the indonesian island of lombok has been rocked by a second deadly earthquake within a week. at least 82 people are reported killed in the magnitude 7 quake. dozens more were injured as the tremor damaged buildings and triggered power cuts. the us geological survey says the tremor struck just 10 kilometres underground. the bangladeshi capital dhaka has seen an eighth day of protests over road safety. there were clashes as police tried to disperse thousands of students and young people blocking roads. and this video is trending on bbc.com. it's a tropical snake eating a pidgeon in broad daylight on the pavement of a busy street in london. the snake is thought to be an abandoned boa constrictor. it's now been taken to an animal welfare centre. stay with bbc world news. now on bbc news, hardtalk‘s stephen sackur in conversation

with canadian psychologist jordan b peterson. welcome to hardtalk. anger it is a powerful force in politics and there isa powerful force in politics and there is a lot of it about. donald trump, brexit and a host of populist movements have been fuelled by anger with the way things are. letters income from? how best to respond? well, one much discussed provocative perspective comes not from a politician, but the canadian medical psychologistjordan politician, but the canadian medical psychologist jordan peterson, politician, but the canadian medical psychologistjordan peterson, whose defence of traditional values has won him a worldwide following. is his diagnosis liberating or dangerous? jordan peterson, welcome to

hardtalk. thanks for the invitation. at the beginning of this year, you wrote this book, 12 rules for life: an antidote to chaos, and in the six 01’ an antidote to chaos, and in the six or seven months since, around the world it has sold 30 much 2 million copies. predict extraordinary. you have struck some sort of a court, why do you think that is? because i am having a serious conversation with my viewers and listeners and readers about how to structure their lives individually and the relationship between responsibility and meaning and it is a level of discourse or a level of analysis that people don't often have an opportunity to participate in or to hear. it is filling a need in our culture, apparently. search meaning, is it also appealing, reaching out to people, and in particular men,

from all the surveys, men who are angry and feel lost and alienate it? well i don't think it is reaching out to them because they are alienate it, i think it is reaching out to people who are alienate it, certainly there are lots of people who are alienate its. i think it is focused to some degree on young men because my youtube channel is very popular and most people who watched it should happen to be young men. so that has skewed the listening audience in terms of that demographic. it isn't obvious —— it is obvious that it is notjust young men buying the book, it is mixed. there are many books out there and many published over the years that talk about a meaningful life and how to live it and you call your —— yours to live it and you call your —— you rs rules to live it and you call your —— yours rules for life, you could characterise it as a sort of self—help. there are very little of those sorts of books that go into great detail about the dangers of

marxism, talk about the history of mao's china, stalin's soviet union. there is a political content to your book and i wonder why you are so preoccupied by reminding your individuals so repeatedly and so often about the dangers of totalitarian communism. well, i am not. there is only a section in one of the chapters that deals with that, although there are motifs that run through it but it is more of a matter about being concerned with collectivist ideological ease and the dangers of it as a means for guiding yourself through light. —— ideologies. 0ne guiding yourself through light. —— ideologies. one of the failures that characterised the communist totalitarian state and equally on the fascist side was the failure of individual character. for example, in the soviet union and equal in places like china, people were

called upon to falsify their own experience, to lie in the service of the state and not stand up when they should have stood up. if you look around the world today, particularly the western world, where you focus your attention upon, you see a real danger of some sort of renewal of a neo— marxist tendency society. danger of some sort of renewal of a neo- marxist tendency society. you certainly see that in universities, the universities in north america and to some degree in europe as well are completely committed by left—leaning little agenda, the statistics that are clear and most of that has been made via an academy. there are very few centrist ina academy. there are very few centrist in a rightleaning academy and that means that the discourse on campuses has been radicalised. problem i have with that is not the fact that is left—wing, it is the fact that it is extreme and if the same is happening on the right i would be equally perturbed. but it is not, the problem is that we as a society

