Time Restricted Eating: Does it work?

Although traditional reduced-calorie diets are a very science-based way to lose weight, intermittent fasting is a good alternative that studies suggest is just as beneficial for losing weight” –Sai Das, PhD

brown and black round analog watch on beige rocks

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Time-restricted eating is eating within a specified time-frame each day. Sometimes people refer to it as fasting, and it is popular in many health and wellness circles and some religions.

  It does not require one to change the foods he or she eats; it simply requires the food to be consumed  within a shorter time frame.

Although, research seems to suggest that placing that window earlier in the day is more beneficial because our blood sugar control and metabolism are generally better in the morning.  Regardless, time-restricted eating means fasting for a large part of the day and allowing oneself a minimized period of feeding.

woman girl jeans clothes

Photo by Public Domain Pictures on Pexels.com

There is a trending consensus that time restricted eating causes fat loss. The fat-loss theory in time-restricted eating is analogous to  lending money to somebody and then collecting interest on it every day.

You sacrifice for a period of time (no food to go into a fasted state), you get it all back (your window of time that you can eat), plus you benefit more because of the delay/sacrifice (your increased fat-burning).

In theory and analogy it is a wonderful idea. But what does the research say?

book book pages bookcase browse

Moro et al. (2016) found that males with a background in resistance training –and that fasted for 16 hours a day–decreased their fat levels and maintained their muscle mass while maintaining the same caloric intake; those that had a background in training and maintained a regular eating schedule did not reduce their fat levels. Similarly, a pilot study on women found a significant decrease in fat for women who were involved in resistance training and followed a time-restricted diet (Smith, LeSarge, & Lemon, 2017). Although those in the women’s resistance training group maintained muscle mass while decreasing fat, the other groups did not have the same benefits; they experienced an overall weight loss, which included muscle.

A scientist from the Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging (HNRCA) – Sai Das, PhD—has commented on intermittent fasting, stating “Although traditional reduced-calorie diets are a very science-based way to lose weight, intermittent fasting is a good alternative that studies suggest is just as beneficial for losing weight” (The Buzz on Intermittent Fasting, 2017). She goes on to note that there have not been many scientific studies comparing the different intermittent regimens, so there is not a clear  amount of fasting that one should follow; moreover, Das reminds readers to avoid overcompensating during feeding times.

Much more experimental, long-term studies have been done on animals, resulting in better research and substantiated conclusions.

white baby mouse

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

In a popular Youtube video—linked below in the references–  Dr. Rhonda Patrick discusses the immense benefits of fasting on mice, referencing work by Dr. Satchidananda Panda. Moreover, Dr. Patrick gives her own anecdotes, stating she has experienced an increase in cardiovascular benefits. Other suggested  benefits of intermittent fasting may include: cognitive enhancement and an overall increase in health biomarkers.

To me, the evidence suggests that time-restricted eating can be beneficial– especially for those that are already on a workout plan.

Whether the weight loss and/or fat burning caused during time restricted eating is as effective for those living a sedentary lifestyle, it is difficult to say; people could unintentionally cut calories during the fasting time– that and food choices are factors that must be controlled for in larger future human studies. Moreover, although food choices were not mentioned, it is still important to eat as healthy as possible. One should not expect great results while eating horrible foods daily. 

If you are looking for an alternative to cutting a bunch of calories, time-restricted eating seems to be a safe and more practical way to attempt to reach your goal.

Although I have provided some research on the subject, please do your own and draw your own conclusions. I will be giving the fasting a try, limiting myself to food for 10 hours a day to start.


Subscribe to see my updates and to join in on the discussion!



Moro, T., Tinsley, G., Bianco, A., Marcolin, G., Pacelli, Q. F., Battaglia, G., & … Paoli, A. (2016). Effects of eight weeks of time-restricted feeding (16/8) on basal metabolism, maximal strength, body composition, inflammation, and cardiovascular risk factors in resistance-trained males. Journal Of Translational Medicine, 141-10. doi:10.1186/s12967-016-1044-0

Smith, S. T., LeSarge, J. C., & Lemon, P. R. (2017). Time-Restricted Eating in Women – A Pilot Study. Western Undergraduate Research Journal: Health & Natural Sciences, 8(1), 1-6. doi:10.5206/wurjhns.2017-18.3

The Buzz on Intermittent Fasting: Studies suggest intermittent fasting regimens can help with weight loss. But, long-term adherence and health benefits are uncertain. (2017). Tufts University Health & Nutrition Letter, 4.

Youtube interview– Joe Rogan & Rhonda Patrick:

Youtube interview– Rhonda Patrick & Satchin Panda

Rule 3: Make Friends With People Who Want The Best For You


This rule is much shorter and to the point than some of the other rules.

Take a look at Michaelangelo’s David above. What is it? Does it have any meaning? Think about that as we go through this rule.

Peterson opens rule three with stories of his childhood, which we will briefly outline here. He grew up in Fairview, Alberta, where winter temperatures can be forty-below, and the daylight incredibly short. There wasn’t much to do, and the kids he grew up with didn’t want to do much.

single cab pickup truck

Peterson had a friend that he calls Chris. Chris was a smart guy; he read a lot, was inventive, and was a natural engineer. He had a nice family, and his sisters were smart, too.

But something was off– something wasn’t right.

Chris was angry and resentful; he was without hope. Peterson says that Chris’s mannerisms manifested themselves in the form of a pickup that he drove.

It was dented on the inside and outside from wrecks.

“Chris’s truck was the exoskeleton of a nihilist” (Peterson, p. 69, 2018). 

Peterson spent his adolescent years with Chris and his cousin Ed. He remembers drunken nights, which he does not look upon nostalgically; and he also remembers the general feeling of the time that the group bought into.

“Doing anything wasn’t cool” (Peterson, p. 71, 2018).

Peterson wanted to be elsewhere, and it wasn’t because a lack of money. He states that he made more money working a plywood mill in town than he would make for the next 20 years of his life. It was the conditions of the setting, the unchanging, negative air of the little town.

