Podcast Cover NoteExecutive Summary — Peterson vs. Foucault under Triune TestingThis podcast episode explores a detailed case study of Jordan Peterson’s critique of Michel Foucault, examined through the Tribunal’s triune testing across Truth, Love, and Justice.Peterson’s Critique:Frames Foucault as a “postmodern neo-Marxist,” allegedly responsible for relativism and the erosion of objective truth.Employs a combative style, often resorting to ad hominem attacks and references to Foucault’s personal life.Foucault’s Position:Developed nuanced theories of power-knowledge networks, showing how power circulates rather than resting in single institutions.Emphasized that resistance is always possible within power relations, offering resources for critique and social change.Tribunal’s Triune Evaluation:Truth: Peterson identifies legitimate dangers of relativism, but oversimplifies Foucault’s project.Love: Peterson’s approach lacks charity, failing to engage Foucault’s work on its strongest terms.Justice: Peterson’s critique fragments under strain, as it neglects Foucault’s contribution to marginalized voices and critical resistance.Conclusion:Peterson’s critique contains shards of insight but remains fragmentary, weakened by oversimplification and selective interpretation.The study shows how triune testing can separate partial truth from distorted critique, preserving coherence while exposing fracture.☩ Tribunal of Conscience ☩ Truth. Love. Justice. All episodes are part of the ongoing work of the Tribunal of Conscience — testing forms under the triune strain to reveal what holds and what collapses. Follow and connect: 🌐 Tribunal Website ✉️ Subscribe for updates 🎧 Available on Apple, Spotify, and all major platforms Let those who see the structure, name it without fear.

Ver todos los episodios