don't know how to run to rise the exercise of the left. know perfectly well that left can go too far, it happened many times over the course of the 20th century but we don't know when and we don't know what the danger signs are, the markers. but your focus on what you see as the real dangers of the left and its... that is not my focused. my focus is on the necessity of people to adopt individual responsibility. what it seems to me, beyond doubt by reading your own writings and the reactions, is that you have found a way of appealing to and winning the sympathies of a great number of people, who, to be crude about it, are supporters of donald trump, who are supporters of donald trump, who are by nature interested in the populist movements that we see many different parts of the world right now and some of whom identify with the phrase the cult writer. i wonder how you as a psychologist and an academic who about the nature of

seven people who sympathise with you. i don't think that is true. i think that is a vision of followers, i'd think of them as that, i think of them as viewers, readers and listeners. i have talked to one and 50,000 in the past three months at 55 live events, i understand my audience and i know perfectly well that the vast majority of them are there because they were rather disoriented in life for various reasons and have decided to develop a personal vision and to take more responsibility on to try to tell the truth as best they can and that that is actually helping them a lot. that is actually helping them a lot. that is what is happening. but would you recognise there is an overlap between the sorts of people who can deeply sympathise and find a resonance in your message, and many of those who have turned to donald trump in united states right now? not some overlap, there is a 30 million people is watching my videos are there is overlap across the entire political spectrum. thing is,

in the discussions i have had with people in the mainstream media about the response to me, there is a chronic and constant attempt to make it political. it is not political. what i am doing is not political. it political. it is not political. what i am doing is not politicalm is psychological. 0f what i am doing is not politicalm is psychological. of course, but you can't control the way in which your words and your messages are perceived and used. i am interested to know whether you are worried about it. i of course i am worried about it. i of course i am worried about it, but i have also received hundreds of letters from people who have indicated quite clearly that they were attracted by elements of they were attracted by elements of the alt—right and have been led to the alt—right and have been led to the political centre as a consequence. would it be fair to say that one of the core messages of your book is that we underestimate the power and the relevance and importance of old stories and mythss come including the christian bible but also including a host of other stories which you say have survived the test of time and tell us truth

about ourselves which many people today and i think you would say many people in academia today, who are into constructivism and relativism, are missing the truth of old verities. yes, i would happily say thatis verities. yes, i would happily say that is a theme that runs through the book. there is wisdom in traditional stories that we need to understand, not merely believe, but also to understand. so for example last year, i did a series of 15 lectures on genesis and most of that audience was young men and that has been viewed by millions of people online now. the bible in particular. you state or better or worse is the foundational document of western civilisation, it can reveal things to us about ourselves and what we believe and how we should act more than can be discovered in most any other story. the bible is central to your belief systems? no, it is

central to western culture. it is the foundational document of western culture. and this word truth, which is quite an important word for you, you think the bible contains a few kabul truce? well, you think the bible contains a few kabultruce? well, i don't know you think the bible contains a few kabul truce? well, i don't know what area kabul truce? well, i don't know what are a feudal means necessarily but it certainly contains a form of truth, it's narrative form of true. it is the same form of truth is he presented in front of you when you go see movies or when you read great literature. there is a truth in that. foodies are fiction. but we wouldn't be able to rank order fiction according to its quality if there wasn't some relation to truth. —— movies. there wasn't some relation to truth. -- movies. it is viewed right around the world and has millions of viewers who are not from religions at all, they may be hindus, muslims, but how can they therefore refer to your 12 rules for life when they are so wedded to the culture and traditions and the truths of the

bible? i also draw on other traditions extensively throughout the book and also in my first book. but the attitude that i am ticking towards the stories that our culture is predicated on is one that people from all over the world finding ageing. so it is because the stories are deep enough and significant enough so that there is plenty of room at the table for everyone to have an intelligent discussion. and iam not have an intelligent discussion. and i am not necessarily saying that, i am not saying at all that there isn't wisdom to be derived from other traditions, but i do see destabilisation in our own culture about our fundamental values and because our values, at least in part, were derived from judaeo—christian writings than it is useful to return to them to discover what they mean. we have heard from your fear of totalitarianism, as you see it evidenced in the 20th century. we also know that you