Peterson goes to college and finds a group of like-minded friends. He disconnected himself from his past, and he said it was freeing.

“I thought this was just a natural development. I thought that every person who moved would have– and want– the same phoenix-like experience. But that wasn’t always the case” (Peterson, p. 73, 2018).

architecture arm blur buildings

Photo by Kaique Rocha on Pexels.com

He recalls an egregious memory he had while in Edmonton finishing his undergraduate degree. He and his sister took an apartment in the city; it was nice and overlooked the the skyline.

Peterson’s companion from earlier– Ed, Chris’s cousin– had moved to the city, too. Peterson invited Ed over to catch up.

Ed brought his friend over. Peterson recalls seeing Ed and his friend in bad condition.

“Ed showed up, older, balder and stooped. He was a lot more not-doing-so-well young adult and a lot less youthful possibility” (Peterson, p. 74, 2018).

Ed had taken a job mowing lawns, which Peterson admits is a perfectly acceptable job for a someone who could not do better; however, it was a wretchedly low-end career for an intelligent person.

Peterson recalls seeing the tell-tale signs of a stoner with no control– red eyes and lifeless– in Ed and his buddy.  Moreover, Peterson soon found out that Chris wasn’t doing well either.

What was it that made Ed and Chris unable (or unwilling) to change their circumstances?

horror crime death psychopath

Peterson asks questions to get the reader thinking. Was it inevitable? Was it because of their past traumas and their own limitations? People vary, but he makes an interesting point on the nature-nurture debate.

“The degree to which these differences are immutably part and parcel of someone is greater than an optimist might presume or desire” (Peterson, p. 75, 2018). 

It turns out that Chris had a psychotic break in his thirties, resulting in suicide. He had been flirting with insanity for years, explains Peterson.

Why did Chris and Peterson’s other childhood friends continually choose to be with people and in places that were not good for them?

This is where it gets interesting

Freud often discussed something called the repetition compulsion. It can be defined as the unconscious drive to repeat bad– horrible– decisions. Sometimes people commit these repetitions to formulate them more precisely, or because no other options beckon.

“It’s partly fate. It’s partly inability. It’s partly… unwillingness to learn? Refusal to learn? Motivated refusal to learn?” (Peterson, p. 75, 2018).

Rescuing the Damned– Is it Possible?

backlit breathing apparatus danger dangerous

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Sometimes people choose friends who aren’t good for them because they want to help them. Peterson thinks this may be a bad idea. He gives the argument credence by mentioning that many view the highest virtue as the willingness to help. However he makes a valid point:

“But not everyone who is failing is a victim, and not everyone at the bottom wishes to rise, although many do, and many manage it. Nonetheless, people will often accept or even amplify their own suffering, as well as that of others, if they can brandish it as evidence of the world’s injustice” (Peterson, p. 76, 2018). 

The following paragraphs get rather complex and nuanced, referring to other manners in which helping others is an incredibly unstable choice– specifically when the ‘hero’ is nothing but an individual who wants someone to save but cannot save himself. You need to refer to the book to get a full understanding… However, we will continue:

“When it’s not just naivete, the attempt to rescue someone is often fueled by vanity and narcissism” (Peterson, p. 76, 2018).

Peterson outlines the argument one might make on behalf of himself and Christ. After all, Jesus befriended the downtrodden, so why shouldn’t you?

cross jesus summit cross

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

“But Christ was the archetypal perfect man. And you’re you” (Peterson, p. 78, 2018).

Peterson goes on to give some practical research, that which may satisfy the evidence-seeking. He references a study by Barrick et al (1998), which found that peer group interventions in the workplace are harmful. The study showed that putting a problematic person in a well-performing group brings the group down as a whole.

Another study showed that putting a delinquent teen among civilized-peers resulted in a spread of delinquency– not stability. 

Maybe there are times when you believe your strength and generosity are what drive your actions. Maybe you want to prove something.  “Or maybe it’s because it’s easier to look virtuous when standing alongside someone utterly irresponsible” (Peterson, p. 79, 2018).

He says that you should assume you are doing the easiest thing, not the most difficult.

It may look like effort and progress, but there is probably some sort of enabling going on. And it may be possible that your contempt is more salutary than your pity…

Consider these circumstances:

  • One’s raging alcoholism makes another’s binge drinking seem marginal
  • Long talks with a friend over his  failing marriage convince you both that you are doing the best that you can

Real improvement requires much more. The person crying out may have already decided that his suffering is acceptable because it is easier than shouldering true responsibility. 

Often times people have no plan, and they associate with similar individuals because it is easier– you know it, and so  do they– and they have all decided to sacrifice the future for the present.

man s hand in shallow focus and grayscale photography

Photo by lalesh aldarwish on Pexels.com

 “Before you help someone, you should find out why that person is in trouble” (Peterson, p. 80, 2018).

You shouldn’t assume the person is a victim, that the world is against them, and none of their problems are self-inflicted. That, according to Peterson, is the most unlikely situation.

Failure is easy to understand. Vice is easy to adhere to. It’s easier to not shoulder responsibility. Success is the mystery, according to Peterson. Success and virtue are the inexplicable.

Moreover, assuming that everything is out of one’s hands disables the person from having power over his or her future choices. 

“I am not saying that there is no hope of redemption. But it is much harder to extract someone from a chasm than to lift him from a ditch. And some chasms are very deep. And there’s not much left of the body at the bottom” (Peterson, p. 81, 2018).

Peterson continues to give examples, but he comes to a conclusion with this. Maybe one is better off getting his or her act together and leading by example– not continuing a harmful friendship. He finishes by stating that none of the aforementioned is justification for abandoning those in real need.

backlit blur boys brother

Before closing the chapter, Peterson asks us to consider our relationships. If you have a friendship you wouldn’t recommend to a family member, maybe you should abandon it. Loyalty isn’t everything; reciprocity is important here.

