The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

Anyway, we were talking about sleeping issues and at some point he asked if I knew who Jordan Peterson was kind of out of nowhere. He recommended paying for his 40$ program it whatever it was. The Dr was pretty young had a game of thrones watch, which was pretty cool actually. Just a weird conversation we had. Kinda interesting he told me to go listen to Peterson.
So, he recommended Jordan Peterson to help put you to sleep... keep that doctor; he knows what he's doing.

I keed, I keed.
 
Hmm that is interesting, you going to do it?
No, I've listened to a lot of his lectures already, I'm almost 40 years old I don't feel the need to pay for such things. I'll probably continue to listen to his podcasts when I have time though.
 
Jordan Peterson is very inconsistent IMO. I actually really like a lot of what he has to say especially about evolutionary psychological development. The problem with him is that he has a personal vantage point that is a biased position but does not state that outright. He mixes scholarly and personal bias realms so subtly that if you are not paying really close attention you could get the impression that what he is saying is accepted scientific observation rather than personal philosophy and opinion. I think he is intentionally dishonest in this way but feels justified because he thinks he is right. That sounds a lot like the groups he most heavily criticizes.

In many areas it is hard for me to catch him lying becauae I am not familiar with the research and areas of expertise. However in the realm of religion it becomes apparent that he uses the shifting of goalposts in order to seemingly justify his positions. If he wants to support a narrative for traditional Judeo Christian morality (something I am in support of) he pulls often from Christian tradition. But then when he wants to support the american mythos of the strong man, of the importance of being an alpha male (a point I think is beneath the dignity of his position) he shifts away from the Christian tradition which emphasizes kindness and softness and compassion and pulls from evolution and biology. He often makes points that would be very hard to arrive at only from the Christian tradition.

Jordan Peterson is a very educated and insightful man who pulls from whatever disciplines support his own personal narrative and agenda. He is VERY against the radial left for being ideologues and extreem and I think it is because he is basically on the same level as them but from another vantage-point. He is biased and I believe he ultimately thinks he is on a mission from God to promote his bias which is also God's bias.
 


Just finished this. Yikes. I'm revising my original post about her suit: Fucking go for it. I didn't know about anything that she dealt with after the fact, but that whole fucking department is a disgrace and she made the right call taking action.

I've just seen you post in numerous JP threads as a vociferous defender (nothing wrong with that!).

Honestly, your post just further confused me. I'm still not sure why you took issue with what I said or, indeed, what you're even taking issue with. But I'm basically with you on everything that you said, so we might as well leave it at that :D

I remember a BBC radio interview was particularly good, respectful but challenging. I'll try and link it later. You may know the one I am referencing.

This one?



It's from January right around the publication of 12 Rules for Life. Subsequently, he's gotten a decent amount of TV/air time in the UK, but this early one is the only one I've managed to listen to IIRC, so if it's not the one you're thinking of, then I'll have to wait on your Youtube research ;)
 
Behold the counter-attack:

University of Toronto Professor Jordan Peterson has launched a $1.5-million defamation suit against Wilfrid Laurier University, two of its professors and a former gender and equity manager for suggesting he was “analogous to Adolf Hitler.”

The statement of claim, prepared by lawyer Howard Levitt and filed Monday, says Peterson was falsely labelled as incompetent, sexist, misogynist, dangerous and racist in a now infamous disciplinary meeting with Wilfrid Laurier University teaching assistant Lindsay Shepherd.

Shepherd was disciplined during the meeting for showing students a TV clip of Peterson discussing gender-neutral pronouns, something the university later apologized for, but Peterson told the Toronto Sun Wednesday he believes the university failed to properly respond to the incident.

“So I think this is a warning, let’s say, to other careless administrators and professors who allow their ideological presuppositions to get the best of them to be a bit more careful with what they say and do,” he said.

Peterson’s lawyer said the U of T professor cannot allow a university to viciously slander him, let alone compare his comments to a speech by Hitler, when he has spent his life and career teaching against the evils of the Holocaust and despots.

“The politically correct on campus should not think that they can defame people, slander people and bully people implicitly and explicitly with impunity,” Levitt said. “This isn’t just some internet troll mouthing off in a way that no one pays attention to and doesn’t give any credence to. These are professors and head of gender equity studies making comments that are atrocious about Dr. Peterson who is one of if not Canada’s most prominent intellectual.”

In a statement, Wilfrid Laurier University said it will defend itself vigorously against the legal action.

“Laurier remains committed to intellectual inquiry, critical reflection, scholarly integrity, academic freedom and freedom of expression while striving to be a supportive and inclusive community,” the university statement says

http://torontosun.com/news/provinci...ation-suit-against-wilfrid-laurier-university

I'm a five minute walk away from this campus, and I'm there every other day bringing clients to use the one of the rooms in the library for their tutoring sessions before taking them to the athletic complex to let 'em run around, and i gotta say that there is a bit of a buzz right now amongst students and staff. Weirdly enough most of them feel hard done by, from the media and from the people who are suing their university.

