The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

[Metusalemi]

I am very, very familiar with evangelical Christianity. Its adherents are personally "absolutist" in their perceptions and definitions of what constitutes good and what constitutes evil.

I can respect the integrity of a Christian who says, "I believe X is right (or wrong) because that's what my interpretation of scripture indicates."

But not a person who says, "I believe X is right (or wrong) because <philosophical and metaphysical word salad>... Oh, and just by coincidence that's also what my interpretation of scripture indicates, too."

I place Peterson in the latter camp based on the interview segments I have heard.

As he says himself (roughly speaking): "I'm trying to figure things out. I'm not telling anyone 'This is how things are and this is how you should act.' By discussing and debating these things, I'm making them more clear in my head."

I don't know if you have listened these two interviews of him, but I strongly recommend them. (I know it's a tall order)

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[Buck Swope]

Is it discriminating if the persons identity is wrong?

Do you believe identity is a whim?
?

Who the fuck is anyone to judge a person's identity if that said person is hurting no one. Wrong?

Judge not for one day you will be judged..............

 

[ultramanhyata]

My personal approach to members of the trans community is the compassionate approach I learned from geriatric doctors after my grandfather had his stroke - and thought he had to go out and lock the barn doors at night so the horses wouldn't get loose - something he had done as a boy, living on a farm.

We agreed with my grandfather and said we would go outside, make sure all the horses were in, and lock the barn door.

Are you obviously a middle-aged male wearing a wig, a skirt and make-up? You will be "ma'am" to me. No problem.

Like my grandpa, you obviously have enough dysfunction in your life without me adding to it with a confrontational attempt to correct your misapprehension of reality.

 

[Metusalemi]

Who the fuck is anyone to judge a person's identity if that said person is hurting no one. Wrong?

Judge not for one day you will be judged..............

 

[IDL]

Who the fuck is anyone to judge a person's identity if that said person is hurting no one. Wrong?

Judge not for one day you will be judged..............

I don't think it's really about that. People will judge, whether right or wrong or anywhere in between. People are free to do that, as they are free to identify with whatever. There is no need to have laws around that sort of thing.

But, there is a difference in expecting someone to go along with your demands, as in the world revolves around your whims (or that of your ideology). And of course, enshrining that concept into law just takes it to the next level.

 

[Buck Swope]

That cat has issues beyond my expertise to help.....there is a lot of pain in his rants. He is an angry person and his parent(s) probably fucked him up real good.

 

[Buck Swope]

I don't think it's really about that. People will judge, whether right or wrong or anywhere in between. People are free to do that, as they are free to identify with whatever. There is no need to have laws around that sort of thing.

But, there is a difference in expecting someone to go along with your demands, as in the world revolves around your whims (or that of your ideology). And of course, enshrining that concept into law just takes it to the next level.

We are talking about companies being able to discriminate against groups of people. A citizen can have any opinion they want.

 

[dontsnitch]

My personal approach to members of the trans community is the compassionate approach I learned from geriatric doctors after my grandfather had his stroke - and thought he had to go out and lock the barn doors at night so the horses wouldn't get loose - something he had done as a boy, living on a farm.

We agreed with my grandfather and said we would go outside, make sure all the horses were in, and lock the barn door.

Are you obviously a middle-aged male wearing a wig, a skirt and make-up? You will be "ma'am" to me. No problem.

Like my grandpa, you obviously have enough dysfunction in your life without me adding to it with a confrontational attempt to correct your misapprehension of reality.

Do you differentiate between the moral thing to do and the legal thing to do? Calling a man in a skirt "ma'am" may be good, but that's not what we're talking about. We are talking about making it a crime to not call him "ma'am".

Not to mention that this goes far beyond a man in a skirt. It could be a man in a suit who demands you call him whatever he feels at that moment.

 

[IDL]

We are talking about companies being able to discriminate against groups of people. A citizen can have any opinion they want.

Oh, I figured your were talking about C-16, my bad.

 

[Metusalemi]

That cat has issues beyond my expertise to help.....there is a lot of pain in his rants. He is an angry person and his parent(s) probably fucked him up real good.

 

[ultramanhyata]

You've also been claiming a lot of stuff about Peterson that is simply untrue. He has never confirmed that he's a Christian, and in fact, the fact that he refuses to acknowledge or deny it would be evidence that he's not a Christian because the Bible clearly teaches us to put our lamps on a stand, not under our beds, as it were.

"You can't be a Christian and disavow belief in hell, because hell is where you end up if you don't follow Christian principles. That might sound metaphysical, but it's not. If you fail to recognize the sacredness of human life, refuse to die and be reborn when that is necessary, assume that you possess omnipotent knowledge (as ideologues are likely to do) and lie in word and action then you will end up in hell." - J.P.

And is this incorrect??

"Peterson is a clinical psychologist by training and identifies himself as a Christian who is deeply religious. He criticizes atheists who he believes oversimplify the philosophy of Christianity based on their critiques."

http://q4lt.com/sam-harris-and-jordan-peterson-debate-missing-the-mark

 

[Bald1]

He is religious. Jordan is a Christian Ben Shapiro. That's really all you need to know.

People who are impressed by this guy's "insights" are a mystery to me.

I have seen you make 3 types of comments about Peterson over the last few weeks :

1) He's anti trans
2) He's a Christian evangelical type
3) Questioning his intelligence.