“You should choose people who want things to be better, not worse. It’s a good thing, not a selfish thing, to choose people who are good for you” (Peterson, p. 82, 2018). 

Remember Michaelangelo’s sculpture at the beginning? It is an ideal, perfection.  It says to you: ” You can be more than you are.”  It is there to make you uncomfortable in your current state. It challenges you.

Aspire upwards; by doing so you dare others to be better, too.

“Have some courage. Use your judgement, and protect yourself from too-uncritical compassion and pity” (Peterson, p. 83, 2018).



Barrick, M., Stewart, G., Neuber, M., & Mount, M. (1998). Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 377-391.

Peterson, J. (2018). 12 rules for life: An antidote to chaos. London etc.: A. Lane, an imprint of Penguin Books.

Worthwhile Purchases for Beginning Marathoners


people having a marathon

1.A race ticket ($20-$100)

This one is the most important and most obvious. If you purchase the ticket to run in a race, you are more likely to train for said race. The biggest obstacle to training is lack of motivation; a set date will keep you on schedule.


2. Training shoes ($50-$120)

You can run in regular athletic shoes– for a while–but at some point you will want/need to invest in something more sport-specific— running shoes. Go to your local runner’s store to find out about different shoes and about your specific needs for your feet.

asphalt clouds endurance grass

Photo by kinkate on Pexels.com



3. A GPS watch ($75-$250)

Now this isn’t necessary, but the article isn’t called “Necessary Purchases…” I am speaking from experience: having a GPS watch, specifically one with music built in, is a worthwhile investment. 



4. Clothing and anti-chafing remedies ($30-$200)

You can get away with regular workout clothes if you have them; however, once you start to hit those high miles, when it is humid and  near 80 degrees when you wake up, you will want the shorts, tops, and socks that minimize chafing.

Have you ever had to place tape over your nipples, had your thighs chafe, or your lats irritated to death for hours by the movement of an ill-fitting shirt?

You can get decent items from Walmart, TJ Maxx, and Ross for a bargain, or you can spend tons on the newest stuff out. Make it fit your budget.

Even with all that, you will have problems. To reduce the friction, use something like: BODY GLIDE– LOOK IT UP! I’ve found that coconut oil works well, too. 

women s wearing purple floral brassiere holding gray concrete pathway during day time

Photo by JÉSHOOTS on Pexels.com


5. Compression wear ($30-$100)

Compression wear is beneficial for post-workouts, when your body is sore and recovering; or you can wear it during the work out. The idea is the same: to minimize recovery time and increase comfort. Knee and calf-sleeves are my go-to’s.



6. Foam roller ($30)

A foam roller and muscle roller massage stick are going to be your best friends after a lot of your runs. They are beneficial for, well, your muscles– of course. Check out some Youtube videos if you haven’t seen them before. Well worth the money.



7. A training program (FREE)

If you want, you can spend a good chunk of change on a plan and diet, but I wouldn’t do that if this is your first rodeo. It can be tough enough to stay on schedule, especially when the miles pick up. Find a reputable training program online for free and stick to it; also, join a forum if you are lost. There is a lot of free, quality information out there.

adventure athlete athletic daylight

Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com


8. Gels ($25 for a large box)

Not necessary, but definitely useful on those longer runs. There are alternative ways to create your own in-run snacks, but I find the gels to be perfectly sized and practical. Throw a few in your pockets before a long run; you won’t regret it. 




These are not all necessary purchases in the beginning– and a few you do not need at all– so don’t be too put off by the numbers; however, marathon training is an investment– in time and money. You want to make it as comfortable and practical a process as possible.

It is worth it in the end, and you will be a better person for taking on the challenge and completing it.



Often times, people take better care of others, even better care of animals, than they do of themselves. 

Why is that? Do we not care for ourselves like we should? Jordan Peterson takes an interesting approach to this, an approach that makes one think deeply about his or her self-care. 


Peterson opens up rule number two with an alarming fact. People are better at administering medication to others than they are to themselves.

Out of a hundred people prescribed medication, one-third will not have the prescription filled. Half of the remaining sixty-seven will fill it, but won’t take the medication correctly” (Peterson, p. 31, 2018). They will miss doses, take it at the wrong times, or they will neglect it completely. “What’s wrong with them? Don’t they want to get better?” asks Peterson.

It gets worse…

You may be thinking to yourself that people don’t really do that when they absolutely have to take their medication, right? Like, people wouldn’t do that after a surgery, or when it is a matter of life and death. Well…

Consider patients that have been waiting for a kidney transplant. Peterson outlines how difficult of a process this can be: the time one must wait, the dialysis, and the fear of the body rejecting the organ. Dialysis involves passing all of the body’s blood through a machine, five to seven times a week, for eight hours at a time.

 Rejection of the organ happens when the body detects a foreign object in it, regardless of whether or not the object is intended to help. To stop the rejection from occurring, one must take anti-rejection medication. Even with the medication, recipients can still suffer from rejection, but it is often the fault of the individual.

“It’s more often because those prescribed the drugs do not take them” (Peterson, p. 32, 2018).

Peterson gives possible reasons for why individuals may miss their scheduled medications: often these people are isolated and have multiple health problems; they could be cognitively impaired and depressed; there is mistrust between the patient and doctor; and they could be in a financial circumstance that requires them to ration the drugs, desperately and unproductively (Peterson, 2018).


He asks us to imagine that it isn’t the reader that is sick, it’s one’s animal– say, your dog. After one takes his or her dog to the vet, a prescription is given. Guess what? The thought process and actions change, and it doesn’t need to be life or death for the animal.

“You have just as many reasons to distrust a vet as a doctor. Furthermore, if you cared so little for your pet that you weren’t concerned with what improper, substandard or error-ridden prescription he might be given, you wouldn’t have taken him to the vet in the first place.”

People are better at administering medicine to their animals than they are to themselves.