I'm not sure if Laurier has ever had such sustained media scrutiny focused in it's entire history.

If doing the right thing won't be an incentive for these assholes, then a finaciancial sanction surely will.

all in all this is a good thing. This a very good thing. Perhaps the Age of Impunity with some of these left-wing entities on campus will be over if the lawsuits by Sheppard and Dr. Peterson succeed.
 
Just finished this. Yikes. I'm revising my original post about her suit: Fucking go for it. I didn't know about anything that she dealt with after the fact, but that whole fucking department is a disgrace and she made the right call taking action.



Honestly, your post just further confused me. I'm still not sure why you took issue with what I said or, indeed, what you're even taking issue with. But I'm basically with you on everything that you said, so we might as well leave it at that :D



This one?



It's from January right around the publication of 12 Rules for Life. Subsequently, he's gotten a decent amount of TV/air time in the UK, but this early one is the only one I've managed to listen to IIRC, so if it's not the one you're thinking of, then I'll have to wait on your Youtube research ;)


Posting after 5 beers was probably a poor decision in retrospect.

Yes that was the one. There were others that I saw that were very good as well, but to be honest they all are extremely similar so none stood out particularly.

A lot of British interviewers purposely ask challenging questions as simply part of the interview style. A lot Peterson fans take this as some kind of confrontational attack by the MSM and hatchet jobs. That seems ludicrous.

Even the C4 interview was bad. But if you see their other combative interviews not driven primarily by ideology.
 
Behold the counter-attack:



I'm a five minute walk away from this campus, and I'm there every other day bringing clients to use the one of the rooms in the library for their tutoring sessions before taking them to the athletic complex to let 'em run around, and i gotta say that there is a bit of a buzz right now amongst students and staff. Weirdly enough most of them feel hard done by, from the media and from the people who are suing their university.

I'm not sure if Laurier has ever had such sustained media scrutiny focused in it's entire history.

If doing the right thing won't be an incentive for these assholes, then a finaciancial sanction surely will.

all in all this is a good thing. This a very good thing. Perhaps the Age of Impunity with some of these left-wing entities on campus will be over if the lawsuits by Sheppard and Dr. Peterson succeed.

Whoa we probably cross paths pretty often if all this is true lol.

Peterson should lecture at UW just to max out on troll points.
 
Whoa we probably cross paths pretty often if all this is true lol.

Peterson should lecture at UW just to max out on troll points.

Im UDub alumni. I like to think we're a little bit less shrill than "highschool down the street" but sadly with the way things are these days, i doubt it.

Are you a student or townie. You close to either campus's? I also go to the Conestoga campus in Doon sometimes as well.
 
Jordan Peterson is very inconsistent IMO. I actually really like a lot of what he has to say especially about evolutionary psychological development. The problem with him is that he has a personal vantage point that is a biased position but does not state that outright. He mixes scholarly and personal bias realms so subtly that if you are not paying really close attention you could get the impression that what he is saying is accepted scientific observation rather than personal philosophy and opinion. I think he is intentionally dishonest in this way but feels justified because he thinks he is right. That sounds a lot like the groups he most heavily criticizes.

In many areas it is hard for me to catch him lying becauae I am not familiar with the research and areas of expertise. However in the realm of religion it becomes apparent that he uses the shifting of goalposts in order to seemingly justify his positions. If he wants to support a narrative for traditional Judeo Christian morality (something I am in support of) he pulls often from Christian tradition. But then when he wants to support the american mythos of the strong man, of the importance of being an alpha male (a point I think is beneath the dignity of his position) he shifts away from the Christian tradition which emphasizes kindness and softness and compassion and pulls from evolution and biology. He often makes points that would be very hard to arrive at only from the Christian tradition.

Jordan Peterson is a very educated and insightful man who pulls from whatever disciplines support his own personal narrative and agenda. He is VERY against the radial left for being ideologues and extreem and I think it is because he is basically on the same level as them but from another vantage-point. He is biased and I believe he ultimately thinks he is on a mission from God to promote his bias which is also God's bias.
Great post. While I like his work on the Bible, when he is talking about politics (or postmodernism) you can see that zealot stare take over.

He also suffers from what I call “Canadian Assumption Syndrome.” He argues for “conservative culture” all the while taking for granted that universal healthcare and affordable college (subsidized by the government) are good things.

I’ve said it many times, but I’ll say it again: most Canadian “conservatives”are LEFT of the American Democratic Party on economic issues.
 
Sounds like recent debate involving Peterson- Harris



ordanPetersonIn Depth

Key moments from Jordan Peterson vs. Sam Harris Debate Night 1
u/newplayer33554432
Sam Harris = SH

Jordan Peterson = JP

Bret Weinstein = BW

Summary: This was exactly what I was hoping for, the best debate I've seen either of them ever do. I cannot recommend enough watching this when it comes out (if it comes out). Even though I'm writing these notes only ~12 hrs after leaving the venue, my memory is already a bit fuzzy, so this is just the best I can do, maybe some other people can fill in the gaps and remember other moments. If JP read this he would probably chew me out for not conveying every word exactly right (or mostly wrong is more probable). There were so many good points, and I can’t recall all of them off the top of my head.

