Degrees of knowledge, and the asymptotic nature of truth
The following are two related questions/interpretations regarding truth/reality that I have thought about for quite some time, and had hoped to ask during your stop in Norfolk, VA. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend that evening, so I feel that this AMA forum is probably the second best option. 1.) Although both may be considered 'knowledge,' there seems to be a fundamental difference between (i) knowing something when provided a stimulus to evoke such knowledge (e.g. a multiple choice quiz where one recognizes the answer only after reading through a list of possible choices) and (ii) knowing something spontaneously, without needing any such stimulus. What are your thoughts on this, and does psychology have anything to say about this? To me this implies that there are gradations to knowledge, even while one can be equally certain in either scenario. 2.) What do you think about the concept of truth as being asymptotic in nature? That is, if we take Truth/reality as the ideal value toward which a particular asymptotic function (i.e. some specified question) aims, then regardless of how much data one obtains, there will always be a 'leap of faith' required to reach an answer. Certainty might not be possible, and it could be argued that certainty is not the ultimate goal anyway. To be certain 'enough' might actually be better, because it allows room for flexibility as opposed to rigidity. I'm not entirely sure of what other implications this might have, but I feel like there may be something of value here. Thanks for the opportunity to pose these questions here. I have a few others but I'm still trying to figure out the best way to word them.
Did 25 year old Jordan Peterson Aim Low?
Hello Dr. Peterson, Can you clarify what you mean when you say “aim low”? You quit smoking and drinking in your mid-20s to write Maps of Meaning while simultaneously shattering the publication record for graduate students at McGill and the you landed a job at Harvard. It sound like you aimed high from the beginning and went even further than anyone could have imagined.
Graduate school for those who didn't major in psychology
I am preparing to go to graduate school with the ultimate goal of becoming a clinical psychologist. It has been 3 years since I graduated from USC with a bachelor's degree in international relations. My GPA is 3.41 / 4.0. Currently I am taking online university courses in Intro to Psychology and Into to Statistics. I plan to take the GRE psychology test in the future. I am highly interested in this field and highly motivated. But I feel like I lack necessary study materials and advices for graduate admissions since they are mostly geared towards those who majored in psychology. What would be your practical advice in preparing for the admissions process for those who didn't major in psychology?