1) False. He's worked with trans people, has never made disparaging comments about them as far as I know. The root of his concern is words being put into his mouth, and therefore handing over control of his person/action/speech to others.

2) His views on religion don't line up with the Church at all. He speaks in archetypes and basic driving forces that have shaped our consciousness over millennia. On numerous occasions he's mentioned far older religions than Christianity to frame his points. The Abrahamic religions are used as an easy refrence point around which he builds his foundation of explaining how our primal fears and motivations manifested themselves as religion in order to explain the unexplainable. His "religion" stems from understanding human motivation and the belief that holding higher ideals is a beneficial thing.

3) Is your superiority complex so threathened that you just must inject uninformed opinions into these threads? Give the guy a fair chance, and if you disagree with him, then formulate your points around a well informed argument. Guaranteed we'll listen.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Do you differentiate between the moral thing to do and the legal thing to do? Calling a man in a skirt "ma'am" may be good, but that's not what we're talking about. We are talking about making it a crime to not call him "ma'am".

Isn't the Canadian bill basically saying that if you're in a workplace with a trans female and you continually refer to that person as "sir" or "it", that language can be considered harassment?

 

[dontsnitch]

"You can't be a Christian and disavow belief in hell, because hell is where you end up if you don't follow Christian principles. That might sound metaphysical, but it's not. If you fail to recognize the sacredness of human life, refuse to die and be reborn when that is necessary, assume that you possess omnipotent knowledge (as ideologues are likely to do) and lie in word and action then you will end up in hell." - J.P.

And is this incorrect??

"Peterson is a clinical psychologist by training and identifies himself as a Christian who is deeply religious. He criticizes atheists who he believes oversimplify the philosophy of Christianity based on their critiques."

http://q4lt.com/sam-harris-and-jordan-peterson-debate-missing-the-mark

He's saying hell exists on earth, which is something he has repeatedly echoed in many of his lectures. He's not saying he believes in an afterlife or even in the divinity of Christ.

 

[dontsnitch]

Isn't the Canadian bill basically saying that if you're in a workplace with a trans female and you continually refer to that person as "sir" or "it", that language can be considered harassment?

That's one of the things the bill deals with, but not the only thing.

 

[IDL]

"You can't be a Christian and disavow belief in hell, because hell is where you end up if you don't follow Christian principles. That might sound metaphysical, but it's not. If you fail to recognize the sacredness of human life, refuse to die and be reborn when that is necessary, assume that you possess omnipotent knowledge (as ideologues are likely to do) and lie in word and action then you will end up in hell." - J.P.

And is this incorrect??

"Peterson is a clinical psychologist by training and identifies himself as a Christian who is deeply religious. He criticizes atheists who he believes oversimplify the philosophy of Christianity based on their critiques."

http://q4lt.com/sam-harris-and-jordan-peterson-debate-missing-the-mark

He has a very different definition of what 'hell' is, if you are thinking of fire and brimstone in the afterlife. To him, it is a concept that can apply to the living. As in, someone loses their job, becomes addicted to drugs, and is in a spiral, is in 'hell'.

He talks about the concept of envisioning and understanding such a place in order to avoid it, or navigate your way back out of it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Who the fuck is anyone to judge a person's identity if that said person is hurting no one. Wrong?

An individual with agency and the capacity for judgement? We judge people all the time for their identity but now suddenly its a problem? Being black or female is not an identity, its a tangible reality. We generally don't have a problem with judging a person for identifying as a Republican or liberal or as a McGregor fan but now the gender identity they came up with last week is off limits?

 

[Metusalemi]

An individual with agency and the capacity for judgement? We judge people all the time for their identity but now suddenly its a problem? Being black or female is not an identity, its a tangible reality. We generally don't have a problem with judging a person for identifying as a Republican or liberal or as a McGregor fan but now the gender identity they came up with last week is off limits?

I like this political spectrum.

 

[ultramanhyata]

I have seen you make 3 types of comments about Peterson over the last few weeks :

1) He's anti trans
2) He's a Christian evangelical type
3) Questioning his intelligence.

1) As I explained once before, that line was a joke. Because I knew Peterson had become internet famous upsetting some trans kids during a confrontation about gender pronouns on a college campus.

2) That's what I read when I first started listening to the guy. (Posted the link above... I am also almost positive I heard him tell Rogan at some point in that podcast that he considered Jesus Christ to be the ultimate embodiment of truth.)

If I can be shown to be wrong about Peterson's Christianity I will stop calling him a Christian. A quote in which he denies being a Christian or in which he denies belief in the divinity of Christ would qualify.

3) Never questioned his intelligence! He's pretty obviously in possession of a brilliant mind. My issue was very specifically with his ability to both support the teachings of Jesus as the pinnacle of morality and at the same time support rugged individualism and the rejection of positive rights.

 

[ultramanhyata]

We generally don't have a problem with judging a person for identifying as a Republican or liberal or as a McGregor fan but now the gender identity they came up with last week is off limits?

Imagine you worked in an office with Joe, and Joe identified as a conservative republican.

Imagine you vehemently opposed the right, considered all those on the right to be disconnected from reality, and, as an extension of your contempt, decided to refer to Joe as "Nazi" - a label Joe personally considered a representation of the opposite of his political identity.

Could your behavior be reasonably construed as workplace harassment?