Jordan Peterson interviews Stephen Hicks

From the link to the video.

Jordan Peterson speaks with Dr. Stephen Hicks – [born in Toronto I might add] – professor in the philosophy department at Rockford University in Illinois. Dr. Hicks is the author of the influential and courageous 2004 book Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault, which is perhaps even more relevant and important now than it was when it was published.

We spoke in depth about the history of philosophy as it has developed since medieval times, trying to understand and describe the processes that led to the rise of postmodern theory.

Stephen Hicks will be in Australia next month: details here.

This entry was posted in Books and writing, Gratuitous Advertising, Philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Jordan Peterson interviews Stephen Hicks

  1. duncanm

    I refuse to watch this because ‘racist!’


  2. NB

    Hey my post dropped the ‘sarc’ tag!
    But, heck, who needs it.

  3. Cameron

    A good book to read on this is: Know Thine Enemy, A History of the Left by Mark L Melcher.

  4. one old bruce

    I don’t have the patience for such videos, but-

    ‘from Rousseau to Foucault’

    So he only covers Continentals, or just French? How very Canadian.

    The European Continental line of philosophy used to be classed as Idealist: they believed everything could be understood by using ‘the mind’. Kant took this to its fullest extent, showing there could be a universal metaphysical human ethic without God. But all he did was put ‘duty’ at the centre of human life, how very German. The Categorical Imperative(!) as an absolute duty.

    While the Continentals were exercising their minds, the British had Newton who showed there WERE universal laws independent of human ‘reason’. Thus British Empiricism was born: knowledge was advanced by scientific study of the world outside, not just humans ruminating inside their heads. Empiricism versus Idealism. But so far both worked together and Modernity was declared in the 19th Century: the solution to all problems seemed to be in sight.

    People like Jeremy Bentham started proposing solutions to long standing problems, such as his Panopticon which might eliminate crime. In Europe, ‘enlightened’ philosopher kings wanted absolute power to impose modernity on the masses for their own good. Do you start to see the problems with modernity? It envisaged an Orwelllian world, or at least a Huxleyan Brave New World, where sciences, both physical and moral (Kant etc), would bring humanity to perfection. The French Revolution disagreed about monarchy but otherwise pushed for the same Brave New World of ‘modernity’. God, if still accepted such as by the Deists who wrote the US Constitution, was seen merely as Cosmic Watchmaker. Science would reveal human perfection. Civilisation would finally be in harmony, we would conquer the stars.

    All sorts of reasons why this began to be doubted, e.g the Great War. People like Hegel back on the Continent attempted to refute Kant but with a different Idealism which just looked like German hubris. His student Marx thought he could rescue Hegel by borrowing British Empricism (‘materialism’) and carry on the great march of progress and modernity, also he recognising stresses in the system previously ignored, such as the masses rising up in the French Revolution (‘it must be the class system!’) So we all stumbled onwards through the dreadful 20 Century.

    Many still declare allegiance to the Enlightenment which started all this, and progress and modernity. But others in various ways see this as deeply problematic, and they are called, wait for it, Post-Modernists. American college kids and many academics have their own axes to grind and rarely reflect on the bigger picture. But when you do it’s all pretty clear. If you start to think that, for example, Germans will always be Germans, and British will be British, then you are in fact a Postmodernist. It’s that simple.

  5. bespoke

    At the beginning it looks like Hicks wanted to tell Jordan to STFU and let me speak!! .

  6. None

    I used to get bored in my philosophy of science/science vs religion philosophy class but this was actually bearable to listen to. What needed addressing is why Foucault etc were just passing fads in France but are just obsessions in the non-Francophone wanky West world.

  7. None

    Also good from the linked website is Jordan Peterson on postmodernism in 12 minutes

  8. John A

    None #2941161, posted on February 22, 2019, at 10:35 pm

    What needed addressing is why Foucault etc were just passing fads in France but are just obsessions in the non-Francophone wanky West world.

    That’s easy: because critical theory and anti-Christianity.

  9. George Gell

    Is society so rich that it can pay enough to this bore to feed him when all he can do is talk such garbage?

Comments are closed.