The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

I think its rational to consider his Patreon. Funding sources can very well influence someone. We consider this when it comes to lobbyists, why not Patreon?

Generally true, but Peterson has most of his material from prior to patreon so you'd really only be trying to notice changes from prior, to post.

The money is also earmarked for projects related to his work, so it isn't like he's 'got rich' and is buying things for himself.
 
Generally true, but Peterson has most of his material from prior to patreon so you'd really only be trying to notice changes from prior, to post.

The money is also earmarked for projects related to his work, so it isn't like he's 'got rich' and is buying things for himself.
Just because its earmarked doesn't mean it can't have an influence on him. If he really cares about those projects he could attempt to protect his revenue source to complete them.
 
Just because its earmarked doesn't mean it can't have an influence on him. If he really cares about those projects he could attempt to protect his revenue source to complete them.

Yes I agree, and he's talked about this very thing several times (both in terms of being more recognized publicly, and patreon specifically). It's always going to be something to be mindful of.
 
I didn't get past the first minute but describing Fritz's view as against the institution of Christianity and not the core principles as slave morality is misleading at best. That doesn't mean he never said anything positive about it though

I'd be surprised if he did abandon Christianity. He seems to like the motifs and mythology in that Cambellian way that where they add subjective richness or part of the human experience. Perhaps he'd decide Christianity need not be elevated over other myth though but it is certainly woven into the fabric of western consciousness.

I'm not sure he is actually saying that. Or maybe I've missed it. I can't really bother listening to speeches about religion.

I think he's definitely trying to interpret Nietzsche's writings in perhaps a more favourable light than he should, towards Christianity. It's pretty obvious that both are important to him, and that he's perhaps trying to find a way to make it work. Yet, to me, it appears an impossible task. That's why I think he could eventually elect to no longer identify as a Christian, atleast privately. I think Nietzsche might ultimately be more important to him than Jesus.

He's certainly much more intellectually stirring. And you won't have to excuse yourself about his supposed resurrection after death, either. When he died, he stayed dead.
 
Last edited:
Personally I believe there's a limit to human rationality. You can never teach a cat algebra, I think there are somethings out there in the universe that are to us what algebra is to a cat. Incomprehensible.

There's a limit to human rationality, certainly, but humans could serve as a catalyst for the "next being", and so forth, until a complete comprehension is reached.

But it's such a ridiculous fantasy at this point that it's not really worth considering. The pragmatic reality is that we can only reach a certain point of understanding through science, and will have to figure out the rest through other means.
 
I'm not sure he is actually saying that. Or maybe I've missed it. I can't really bother listening to speeches about religion.

I think he's definitely trying to interpret Nietzsche's writings in perhaps a more favourable light than he should, towards Christianity. It's pretty obvious that both are important to him, and that he's perhaps trying to find a way to make it work. Yet, to me, it appears an impossible task. That's why I think he could eventually elect to no longer identify as a Christian, atleast privately. I think Nietzsche might ultimately be more important to him than Jesus.

He's certainly much more intellectually stirring. And you won't have to excuse yourself about his supposed resurrection after death, either. When he died, he stayed dead.
Is Peterson really a capital "c" Christian though? I've seen someone else say he was an evangelist in the thread.. whenever he speaks about it it seems to be in a pretty disconnected academic way and when he gets asked about believing in god he gives one of those long drawn out answers about "depends what the definition of god is" that agnostic and atheist types give when they don't want to be pidgeonholed as a non-believer. Christians generally can say 'yes' despite the particular nuances of their view. Wiki seems to think he is a Christian existentialist of the Kierkegaard sort which would mesh well with borrowing myths as useful but not needing to abandon the label as inconsistent with other views. Fuck if i know clearly i don't follow the guy too closely. Too much alt right bullshit pops up on youtube as soon as I watch one of his videos.

The pragmatic reality is that we can only reach a certain point of understanding through science, and will have to figure out the rest through other means.

We've always had to do this though. Science can tell you about concentrations of nerve endings in the genitalia, but it can't tell you how you should hump your girlfriend
 
I think its rational to consider his Patreon. Funding sources can very well influence someone. We consider this when it comes to lobbyists, why not Patreon?

If "journalists" are going to focus on Peterson's Patreon, then they should look into who is paying him instead of just mentioning the amount.
 
If "journalists" are going to focus on Peterson's Patreon, then they should look into who is paying him instead of just mentioning the amount.
That's harder to pinpoint. I agree its probably not the most honest or good faith argument coming from some but I'm just saying in a more general sense its legitimate to worry about the influence such a revenue source might have on him. We worry about it elsewhere, I see no reason not to here.
 
That's harder to pinpoint. I agree its probably not the most honest or good faith argument coming from some but I'm just saying in a more general sense its legitimate to worry about the influence such a revenue source might have on him. We worry about it elsewhere, I see no reason not to here.
It's patreon. With thousands of donors with small donations, hence small influence per person. Lobbyists give big donations per person, hence more influence.

