D
Devout Pessimist
Guest
The Golden One talks about Jordan Peterson:
Apparently, Peterson's daughter is just as much of charlatan and huckster as he is.
I hope that his fanboys enjoy the rotgut and diverticulitis they develop if they're stupid enough to pay for this diet plan.
Additionally, the stuff about salmon causing Peterson back pain and chicken giving him dizzy spells is hilarious.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/meat-only-diet-eased-autoimmune-disease-symptoms#5
It seems there is atleast some evidence that a "keto diet" might help with autoimmune diseases and relieving depression. So if that has helped them deal with it, more power to them.
Of course, there are also some drawbacks to an "all-meat diet" which may not be worth the advantages.
Anyway, I would say that it would be best for Peterson to avoid getting into conversations about diets, because those can be another religion to people. In fairness though, it seems that it is his daughter who is mostly talking about the subject.
He did mention it on his latest appearance on Joe Rogan's podcast. But he prefaces it with an "I'm not an expert" so don't take his word for it as expertise. Then talks about how the diet his daughter is on has helped her health and his as he adopted the plan.
Apparently, Peterson's daughter is just as much of charlatan and huckster as he is.
I hope that his fanboys enjoy the rotgut and diverticulitis they develop if they're stupid enough to pay for this diet plan.
Additionally, the stuff about salmon causing Peterson back pain and chicken giving him dizzy spells is hilarious.
Apparently, Peterson's daughter is just as much of charlatan and huckster as he is.
I hope that his fanboys enjoy the rotgut and diverticulitis they develop if they're stupid enough to pay for this diet plan.
Additionally, the stuff about salmon causing Peterson back pain and chicken giving him dizzy spells is hilarious.
Has anyone brought up JP claiming he defeated male pattern baldness by switching to almond milk and by cleaning his room?
Told you you would be banned within a monthI like how we have an internet moron in kong.. calling a PHD clinical psychologist with multiple books, papers, citations, research, etc...stupid.
Only on the internet.
Clean your room bucko
Maybe this was his point?
https://www.economist.com/christmas-specials/2017/12/19/the-link-between-polygamy-and-war
I also could've taken Peterson a little more seriously if he weren't a religious nut, but he is.
Religion and science never go together, and any of his ideas should be treated with skepticism imo
I also could've taken Peterson a little more seriously if he weren't a religious nut, but he is.
Religion and science never go together, and any of his ideas should be treated with skepticism imo
Just forget about useless labels like "incel" for a moment, and just think about it from a general, rational perspective.
A society which offers guidance to men and women in regards to how they will be able form meaningful partnerships with one another, will surely have more people happily married, with families, children, long-term relationships, than a society which does not, right? I mean, surely, pretty much anybody would agree with that. A society that offers rewards and encouragement for monogamy, is going to do better in that regard, than one which does not.
Are we, then, as a society, doing a truly good job at "enforcing monogamy", or rather, encouraging people to invest into relationships and becoming productive members of society, establishing families, putting their roots on the ground, and leaving a lasting legacy as human beings, if there's an increasing host of "angry young men", becoming outcasts and lashing out at the society? Probably not.
Administering labels to people such as "incel" and whatever does not really help to solve the problem. It's what a society does when it's on the defensive, against a growing problem of disassociated groups of people, be they black people, gay people, incels, or whatever. But it's more like the reaction of a child than a wise adult. We have no need to discuss this in terms of "incels" or what not.
The reality is that we are seeing a generation of men being raised, who find it increasingly difficult to integrate into becoming part of society. In any case, even without taking a humanitarian perspective into account, that's an enormous loss of productivity. A truly effective, well-functioning society does not look past a loss of productivity on that scale.
My own society is a prime example in the sense that with each generation, we are seeing a greater and greater number of "lost youth", who forsake society, and there is absolutely no desire whatsoever to even discuss about the problem in any sort of rational terms. You can't even begin to approach that discussion without a bunch of labels being thrown at you, basically degenerating the conversation down to nothing. Yet it is a crucial conversation, that at some point, is going to have to be had.
Sorry for the late response but...
I agree with you that a society that encourage monogamy is a better one.
But Petersson was asked what we should do about the incel Community (they call themselves incels) and he responded with enforced monogamy. Ok that's fine if "forced monogamy" mean what you say "A society which offers guidance to men and women in regards to how they will be able form meaningful partnerships with one another, will surely have more people happily married, with families, children, long-term relationships"
The problem is that they can't even get woman in THAT society so he doesn't really have a Point in that case.
Society do encourage monogamy, its illegal to marry more then one person for example....