“It is difficult to conclude anything form this set of facts except that people appear to love their dogs, cats, ferrets and birds (and maybe even their lizards) more than themselves” (Peterson, p 33, 2018).

At first read this comes across as too absurd to be true, I admit; however, let’s ponder on this thought for a moment. Can you think of people that you know that fit this description? I bet that some of you can.

Now, the person you are imagining probably smokes, drinks excessively , puts unhealthy food in his or her body, or makes a number of other, let’s say, less-than-stellar choices. He or she has an animal or two, and takes fantastic care of it. It gets the best food and care around, is socialized with other animals, and has regular visits to the vet; however, the person probably has multiple health issues that are neglected, or you can see them coming down the road. Do you see the juxtaposition now? Animal= greater care; self= less than stellar. 

The peculiar realization is this: if said person were to give someone else advice on how to live and care for oneself, I do not think it would reflect his or her lifestyle and choices. 

“What could it be about people that makes them prefer their pets to themselves” (Peterson, p. 33, 2018).

Oblige me and take the time to read what’s ahead; it is deep and dark at times, but it is meaningful…


Order, Chaos, & The Domain of What Matters, Not Matter

Roughly 500 years ago the world began to adopt a scientific world view, thanks to the likes of Descartes, Bacon, and Newton. Before that time people were less deterministic and materialistic, and their views were constructed on actions and experience, not things, Peterson explains.

Our lives are much more akin to a story or a drama lived subjectively, with feelings and lived experiences: emotions, dreams, hunger, thirst, and pain.

“Pain matters, more than matter matters” (Peterson, p. 35, 2018).

Because we are so scientific now, it is difficult for many to relate to the way the world was viewed many years ago. “But those who existed during the distant time in which the foundational epics of our culture emerged were much more concerned with the actions that dictated survival than with anything approximating what we now understand as objective truth” (Peterson, p. 34, 2018).

The scientific world can be broken down into: molecules, atoms, and quarks. The world we experience can also be broken down, and the constituents are very familiar once understood (they define drama and fiction):  Order, Chaos, and the mediation of the two– Consciousness.

“It is our eternal subjugation to the first two that makes us doubt the validity of existence– that makes us throw up our hands in despair, and fail to care for ourselves properly. It is proper understanding of the third that allows us the only real way out.”


The domain of ignorance; unexplored territory; has no limits; the monster under the bed; the foreigner; despair when you know you have been betrayed; the place you end up when things fall apart; when your dreams die, your career collapses, or your marriage ends; the underworld in a fairy tale; skating on thin ice; we all skate on ice, and sometimes it becomes thin and we fall through…

“Chaos is where we are when we don’t know where we are , and what we are doing when we don’t know what we are doing” (Peterson, p. 36, 2018).

Chaos is also the chance, the potential in a situation, hope. Chaos is freedom, but too much freedom can become dreadful. 


Explored territory; structure in society; the structure provided by biology; tribe, religion, home and country; the warm, secure place where all is safe; the flag of a nation and its valued currency; tradition; the rows of desks in a classroom and the structure that comes from a teacher; our calendars, schedules, and routines; it’s the politeness with which we greet each other, the facade we put on just because that is what we do in society; order is where the world behaves and acts in a manner in line with our expectations and beliefs; we like order, and order is important; however, order is also where tyranny and stultification can occur…

We rarely leave places that are in order; we do not seek chaos consistently. Order allows for competence and routine, a feeling of calmness and stability.

“Chaos and order are two of the most fundamental elements of lived experience– two of the most basic subdivisions of being itself” (Peterson, p. 38, 2018). They are not inanimate things or objects; they are lived experiences, real and felt.

Chaos and Order: Personality, Female and Male

Humans see what things mean, their usefulness as a tool, their intent, before we perceive what they are. This may be counter-intuitive but, “Perception of things as tools , for example, occurs before or in concert with perception of things as objects” (Peterson, p. 39, 2018). 

Because we are intensely social creatures, our hierarchical, typical perceptions, the personalities we have evolved to perceive,  have been around forever. The personalities have been male or female.

“The division of life into its twin sexes occurred before the evolution of multi-cellular animals. It was in a still-respectable one-fifth of that time that mammals, who take extensive care of their young, emerged. Thus the category of “parent and/or “child” has been around for 200 million years”.

Peterson argues that the great expanse of time of evolution has created natural categories for us– natural categories that are deeply embedded into our motivational structures. The habitat we lived wasn’t just materialistic trees, water, and dirt, he suggests; it was the the people, our social interactions that were also a part of the environment.  Therefore, from a Darwinian perspective, nature, reality itself, is what selected, and the environment cannot be defined in “any more fundamental manner.”

“Reality itself is whatever we contend with when we are striving to survive and reproduce. A lot of that is other beings, their opinions of us, and their communities. And that’s that ” (Peters, p. 39, 2018).

I believe this is where Peterson derives his beliefs regarding the male, female duality and how he applies it to the world.  In his opinion, the male, female role is not merely a social construction–it goes deeper than that– it is biological. It formed the social structure itself, not the other way around. 

And that is why he gets on television and says what he does; and that is why he doesn’t believe in equal outcomes, but does believe in equality of opportunity.

We are so finely constructed and melded, through millions of years of a conservative evolutionary processes, that an upheaval, a dramatic attempt to change the social structure, is really an attempt to flip the switch of biology: that cannot be done in one fell swoop. 

“Our minds are far older than mere humanity. Our categories are far older than our species” (Peterson, p. 40, 2018).

Peterson argues that we have taken that primordial knowledge of structure and used it as a lens to interpret everything.

In the Taoist image of the yin and yang, the white can be interpreted as order and masculinity, while the black is interpreted as chaos and femininity. Inside each half is a small circle; the circles represent the lurking chaos in order and the opportunity for order in chaos.

