“The Abrahamic adventures continue with this, the tenth lecture in my 12-part initial Biblical lecture series. Abraham’s life is presented as a series of encapsulated narratives, punctuated by sacrifice, and the rekindling of his covenant with God. This seems to reflect the pattern of human life: the journey towards a goal, or destination, and the completion of a stage or epoch of life, followed by the necessity of revaluation and reconsideration of identity, prior to the next step forward. Abraham, for his part, makes the sacrifices necessary to continue to walk with God, or before God (as the terminology in this section has it). It is this decision that allows him to transcend the vicissitudes of life, and to take his role as the father of nations. “

This extract from a longer lecture which is part of a series of biblically themed lecture set. Talking about how art has the power to be transcendent and through beauty, suggest a path to God.

I don’t know if I fully agree with some of his stand points.

I’m not sure if that is because those point have been misrepresented or if I find them troubling at a deeper level. He is quickly becoming an infamous internet intellectual, but unlike many podcast echo chambers he comes with a pedigree and experience.

A clinical psychologist and lecturer at the University of Ontario, his work has explored the position that belief and meaning have in regulating behavior and emotion. Recently he is more notable for his positions against political correctness, gender politics as well as his defense of the freedom of speech.

A trend and pitfall of political ideologies that he talks frequently on is how political ideologies essentially become thought cages. Once one identifies with an ideology there is the inherit risk that you will become possessed by that ideology. He frequently cites  left wing ideologues for their increasing tendency for attacking all those who do not ascribe to their “progressive” viewpoint.

I could oversimplify this by butchering the famous Nietzsche quote to read;

“He/She who fights with the oppressor should be careful lest they become the oppressor. Remember if you gaze long into the left, the left will also gaze back into you.”

Now this obviously is a neutral standpoint, tie yourself to the mast of any ideology you are a hostage of where the ship takes you. But due to his highlighting of behavior by extreme left wing activists and thinkers, he is frequently labeled as “right wing”. I am fairly sure that whilst his politics is conservative, that he is not the extreme right wing operator that he is sometimes painted as being. How far along the spectrum he is, I am unsure as he has contradicting opinions on some issues. Which is something I feel is often simplified with the easy left right narrative. Just because someone identifies differently from their assigned birth gender does not mean they are a left leaning in their politics for example.

I make a conscious effort to try and listen to talks, lectures and podcasts from both sides of a political debate. How can an argue coherently with the aim to change someones mind if I do not fully understand and appreciate their standpoint. This broad media diet has the fringe benefit of thoroughly confusing my Google search results.

If you don’t know Petersen’s work beyond his Cathy Newman interview, here is a primer article on the Guardian.