What does it mean for something to be 'true'? Are religious truths a special category?
Sam Harris vs Jordan Peterson — What Is True? (Vancouver, 2018)
A long-form moderated conversation centered on whether 'pragmatic truth' (Peterson) and 'correspondence truth' (Harris) can both be called 'true' without equivocation.
The case is decided
It wasSam Harris.
Harris wins by holding a single coherent definition of truth across the entire conversation while Peterson's central move (C2) collapses under the equivocation challenge in X1. The deciding factor is the C7 → implicit concession at 4200s — Peterson stops defending the conflation and pivots away. Peterson is the more captivating speaker, which is why this debate is widely remembered as a draw — it isn't.
Crowd verdict
1 voteThe model called this for Sam Harris. Who do you say won?
Spread the verdict
Receipts attached. The link opens at the deciding moment.
Another case?
Try the next debate.