The known/order, yang, is associated with masculinity, and this is perhaps because of the masculine hierarchy associated with most animals. Peterson lays out other examples: men have been the builders of towns, engineers, brick layers; “order is god the father, the eternal Judge” (Peterson, p. 40, 2018).

It’s the ‘they’ in ‘you know what they say.’

When order is pushed too far, it manifests itself in stultifying evil and oppression. It is the forced migration and concentration camps, the gulags, and soul-crushing conformity. 

The unknown– chaos– is associated with the feminine. The unknown represents the idea of being born, coming from a mother, as all beings have done. “Chaos is mater, origin, source mother; materia, the substance from which all things are made” (Peterson, p. 41, 2018).

Chaos, as a positive guise, represents chance, possibility, hope and belief. It is change, gestation, birth. As a negative force, chaos is darkness, the unknown, disorder, and danger.

“Chaos, the eternal feminine, is also the crushing force of sexual selection” (Peterson, p. 41, 2018).

Women are fastidious in their choice of a mate. This is known by all men, but it is also reflected in statistics: women rate 85 percent of men as unattractive on dating websites.

“Women’s proclivity to say no,more than any other force, has shaped our evolution into the creative, industrious, upright, large-brained (competitive, aggressive, domineering) creatures that we are” (Peterson, p. 41, 2018). 

Peterson goes on and one about the feminine and masculine, and how it is represented in religion and the implications is has on our lives. His main point is this:

Chaos and order are so fundamental to life that every situation, even every conceivable one, is structured by it. To live in the most fulfilling manner, one must have one foot in order and one in chaos; if the goal is to live a fulfilling life, we do not get that by being too comfortable or too disorderly.

Peterson continues to unpack the feminine and masculine from a religious standpoint, focusing on the Genesis stories and, specifically, on the story of Adam and Eve. Although familiar, it is important to review the story to understand how this ties into order and chaos. 

Here are the main points:

  1. God placed Adam and Eve in a (un)bounded space, with bountiful fruit and two forbidden trees: the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
  2. Adam and Eve are not self-conscious
  3. A serpent appears

We have to focus on the symbolism of the snake in the garden; Peterson breaks this down in a fascinating and poignant way.

The serpent appearing in the garden is the black dot in the yin side of the Taoist symbol. It is the chaos that can show itself and disrupt order.

There is no bounded place where chaos and evil cannot show itself– not in the real world. “So even the ultimate in safe spaces inevitably harbors a snake” (Peterson, p. 46, 2018).

Even if all the snakes could be defeated in our area, walls constructed, and a watchful and determined set of eyes working tirelessly to protect the inhabitants within, chaos still emerges.

Chaos emerges because of a staggering realization.

“As the great Russian writer Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn insisted, the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being” (Peterson, p. 47, 2018). 

It is not possible to wall off a space and keep it safe from all that is evil and chaotic; the capacity for good and evil inhabits all. A serpent will appear…

Peterson then indulges the hypothetical: what if we could render all safe and lead a perfect and orderly life?

He says that is not ideal. “It is far better to render Beings in your care competent than to protect them” (Peterson, p. 47, 2018).

The message is for all, but it is specifically directed at parents. He asks a question at the end of the page to get parents thinking critically. “Do you want to make your children safe, or strong ?”

Back to the story of Adam and Eve…

4. The snake convinces Eve to eat the forbidden fruit

5. She’s conscious and self-conscious for the first time

6. The unawakened man is given the fruit by the woman, rendering him self- conscious

“Women have been making men self-conscious since the beginning of time. They do this primarily by rejecting them– but they also do it by shaming them, if men do not take responsibility” (Peterson, p. 48, 2018).

There is an interesting connection here. The snake has opened our eyes metaphorically, but they may have done so literally.

Dr. Lynn Isbenn suggests that our acute vision comes from the adaptation necessary to co-evolve with snakes in a similar territory; if we could not identify them quickly, they would punish us with an attack.

Peterson suggests that the serpent has given us the vision of God, but that it is also the eternal enemy of humanity. He believes the depiction in the image below may serve as an example of this, among other metaphors.  Take notice of the serpent under Mary.


(Krent & Marx, n.d.)

Virgin and Child (c. 1480) by Geertgen tot Sint Jans

Another interesting connection is this: the serpent offers fruit, and fruit is connected with vision, in that the ability to detect colors of fruits allow for one to rapidly collect food.

Our ancestors listened to and were influenced by the snake, resulting in vision– metaphorically and literally. Adam and Eve have awoken, and the first thing they notice is that they’re naked.

What does it mean to know yourself and your partner naked?

It means to be vulnerable and easily damaged, according to Peterson.

“Naked means subject to judgement for beauty and health. Naked means unprotected and unarmed in the jungle of nature and man” (Peterson, p. 50, 2018).

Adam and Eve were ashamed because they could see– and what they could see was themselves. They were embarrassed because their faults and vulnerabilities stood out, so they made themselves loincloths (or aprons) to cover up and protect their egos.

They felt unworthy to stand before God.

Let’s unpack that statement. One can take it literally or metaphorically, but either way the message has strong meaning. Here is how Peterson breaks it down:

“Beauty shames the ugly. Strength shames the weak. Death shames the living– and the Ideal shames us all” (p. 50).

These intense feelings cause fear, resentment and hate, which is the theme of the story of Cain and Abel. We must accept it as a part of life. It is the price that we pay for ambition and achievement.

“But it’s also no wonder that Adam and Eve covered themselves up” (Peterson, p. 50, 2018).

The next part of the story is interesting and rather poignant. God goes looking for Adam but cannot find him. When he does, he asks him why he has been hiding. Adam reveals why: he was naked and hid–he felt shame and vulnerability.

Being afraid to walk with God means that Adam– people– are afraid of their vulnerability, truth, and they find it difficult to mediate between chaos and order. 

Peterson takes his analysis to another level here– again.

God asks Adam how he knows of his nakedness, and Adam snitches on Eve. In doing so, he also blames God…

Men, ask yourself if you have ever done something like this. Blamed another, then cursed the heavens because of a decision you made. I bet you have. 

