Podcast Cover Note

Executive Summary — Peterson vs. Foucault under Triune Testing

This 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.