regard the bible as a foundation stone of your thinking, here is what they fellow canadian philosopher has said about what he sees about the wea kness said about what he sees about the weakness in your argument. he says that peterson assumes that the only alternative —— alternative to religious morality is some form of totalitarianism, or nihilism, but secularism has flourished since the 18th century, you do seem to get any real importance to other secularists. i don't think that is true at all. i have great respect for enlightenment doctrines and it is unfortunate that our situation right now is the consequence of something of a marriage between his old stories. the enlightenment doctrines upon which countries like england are founded. i am a scientist with many published works and soi scientist with many published works and so i am perfectly aware of,

despite the criticisms of that particular philosopher, perfectly aware of the utility of the enlightenment approach. but i think that humanist values, let's say secular values, have flourished for a long time and then to call that 200 years only means that that philosopher and i have very different ideas about what a long time is. i am an evolutionary biologist by the way, not a philosopher, thousands of years, not hundreds of. i wonder how you then conceptualise the importance of change. a lot of your work is about co nsta ncy change. a lot of your work is about constancy and finding truce in the very deep past. but what about the importance of change? if one thinks about everything from the emancipation of women, equality for women, think about gay rights, think about civil rights. these are changes that we have seen in our society in the last 80 years and many people think that your philosophy actually has no place to change at. it runs counter to change. or that means is that they

actually haven't read it. —— all. 0ne actually haven't read it. —— all. one of the things i point out clearly in the book that you have an internal guide to meaning. it is an instinct. is a manifestation of southern colebee 0riental reflex, which is something deep and what it does is try to place you on the border between status and transformation, wet you need to be, in order to survive properly you need to maintain your structure but you have to update it in the face of co nsta nt you have to update it in the face of constant challenge. for people watching this, let's ask a basic question. if i were living in the late 19th century in the uk as a man, i may well have persuaded myself that the natural order of things is for men to have the boat and women not to. if you were living at that time, with your regard for tradition and long—term internal truce, you might well side with those who oppose the emancipation of women. assuming that my primary emphasis is on the maintenance of tradition, but like i said it is

not. by primary emphasis it is on the ability for people to live in a context that is defined by act of meaning. and so, for example, to the degree that we are engaging in discussions here that is actually going on to be meaningful to both of us going on to be meaningful to both of us and people who are watching it. what that will actually signify is that have done a properjob of staying with —— within a tradition thatis staying with —— within a tradition that is general so we can understand it and updating it at the same time. the mystic with equality for women are widely argued that society today has been a boost —— —— overly and dangerously feminised ? has been a boost —— —— overly and dangerously feminised? because i see a backlash against masculinity and the sense that there is an intoxica nt the sense that there is an intoxicant out that. what is this idea, why is that society overly feminised? i never said that. if we are going to discuss my views we should my actual words of. i believe that there is a danger in our society at the moment of making the assumption that our culture, for example, is a radical patriarchy, which it is in some small part, and

that any act of engagement on the pa rt that any act of engagement on the part of young men in particular is indistinguishable from an unacceptable power and dominance drive, which i don't believe.“ much of the power and authority of a very long historical period has lay with men, isn't it inevitable that some men will get a little hacked off when women are given a stab at something approaching equality? that could be inevitable but that doesn't make it right, and certainly isn't something i support. you think men's resentment is more... than women's effort to attain a quality. i'm not in favour of resentment at all, if you're resentful then something is definitely wrong. even you need to grow the hell up and take stock of your life, or you have something to say that you have been saying. use a science undoubtedly shows us that men and women have different rates, and there's a lot of science to back you up on that, but you say because of that men are fired wide to

achieve success and to be successful ina way achieve success and to be successful in a way women are not. not at all, i never said anything like that, i said there are biological differences between men and women that express themselves in temperament and occupational choice and any attempt to enforce equality of outcome is unwelcome and ill—advised as a consequence. of outcome is unwelcome and ill-advised as a consequence. some of the most successful societies, judged on contentment indices or material success are those in scandinavia... where the temperamental differences between men and women are larger than any other society. so you say, you point out in scandinavia many more women choose to be help workers than engineers or example. it's not what i say, it's what the large—scale scientific investigation has revealed. fair enough, but equally scandinavia is full of societies, you can point to norway, where they've made a legislative effort with a quote, 40% of women in boards ora with a quote, 40% of women in boards or a quota of women in parliament,