“How pathetic– and how accurate. The first woman made the first man self-conscious and resentful. Then the first man blamed the woman. And then the first man blamed God. This is exactly how every spurned male feels, to this day” (Peterson, p. 51, 2018).

God curses the serpent, relegating him to a life on the ground– forever. He tells the woman she will bring forth children in sorrow; moreover, she will desire or need a resentful and unworthy man.

Is God a patriarchal tyrant? Peterson says NO. The story is merely descriptive in his view.

The evolutionary arms race between fetal head and female pelvis, the care needed for babies, and the consequences of child birth, which included death for a long period of history, requires the good graces of problematic and unreliable men.

What about man? What are his consequences?

Essentially he forces man to work for eternity, and Peterson explains God’s plan for man like this:

Because you have been awakened, you have vision, and with vision comes the vision of the present and future. With vision of the future comes the vision of trouble. Thus, you will always have your eyes on the future, sacrificing the present. You will put aside pleasure for security, and it is going to be difficult.

God banishes the first man and woman from paradise, out into the world and the evils and troubles of history.

Peterson entertains the question many have: why banish them and make them suffer? His answer is: who questions God? Moreover, he suggests, “Perhaps Heaven is something you must build, and immortality something you must earn” (Peterson, p. 53, 2018).

So we return to our initial question.

Why do people administer medication so carefully to their animals, but they will not tend to themselves with the same care?

Peterson suggest that we may be asking the wrong question… why would anyone care for the shameful, resentful, naked, ashamed, worthless, cowardly, defensive, and accusatory descendants of Adam? Moreover, 

“No one is more familiar than you with all the ways your mind and body are flawed. No one has more reason to hold you in contempt, to see you as pathetic–and by withholding something that might do you good, you can punish yourself for your failings” (Peterson, p. 53, 2018).

I admit, that is a harsh statement and realization. I don’t think it is something that a lot of people will subscribe to, but I do find it fascinating to think about. Do we really view ourselves in that way? Do you?

Much has been contemplated to this point, but there is more. “We are next fated to contemplate morality itself” (Peterson, p. 53, 2018).

Good and Evil

With their eyes open, consciousness seeps in, and Adam and Eve come to know more than their nakedness– they come to know morality (Good and Evil). I am unaware of how common it is to take this approach, but Peterson says it took him many years to figure out what it all meant.

Nakedness clued him in

What is the difference between man and animal? Animals are predators, but we still love them for what they are. It is their nature to be predatory, and they cannot see beyond that.

“They’re hungry, not evil. They don’t have the presence of mind, the creativity– and, above all, the self-consciousness– necessary for the inspired cruelty of man” (Peterson, p.54, 2018). 

Nakedness clued Peterson into this realization because our realization of our nakedness is also the beginning of our self-consciousness and rational brain. When we can see our own flaws,  we can identify them in others. When we know where we are susceptible to pain, discomfort, shame, and cruelty, we can force it onto others.

“We know how we are naked, and how that nakedness can be exploited– and that means we know how others are naked, and how they can be exploited” (Peterson, p. 54, 2018).

This realization, this power, is more than predatory: it can be evil. “That’s the entry of the knowledge of Good and Evil into the world” (Peterson, p. 54, 2018).

Peterson goes on to explain how the capacity to do wrong, to exacerbate pain intentionally, to voluntarily make things worse, is the reason we are suspicious of ourselves. Why wouldn’t we be?

“And no one understands the darkness of the individual better than the individual himself. Who, then, when ill, is going to be fully committed to his own care” (Peterson, p. 55, 2018).

He continues and ponders whether man is something that should have never been. Who, in their deepest and darkest moments, has not wondered about this? Wouldn’t the world be better if the innocent brutality of the animal is all that there is?

A Spark of the Divine

God creates man and woman in Genesis I in his image, and in his image we, too, have the capacity to transform order and chaos.  God looks upon his creation, each step along the way, and pronounces it Good.

Genesis 2 & 3 outline the fall of man, and they describe why our lot is so tragedy-ridden. “The moral in Genesis I is that being brought into existence through true speech is Good” (Peterson, p. 56, 2018). The stories of Cain and Abel, the Flood, and the Tower of Babel make us question ourselves, but we do not forget Genesis I.

We find respite in the prelapsarian state. We remain eternally optimistic and nostalgic of the unconscious and for the innocence of childhood. But there is no going back…

Man and woman, before the awakening, existed in unity with their Creator. However, their perfection was different, and it is not better than earned goodness.

There was no choice in the pre-Fall of the individual, and God knows that is easier. 

Maybe goodness that is genuinely earned is better; maybe there is something to be said about free choice. Who knows? Peterson is thinking out loud here, and he says that just because these are difficult things to ponder, they should not be taken off the table.

He considers an alternative to our question of self-care. Maybe it’s not our self-hate, derived from our lowly thoughts of ourselves, that makes us care less about our bodies and minds than we should.

“Perhaps it is instead or unwillingness– reflected in Adam’s shamed hiding– to walk with God, despite our fragility and propensity for evil” (Peterson, p. 57, 2018).

Everything after the fall is structured to show readers how to remedy it, to find a way out of evil.  It is humanity’s attempt to set things right, but what would that mean? Is there something we are missing? Yes…


The answer is implicit in Genesis I. Our way out is to embody the Image of God, to bring order from chaos, but to do so of our own free will. We must bring goodness into the world by changing ourselves first.

Peterson continues,

“If we wish to take care of ourselves properly, we would have to respect ourselves– but we don’t because we are– not least in our own eyes– fallen creatures. If we lived in Truth; if we spoke the Truth– then we could walk with God once again, and respect ourselves, and others, and the world. Then we might treat ourselves like people we cared for. We might strive to set the world straight. We might orient it toward Heaven, where we would want people we care for to dwell, instead of Hell, where our resentment and hatred would eternally sentence everyone.”

