Sam's main point in Peterson podcast: why on earth use the word "true" or "truth" when we already have a perfectly good word to convey his intended meaning: "useful".

After listening to the podcast and reading some of the reactions to it, what I still haven't been able to understand is why Jordan insists on using the word "true" or "truth" instead of "useful/necessary for survival" and "not true" instead of "not worth knowing/not useful/leads to our destruction". Something Sam pointed out many times and something I didn't think was adequately answered by Jordan.

As an example (mentioned in the podcast), the statement that energy is released when two hydrogen atoms fuse together to form a helium atom, is a true statement (demonstrated in dramatic fashion with successful hydrogen bomb tests, not to mention it is our understanding of how stars produce energy).

This information may lead to the destruction of the human race or it may usher in an unprecedented era of prosperity with cheap, widespread, pollution free fusion energy.

The knowledge that energy is released when two hydrogen atoms fuse together will thus either be useful to the survival of the human species or will lead to its destruction. It is knowledge that may end up being not worth having, or it is knowledge that may end up being essential to our continued survival.

What is gained by attempting to redefine the word "truth" into something completely different such that one can say "it is not true that energy is released when two hydrogen atoms fuse if such information leads to the destruction of the human species" instead of the perfectly sensible "humans having knowledge of the energy released when two hydrogen atoms fuse is knowledge that is not useful or worth having if it leads to our destruction."?

Perhaps both Sam and Jordan just need to agree to not use the word "truth" at all in a future conversation since they both mean different things by the word (even if Sam's is a much more sensible/practical definition that the vast majority of listeners would recognize, in my opinion).

Sam could maybe use "empirically established knowledge" or "logically valid statement", while Jordan could use "useful statement" or "statement that aids in survival", where useful in this context means something that leads the species to thrive and avoid extinction. Perhaps others can think of better words/phrases.