On top of that Peterson is having monthly patreon Q&A sessions, where he answers the most upvoted questions.

What exactly are you worried about here?
 
This was truly cringe worthy. The trans guy on the left at one point looks at Peterson and asks him "don't you want to learn". It was the most disingenuous and condescending thing I've ever seen. Especially to a guy like Peterson who has dedicated his life to learning in an honest way, with his relentless pusuit of truth whether you agree with his conclusions or not. He probably has the IQ of both of those people combined.

And of course the CBC makes it a two on one lol.

I'm not a Peterson fan by any stretch, but when I saw that panela few months ago, christ. That trans dude is so fucking creepy with his manufactured voice, air of intellectual superiority and arrogance.

I happen to think that ignorance and arrogance are bedfellows, and they ran a train on that "guy".
 
It's patreon. With thousands of donors with small donations, hence small influence per person. Lobbyists give big donations per person, hence more influence.

On top of that Peterson is having monthly patreon Q&A sessions, where he answers the most upvoted questions.

What exactly are you worried about here?
Peterson isn't dumb, I get the sense he can read his audience and their political slant. He can play to that to keep the money flowing.
 
Peterson isn't dumb, I get the sense he can read his audience and their political slant. He can play to that to keep the money flowing.
So you are not worried about the patreons affecting him. You worried about him affecting the patreons.

What do you think their political slant is?
 
So you are not worried about the patreons affecting him. You worried about him affecting the patreons.
No, I'm worried about him tweaking his message to fit the audience. To certain extent everyone who produces media for public consumption does that but if you want intellectual honesty then someone like JP telling his audience what they want to hear is not what you'd want from him.
What do you think their political slant is?
Definitely to the right but not neocons or paleo-conservatives, more of the new internet right that has sprouted up in the last few years. The young, anti-SJW right I suppose you could call them.
 
No, I'm worried about him tweaking his message to fit the audience. To certain extent everyone who produces media for public consumption does that but if you want intellectual honesty then someone like JP telling his adueicne what they want to hear is not what you'd want from him.

Definitely to the right but not neocons or paleo-conservatives, more of the new internet right that has sprouted up in the last few years. The young, anti-SJW right I suppose you could call them.
Good points. The political landscape has skewed in the last few years, though. Liberal people gets called "right wing" all the time.

I think most of his talks are philosophical and theological, not political.
 
I’ve seen a few of his lectures and you can tell he is very good at gauging his audience and know where the line is. I’m a fan to an extent from what I’ve seen I’d say he’s just a smart prof who sees today’s youth being steered in the wrong direction. The fact he’s not welcome everywhere is proof of that very thing.
 
No, I'm worried about him tweaking his message to fit the audience. To certain extent everyone who produces media for public consumption does that but if you want intellectual honesty then someone like JP telling his audience what they want to hear is not what you'd want from him.

Definitely to the right but not neocons or paleo-conservatives, more of the new internet right that has sprouted up in the last few years. The young, anti-SJW right I suppose you could call them.

Unlike most people who make their living off Youtube, he does have a well-paying job, so he might not be affected as much as the people whose bills are literally being paid by their Youtube viewers.

If it turns into a multi-million dollar business for him though, then it's going to be very interesting to see whether he will eventually just develop into a right-wing talking head.
 
Extended: Excerpts from secretly recorded meeting between Wilfrid Laurier University grad student and faculty



- "I remained neutral."

- "Well that's actually part of the problem..."
 
Extended: Excerpts from secretly recorded meeting between Wilfrid Laurier University grad student and faculty



- "I remained neutral."

- "Well that's actually part of the problem..."


Annoying. The tutorial was for a Communications class, if anyone was wondering.

“This was an opportunity for the university to be like ‘it’s true, we should be able to have a debate, we’re sorry it became an issue and we’re happy to foster debate in the university environment,’ ” she said. “Instead, they’re being weird about it.”

Shepherd said the lesson to her communications tutorial class was focusing on the complexities of grammar.

Shepherd said she was trying to demonstrate that the structure of a language can affect the society in which it is spoken in ways people might not anticipate. To illustrate her point, she said she mentioned that long-standing views on gender had probably been shaped by the gender-specific pronouns that are part of English’s fundamental grammatical structure.

The clip of Peterson debating sexual diversity scholar Nicholas Matte, she said, was meant to demonstrate ways in which the existence of gender-specific pronouns has caused controversy.

Shepherd said a student complained about the clip, which she showed to two tutorials of roughly 24 participants each. In response, she said, her supervisors censured her for airing the clips, told her she was “transphobic” for playing them and said she ought to have spoken out against the positions Peterson expressed during the excerpt.

She said she was permitted to keep her position so long as she agreed to file copies of her lesson plans in advance and allow faculty members to sit in on her sessions whenever they wished, constraints she said are not standard practice for Laurier.

She said the experience left her questioning the school’s commitment to academic freedom, a position Laurier maintains it upholds.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...ng-assistant-plays-clip-of-gender-debate.html
 
Back
Top