Our past was ridden with barbaric ways, child sacrifices, and bellicose tendencies. The moral issue of the past was to control and diminish these atrocities; and people with those tendencies still remain– although the numbers are diminished greatly. 

Many still believe our main societal problem is egotism, arrogance, and narcissism. Peterson says that just isn’t true of our time’s orientation; in fact, we face the opposite problem.

More people shoulder and suffer from self-disgust, self-contempt, shame, and self-consciousness. 

“They believe that other people shouldn’t suffer, and they will work diligently and altruistically to help them alleviate it. They extend the same courtesy even to the animals they are acquainted with– but not so easily to themselves.”

Self-sacrifice, Christ’s archetypal death, does not necessarily mean “sacrifice yourself for others.” It is an example of how to accept finitude, not how to victimize oneself for the benefit of others.

One should not suffer silently, while others benefit from said sacrifice. To do so is tyranny and to be treated like a slave. 

“It is not virtuous to be victimized by a bully, even if that bully is oneself” (Peterson, p. 59, 2018).

The best way to think of this, according to Peterson, is to understand the philosophy. You don’t just belong to yourself, burdened by your own torture and mistreatment. Your Being is tied up with others, and your self-harm has consequences that move far beyond yourself.

This is best understood in the aftermath of suicide, when those left behind are traumatized and bereft. It is important for us to take note of that, and to do our best to serve ourselves, as well as others. 

“We have the semi-divine capacity for consciousness” (Peterson, p. 60, 2018).

Peterson goes on to explain personal experiences, when the resilience of the human spirit prevails. He says that he is often amazed at this ability, but he sees this everyday heroism as the rule, not the exception. 

We are all broken is some sense, and if we aren’t at the moment, we know someone who is.

“There are so many ways that things can fall apart, or fail to work altogether, and it is always wounded people who are holding it together” (Peterson, p. 61, 2018). 

Some people are overcome, degenerating into the Hell of Being, but most refuse to do so.  Our situation is one that no animal endures, and it deserves some sympathy.  Peterson outlines the respect we should have for each other and ourselves, and he discusses the responsibility we have to take care of ourselves.

“We deserve some respect. You deserve some respect” (Peterson, p. 62, 2018). 

Treating yourself like someone you are responsible for helping means to consider what is truly good for you. It is not “what you want” or “what makes you happy.”

“Happy is by no means synonymous with good. You must get children to brush their teeth. They must put on their snowsuits when they go outside in the cold, even though they might object strenuously.” (Peterson, p. 62, 2018).

You must help a  child  become virtuous and responsible, able to care of himself and others. Why think differently of yourself?

Think of the direction you are going. Does it make sense for you? Will it force you to put one foot in order and one in chaos? Will it simply render you competent and safe, not strong and growing? Is your vision bringing you forward, or is it keeping you in the same place?

Start with yourself. Define yourself. Refine yourself. That will give you  Meaning… Friedrich Netzsche said, “He whose life has a why can bear almost any how.” Find your why– every day.

Treat yourself as if you are someone you are responsible for helping.



Krent, E & Marx, D. (n.d.). Geertgen tot Sint Jans Biography. Retrieved from https://www.wga.hu/html_m/g/geertgen/virgin_c.html

Peterson, J. (2018). 12 rules for life: An antidote to chaos. London etc.: A. Lane, an imprint of Penguin Books.

12 Rules For Life: Chapter 1 Review

I will be reviewing each chapter (rule) of Jordan Peterson’s book 12 Rules For Life: An Antidote To Chaos. Even if you don’t agree with him, you will be interested to see his points.

One of the rules is: Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them.

Stick around, and we will get to that one!  If you aren’t in the mood for reading much, check out some of his videos on Youtube. He has a way of communicating ideas and beliefs that many know to be true but do not know how or why.  My thoughts and ideas will become much clearer and concise as we get into each chapter, but before you continue down this road with me, do yourself the favor of picking up the book and forming your own opinion first; then, please come to me and leave your thoughts. I look forward to reviewing this with all of you.

Rule One:  Stand up straight with your shoulders back



Photo by Travis Rupert on Pexels.com


The book and chapter begins with a discussion on lobsters and birds. As you will find, much of Peterson’s rules are explained through stories– some scientific, some religious, and some personal–and the stories can seem irrelevant until he ties everything together; he does a great job with that  for rule 1.

Lobsters and birds are both territorial, and Peterson goes on for a few paragraphs outlining how they go about protecting their living spaces. The impatient reader may want to put the book down (one did not expect to read about lobsters and wrens), but Peterson begins to shed light on the point he is making with the following:

“ Because territory matters, and because the best locales are always in short supply, territory-seeking among the animals produces conflict. Conflict, in turn, produces another problem: how to win or lose without the disagreeing parties incurring too great a cost (Peterson, 2018).

The cost can be material, such as land and food, but it goes much deeper than that.

When a lobster is defeated in a conflict, be it highly confrontational, resulting in physical damage, or a simple show of dominance through size or pre-fighting rituals,  its brain chemistry changes. With the change in brain chemistry comes a new feeling of position in society, be it higher or lower. I can relate, and I am sure many of you can, too. So what exactly happens to the lobster brain after a defeat or victory? In victory, serotonin levels increase, causing an increase in confidence and, interestingly,  a stronger regulation of postural flexion. For the loser, the opposite is true. Moreover, there is an increase in the chemical octopamine for the defeated, increasing the likelihood of a flight response and a heightened startle reflex in confrontational or anxiety-inducing moments. Unfortunately, the trend continues: lobsters that win show a greater statistical chance of continuing to do so; defeated lobsters do the opposite, and that even holds true against opponents that were once defeated by said lobster.

 “It’s winner-take-all in the lobster world, just as it is in human societies” (Peterson, 2018).