they have engaged specifically in social engineering and it seems to be working... it doesn't seem to be working. forgive me, norway is top of any contentment index we see across the world. ok, firstly norway has plenty of oil money, which is contributing to that and second, it depends what you mean by working. there's no evidence the legislation designed to increase the number of women on boards has increased any movement with a number of women holding management and administrative positions in norway. the theory was as societies become more a gamma terrier men and women would become more the same, but that hasn't happened. the biggest differences between men and women now temperament lee and in our own interest have manifested in the scandinavian countries, so what that will mean is men and women will make different choices in occupation if they have free choice. what are we meant to do, stop that from happening? is that the feminist perspective? let's go back to what i used before, and ask you directly,

do you approve of, it's a dangerous word, equality, this word?|j do you approve of, it's a dangerous word, equality, this word? i approve of equality of opportunity but equality of outcome is detestable and dangerous beyond belief. whether it be gay rights campaigners, civil rights campaigners, or indeed women's rights campaigners, if they wa nt to women's rights campaigners, if they want to see equality deliverable in outcomes, they are damaging society, they? depends on how far they go with it and how they measure it. these are very difficult technical issues but if your priority and your assumption is that if there are differences in outcome, those are the consequence of patriarchal oppression then it's a nonstarter because there are multiple reasons for unequal outcomes. was it helpful for unequal outcomes. was it helpful for you to be lot of your signs about the difference between genders on lobsters? i haven't based any of my signs on the difference between men and men and women and lobsters. you talk about how lobsters and humans behave the same, in that

context girls aren't attracted to boys who are their friends, they are attracted to boys who win status contests with other boys and you describe that in the same breath as male and female lobsters. it doesn't make that case, it's a truism of evolutionary biology. is it a truism from evolutionary biology that what we learn from lobsters we can apply to humans? it is because they are neurologically very similar. i'm no expert... but i am. i know you can, no lot of science but that i can't but it seems on the face of it somewhat bizarre to compare lobsters and humans comparing the different size of their brains. it is bizarre, that's why i did it because i wanted to make the case one of the chronic leftist criticisms of western society is its hierarchical nature, that's often put at the feet of, let's say, western society, patriarch keanna capitalist system, pa rt patriarch keanna capitalist system, part of the marxist critique. hierarchies have been around for 350

million years and you can't place them at the feet of the western political system and they've been around for so long that our neurochemical systems have evolved to match their existence. is its study of lobsters that's also one of the foundations for your belief that, you know, a mother and a father are crucially important for the raising of a child. it's certainly the case be crucially important if you compare them to single parents because the development all literature says the outcomes for children with two pa rents a re outcomes for children with two parents are better than with one. and development for children, efficacious as bar as you're concerned? minimum necessary forces the proper principle for discipline in any discipline and you have to negotiate that with your child and anyone else you'd interact with, that's the theme that motivates chapter five, which is that's the theme that motivates chapterfive, which is called don't let your children do anything that makes you dislike them. 0bviously

discipline for children is necessary and negotiating how that's done is difficult. it's interesting, you're an advocate in essence of toughening up an advocate in essence of toughening upfor... you an advocate in essence of toughening up for... you say things like, you know, men have to, i don't know if you ever used the phrase but others do, man up in the way they consistently... i usually mention they should stop being pathetic weasels. i guess that would fall into that category. i guess what odd thing about you and the public debate about you has worked out is that you seem so brittle and thin—skinned about criticism. that you seem so brittle and thin-skinned about criticism. well, suppose you might make that case but i don't think my media experiences have demonstrated that, would say quite the contrary. your social media experiences suggest that, one of the best—known critiques of your work in the new york review of books had you so angry, half the language you used i can't repeat but you called him an arrogant, racist son ofa called him an arrogant, racist son of a you know what. you said that you would happily slap him if he was

