there is a subtle force of nature that is guiding us toward the higher good, and it seems that we are rejecting it when we do what we hate. A common refutation is that sometimes we have to do what we hate to survive. It might make sense in rare cases; however, the vast majority of your life should not be doing what you hate, nor does it need to be. If you are truly willing to do what's necessary to change your circumstances, before you proclaim that you hate your job, consider that some aspects of your job may just require a change in attitude. Peterson says: "Resentment generated by such necessary work is most often merely ingratitude, inability to accept a lowly place at the beginning, unwillingness to adopt the position of the fool, or arrogance and lack of discipline."
Your job is where you'll spend most of your life doing things you either hate or love, so it's strongly advised you have a job that allows you to do what you love. Here's some excuses you may have about looking for another job: "I might get fired." Well, yes, you might, so prepare now by seeking and readying yourself for hopefully a better one. Do not assume that leaving your current job is for the worst. Another excuse: "I'm afraid to move." Well, afraid compared to what? To continue the same job you hate for years on end? Peterson says he's seen many people make the move after years of contemplation, only to end up with a much higher quality of life. And another excuse: "No one else would want me." Yes, the rejection rate for jobs is high. Anticipate that you may need to develop your skills to increase your chances of getting a better job, so do it. You may need to engage difficult conversations with your family; do it because the alternative is likely worse. And remember, you can create your own job. I chose to drop out of a university degree I wasn't passionate about. I decided to try this YouTube thing and have now been doing it for over five years and love what I do. It gives me loads of free time to chill, travel, read books, and pursue the spiritual path. That doesn't mean you should too; you have to adapt your approach to your own values, predispositions, and circumstances, but I hope this gives you some inspiration.
Rule Six: Abandon ideology. Ideologies are attractive to people who are smart but lazy. Ideology is difficult to define because it has a range of useful meanings, and all of them aren't compatible with each other. So let's just roll with Google's broad definition, which is that an ideology is a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms a basis of economic or political theory and policy. Some examples are Marxism, Nazism, conservatism, socialism, feminism, ethnocentrism, postmodernism, veganism, environmentalism, and gender studies. The problem with ideologies begins with selecting a few abstract ideas that oversimplify incredibly complex phenomena. Examples are the patriarchy, the oppressed, the rich, the poor. Peterson says: "All such problems require careful, particularized analysis, followed by the generation of multiple potential solutions, followed by the careful assessment of those solutions to ensure that they are having their desired effect. It is uncommon to see any serious social problem addressed so methodically. It is also rare that the solutions generated, even by a methodical process, produce the intended outcome."
Let's use the ideology of veganism as an example. Veganism, like all ideologies, starts with oversimplifying complex problems with abstract ideas. In the case of veganism, public health, oppression, the economy, global food systems, and the environment. The abstract ideas are lumped together, and then a villain is identified, that being the 86% of the world population who eat meat, especially factory-farmed meat. Then a few explanatory principles are created. So, examples in the case of veganism are that moral relativism does not morally justify eating animals, meat is bad for you because X, Y, and Z, and animal factory farming releases heaps of CO2, which destroys the planet. Those principles then get granted primary causal power while ignoring others of equal or greater importance. Discussion of the reason for the existence of those explanatory principles is made taboo for the followers. Next, every phenomenon, regardless of complexity, is considered a secondary consequence of the new totalizing system. So, what that means is basically that violence, the economy, the health of the planet and people, is largely attributed to one single thing, which is paying for and consuming animal products. A school of thought then emerges to propagate the methods of this algorithmic reduction, and those who refuse to adopt the algorithm or who criticize its use are tacitly or explicitly demonized. Consider the reaction vegans get when they decide to introduce a small amount of meat into their diet.
"You know, JP, and that's Cal. You don't know him, and we're getting ready to go for a really awesome hike. And I have so much compassion for all of life that I want you to die." But this past week, a lot of hurtful things have been said about me online, people commenting in saying nasty things about me, calling into question, "Is JP still a vegan?" This isn't a criticism of veganism per se; it's a criticism of ideology, of which veganism happens to be a modern and relevant exemplar. Simple ideas like encouraging better treatment of animals in factory farms isn't automatically invalid just because you hear it from an ideological vegan. It's also important to note that some vegans, or anyone who subscribes to an ideology, are more ideological than others. Some ways to tell are their level of open-mindedness, level of attachment to an identity, willingness to consider other viewpoints, willingness to consider that the problem may be more complex than the ideology states, the level of victimization of another, and ability to acknowledge the humor amongst the seriousness of it all. I think Russell Brand makes a fantastic example of someone who subscribes to the ideology but is low on the ideological spectrum. "I'm vegan. I'm vegan because I've always been vegetarian. I got pressured into veganism. I love animals, but being like, you know, I love them. My dog's right here now. Okay, fair enough. I'll be vegan. I'm vegan now. Leave me alone. I've become vegan, but I'm not. But my wife is not a vegan." Like, now, like someone said to me, "You should make your wife a vegan." Oh, well, let's just... Well, is this a feminist counter-argument you might want to bring to making my wife a vegan? You know, so I like, I'm not trying to impose my veganism. Someone like Freely Banana Girl, on the other hand, is extremely high on the spectrum, going to such lengths as telling her followers that she's been thinking about, well, this, you shouldn't have the choice, you should be forced to be vegan. So because I eat my chicken and drink my milkshake, maybe I don't deserve to live. You should absolutely be forced to be vegan."
Peterson says: "It is much easier and more immediately gratifying to reduce a problem to something simple and accompany it with an evil doer who can then be morally opposed." So why should you abandon ideology? Because it's ineffective for solving large-scale problems, and some can even foster totalitarianism, which looks something like this.
[Music]
Start by cleaning your room. Yes, that's not a joke. Get your life in order, then find a bigger problem and solve it. Let's recap. In today's video, you learned the following rules: Rule One: Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or creative achievement. Rule Two: Imagine who you could be and aim single-mindedly at that. Rule Three: Do not hide unwanted things in the fog. Rule Four: Notice that opportunity lurks where responsibility has been abdicated. Rule Five: Do not do what you hate. And Rule Six: Abandon ideology.
[Music]