An unexpected and fascinating point follows. Many of you have probably heard of it, but I was unaware until I read this chapter. The winner-take-all idea, the fact that the top 1 percent have as much money as the bottom 50 percent, that isn’t something that is an aberration attributable only to physical dominance or economics; it holds true across many domains. The name of this principle is Price’s law. Here are some examples Peterson gives.:A small portion of cities have almost all the people in them; the majority of mass in the heavenly bodies  is made up by a small fraction of the planets; and over 90 percent of communication occurs using 500 words.

Back on track and back to the main point that Peterson finally reveals. The reason all of this is relevant deals with dominance hierarchies, our place in them, and the length of time that they have been around. A third of a billion years ago, brains and nervous systems were comparatively simple. Nonetheless, they already had the structure and neurochemistry necessary to process information about status and society. The importance of this fact can hardly be overstated (Peterson, 2018).

Peterson then delves into an explanation of the masculine and feminine, relating the Taoist vision of order and chaos to the genders respectfully. He also gives a deeper explanation of evolution, and that’s where I want to begin to refocus our thoughts. His point in his evolutionary tangent makes its way to the dominance hierarchy and its ancient roots; it is older than trees, he states. That is important for we humans because the part of our brain that contains our knowledge and instinctive understanding of it (the dominance hierarchy) is also exceptionally fundamental to our daily lives. “It is a master control system, modulating our perceptions, values, emotions, thoughts and actions” says Peterson. “This is why, when we are defeated, we act very much like lobsters who have lost a fight” (Peterson, p. 15, 2018). Like lobsters, when defeated we face the ground, feel hurt, anxious, and weak. If things don’t improve, chronic depression can take over. Our serotonin levels drop, and so does our confidence, happiness, and our place in the dominance hierarchy is soon to follow.

Peterson continues by discussing the instinctive, subconscious rating system that we all have deep inside our brains. We know our place in society, and it is based off our lived experiences– some good, some bad. Those at the top know it, and they are more likely to thrive in all areas of their lives. The opposite is true for those at the bottom, and the problems can seem to multiply for those in the direst of circumstances. Living at the bottom is a terrible place to be, and the ancient brain assumes that even the smallest of problems can result in a chain of lasting defeats. Heightened readiness is a characteristic of the bottom dwellers, and so is confusion. “When you don’t know what to do, you must be prepared to do anything and everything, in case it becomes necessary. You’re sitting in your car with the gas and brake pedals both punched to the mat” (Peterson, p. 17, 2018). Living in that manner is physically and emotionally draining, resulting in impaired health and wellness.

If you are struggling, all is not lost, according to Peterson.

He begins to unpack the realistic pitfalls and all-too relatable suffering that comes with Being. Maybe you have been pushed around all of your life, assuming that one day things will turn around. 

“Maybe you are a loser. And maybe you’re not-but if you are, you don’t have to continue in that mode. Maybe you just have a bad habit. Maybe you’re even just a collection of bad habits. Nonetheless, even if you came by your poor posture honestly– even if you were unpopular or bullied at home or in grade school– it’s not necessarily appropriate now.” 


To change, for some, means to discover one’s capacity for anger. This is where Peterson’s brilliance multiplies, in my opinion. “When naive people discover the capacity for anger within themselves, they are shocked, sometimes severely” (Peterson, p. 24, 2018). However, this recognition and transformation is necessary for one to take his or her life into their respective hands. When the awakening occurs,

“when once-naive people recognize in themselves the seeds of evil and monstrosity, and see themselves as dangerous (at least potentially) their fear decreases. They develop more self-respect” (Peterson, p. 25, 2018).

Wow! If that doesn’t hit you like a ton of bricks…

His message begins to take a new feel and the light beings to shine through. You see, Being necessitates the ugly, along with the good, bad, and mundane.  The bad can be terrible: there is addiction, death, wealth disparities, deceit, and flat out bad luck, and standing up straight with your shoulders back will not fix all of that; however, to assume that putting your shoulders back and standing up tall is just a physical act with no other consequences is a mistake…

“Standing up physically also implies and invokes and demands standing up metaphorically. Standing up means voluntarily accepting the burden of Being.Your nervous system responds in an entirely different manner when you face the demands of life voluntarily. You respond to a challenge, instead of bracing for a catastrophe. You see the gold the dragon hoards, instead of shrinking in terror from the all-too-real fact of the dragon. You step forward to take your place in the dominance hierarchy, and occupy your territory, manifesting your willingness to defend, expand and transform it.”

Ahh… That is so refreshingly true and brutally honest. That is why men and women have been hanging on his words, watching his videos, buying his books, and changing their lives for the better. He has a way with words, with ancient stories, with people, and he knows how to connect them all in a compelling and practical manner. Jordan Peterson has described himself as somewhat dark and pessimistic, and his writing often reflects that; however, within all of that pessimism is an extremely bright light, an optimistic message that cannot be missed by those willing to listen: honesty and responsibility in the face of all circumstances will free you. 

So, friends, be like the lobster, with its ancient, practical wisdom. Stand up straight, with your shoulders back.

Click here for RULE NUMBER 2


What are your thoughts on this chapter? I know I  left a lot out, so if I missed something you found important, share it with me in the comment section. 

Thanks for reading,


The Journey Begins

So, this is my first post. I don’t know what to write exactly, nor do I know why I just spent $48.00 to begin a website that I may not use; however, I suppose the name of the site suggests all that I need to know. This is going to seem futile and a waste of time, but I do believe it will be fruitful in some sense (just not for you, dear reader). What exactly do I plan to do with the site? What will be the underlying theme? Will I try to traffic as many people through it as possible through deceiving, click-bait type articles and all that comes with them? Or will I have something interesting to say, build an audience, become the blogger of the year, and go on to become a bajillionaire through the selling of a site that never had a point to begin with? I have no idea. Probably not, actually. More than likely, this will be useless and kind of boring. But it is mine, and it will keep my mind busy and working when I have nothing else to do!

Thanks for joining me!

Good company in a journey makes the way seem shorter. — Izaak Walton