in the same room as you. because he referred to a friendship i had with a native canadian guy of several decades and said i was romancing the noble savage, which i regarded as an indefensible statement and if he had been on the right you would be sure he would have been torn to shreds. what about some of the values you tell us we must try to pursue. humility is one of them, you say you must assume the person you're listening to may know something you don't. you should try to do that on the off chance they can tell you something you don't know. just an off chance? it was an ironic comment. i'm more convinced i would rather know some things i don't know andi rather know some things i don't know and i do listen to people very carefully, just like i'm listening to you very carefully and i rodrigo duterte that because i would rather know some things that i don't know than be completely sure that what i already know it is correct. that doesn't mean i won't defend my points but i'm very good at talking to people and listening to them, i've been doing it for thousands of hours and i've learned plenty from

people i disagree with. your success is very striking, you talk a lot about success and what leads to success , about success and what leads to success, has your success made your life more meaningful?” success, has your success made your life more meaningful? i would say yes,... in what ways? well, it's more intense, the stakes are higher, the impact is larger, the amount of responsibility i therefore what i say has increased, and the number of people that i'm affecting has grown immensely. and so all of that's associated with a deeper sense of meaning but it's not without its cost. i have to be very careful for all sorts of reasons. so i'm trying to be very careful, bearing in mind that what i'm saying is going to be disproportionately impactful. but i do believe mostly from watching my audiences, let's say, on my public tours, that the primary effect that i'm having is in helping individuals

establish themselves more firmly in their personal and public lives, and that that's working very well. jordan peterson, we have to end there but i thank you very much for being on hardtalk. my pleasure. thanks for the invitation. hello. it's been a weekend of contrast across the uk. scotland and northern ireland have seen more cloud with some outbreaks of rain at times. england and wales have seen plenty of sunshine and it's been very warm if not hot. but some changes to come through the week. slowly we start to lose the heat. it will feel fresher for all of us, an increasing chance of seeing some showers.

also still some sunshine. it's sunshine we'll continue to see for much of england and wales on monday underneath this area of high pressure. meanwhile, for scotland and northern ireland, these fronts will continue to bring more cloud, and also some outbreaks of rain. slowly it will ease through monday becoming increasingly more patchy, with a little bit of rain possibly get into the far north of england through the afternoon. equally, breaks of cloud in eastern scotland. after breaks in the cloud on the western coast, lots of sunshine for england and wales, feeling warm, with 31 or 32 possible in east anglia and south—east england. still 23 for eastern parts of scotland in the best of the sunshine. through tomorrow evening, for most, it will be dry with clear skies again for england and wales, before mist and cloud reforms on the coast. still a zone of cloud from scotland to northern england. temperatures dropping to between 12 and 16 celsius in many areas, 17 or 18 maybe still in south—east england. we still have the front going from monday into tuesday. it's a weakening feature as it slips south and east.

still a band of cloud stretching from scotland down into parts of wales and south—east england. and it is a dividing line between the fresher air behind it and still holding onto the heat and warmth south and east. tuesday will be the last hot day that we see for some time across south—east england. you still have that zone of cloud stretching down from scotland into wales and that could bring patchy rain for a time on tuesday. but that will fizzle out. by tuesday afternoon, most areas will become largely dry with sunshine. temperatures still exceeding 30 celsius across east anglia and south—east england. the fresher feel to the north and west. but it is the last of the hot days. through tuesday evening, we could well see some thunderstorms developing across eastern and southern england.

as they start to clear away, we'll be in something fresher as we move into wednesday and thursday. certainly the case across much of scotland, northern ireland and northern england. still some showers around here wednesday and thursday. but notice the drop in temperature further south and east. many places to dry with an increasing chance that some of us can see some showers. goodbye. welcome to newsday on the bbc. i'm sharanjit leyl in singapore. the headlines: the indonesian island of lombok is rocked by the second deadly earthquake within a week. at least 82 people have been killed. translation: people started to shout "earthquake", then all the staff panicked and rushed out of the building and then officials asked everyone to vacate the building. fresh clashes erupt in bangladesh, as police try to disperse young people continuing a week—long protest in demand of safer roads. i'm lukwesa burak in london. also in the programme — tragedy in the swiss alps after a vintage military plane on a sightseeing flight plunges into a mountainside, killing all 20 people on board. and is communist china on the verge of a reconciliation