They argued for the full allotted time of 2-2:30 hrs rather than just 1:15 scheduled and skipped answering questions in order to get to the bottom of their disagreements. In my opinion the much needed and best option, crowd roared with approval when asked if they could do this.

If one of them doesn't sound like they have a solid argument in the notes, blame me, they were both on point all night long.

Started
 
Sounds like recent debate involving Peterson- Harris



ordanPetersonIn Depth

Key moments from Jordan Peterson vs. Sam Harris Debate Night 1
u/newplayer33554432
Sam Harris = SH

Jordan Peterson = JP

Bret Weinstein = BW

Summary: This was exactly what I was hoping for, the best debate I've seen either of them ever do. I cannot recommend enough watching this when it comes out (if it comes out). Even though I'm writing these notes only ~12 hrs after leaving the venue, my memory is already a bit fuzzy, so this is just the best I can do, maybe some other people can fill in the gaps and remember other moments. If JP read this he would probably chew me out for not conveying every word exactly right (or mostly wrong is more probable). There were so many good points, and I can’t recall all of them off the top of my head.

They argued for the full allotted time of 2-2:30 hrs rather than just 1:15 scheduled and skipped answering questions in order to get to the bottom of their disagreements. In my opinion the much needed and best option, crowd roared with approval when asked if they could do this.

If one of them doesn't sound like they have a solid argument in the notes, blame me, they were both on point all night long.

Started


One of my guests went to the event and said it was the most profound debate he and everyone in the orpheum experienced. They both went head to head and had great points. It was also a very civil discussion. They bonded as they fused towards the end, The Nexus shined brightly that night.
 
One of my guests went to the event and said it was the most profound debate he and everyone in the orpheum experienced. They both went head to head and had great points. It was also a very civil discussion. They bonded as they fused towards the end, The Nexus shined brightly that night.

That’s encouraging to know, thanks for the inside scoop.
Really hope the tone of these debates keeps moving toward a civil discourse. The smugness Sam is known for, and imitated with clueless glee by his trained parrots, is incredibly annoying and totally unproductive. When he gets called on that crap he has to answer questions outside of his go to straw man tactics. That’s when it’s obvious things aren’t so triumphalistic in the new atheist world as his persona so arrogantly exudes. At that point a real conversation finally begins.
 
That’s encouraging to know, thanks for the inside scoop.
Really hope the tone of these debates keeps moving toward a civil discourse. The smugness Sam is known for, and imitated with clueless glee by his trained parrots, is incredibly annoying and totally unproductive. When he gets called on that crap he has to answer questions outside of his go to straw man tactics. That’s when it’s obvious things aren’t so triumphalistic in the new atheist world as his persona so arrogantly exudes. At that point a real conversation finally begins.

Looks like JP and Harris will have a good friendship. Jordan has now joined the party.
 
Sounds like recent debate involving Peterson- Harris

Unfortunately, Sam both looks and sounds very unappealing (sorry Sam, but it's true), so he's probably going to have a hard time playing the heavy without getting hated to where his points get completely ignored. Nevertheless, I really hope that he doesn't let Peterson off the hook on his silly religious equivocations. I also hope that he has not just the intellectual capacity (he seems to) but the wits (less confident on this) to know how and when to corner Peterson on nonsense in the flow of a conversation (where Peterson tends to shine, likely due to his long clinical career and his comfort in conversational settings).
 
Unfortunately, Sam both looks and sounds very unappealing (sorry Sam, but it's true), so he's probably going to have a hard time playing the heavy without getting hated to where his points get completely ignored. Nevertheless, I really hope that he doesn't let Peterson off the hook on his silly religious equivocations. I also hope that he has not just the intellectual capacity (he seems to) but the wits (less confident on this) to know how and when to corner Peterson on nonsense in the flow of a conversation (where Peterson tends to shine, likely due to his long clinical career and his comfort in conversational settings).
Unfortunately, Sam both looks and sounds very unappealing (sorry Sam, but it's true), so he's probably going to have a hard time playing the heavy without getting hated to where his points get completely ignored. Nevertheless, I really hope that he doesn't let Peterson off the hook on his silly religious equivocations. I also hope that he has not just the intellectual capacity (he seems to) but the wits (less confident on this) to know how and when to corner Peterson on nonsense in the flow of a conversation (where Peterson tends to shine, likely due to his long clinical career and his comfort in conversational settings).

Most of his points are straw man arguments that a junior high student would not agree would represent what he believes.
 
The Shepherd tape is viscerally disturbing. Listening to anyone being bullied is uncomfortable. But more than that, the tapes are Kafkaesque. Shepherd’s antagonists aren’t trying to argue that her vision of a university’s role is wrong — they know they can’t. Instead, they are trying to impose an incongruent set of values by force.

It looks like the professors are now suing Lindsay Shepherd:

Professors who falsely accused and harassed Lindsay Shepherd are now suing her



 
Back
Top