The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

[unimackpass]

GOAT IS BLESSING US WITH AN APPEARANCE ON JRE RN LADS

in for paradigm shifting knowledge

If someone is looking for a condensed version about the ch4 interview this isn't to bad. Not really a fan of joe but he really gets what Peterson is about so he's doing way better than some of the Sdoggers that actually believe in their own high IQ.



Joe references this article. People that want another perspective should read it, not sure it it will help them though.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/putting-monsterpaint-onjordan-peterson/550859/

 

[Armbars]

Intelligent man. Probably hated by the majority of the left due to their hate or anything outside of the leftie manifesto

 

[Bamboozled]

He has a few of these now, but it's still a great listen.

Intelligent man. Probably hated by the majority of the left due to their hate or anything outside of the leftie manifesto

As the video goes over, how appropriate.

 

[Metusalemi]

Since the Cathy Newman interview, his Youtube subscriber count has gone up by 100,000.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

I don't think there would be a Peterson thread if he didn't rail against PC culture. I don't think that in itself makes anything he has to say mindblowing or anything.

What would be the political slant to what he says if he wasn't opposed to PC culture?

 

[Goonerview]

Since the Cathy Newman interview, his Youtube subscriber count has gone up by 100,000.

That interview was so good

 

[Goonerview]

Peterson is great. Can't say I've followed him for long, but I do appreciate folks who bring logic and research to the debate instead of just feelings and outrage.

I like Peterson, Molyneux, Shapiro is alright. Sargon of Akkad is funny. Gavin McInnes is hilarious.

Peterson and Molyneux are my favrourites.

 

[Gunny]

Since the Cathy Newman interview, his Youtube subscriber count has gone up by 100,000.

And the original video of the interview has over 5 million views. I used to think Rogan was singularly most responsible for JP’s widespread exposure. Much to her chagrin, I’m sure, Cathy Newman may now hold that distinction.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

The mainstream media (this time it is the Globe and Mail) with another ridiculous hit piece:

The Jordan Peterson paradox: high intellect, or just another angry white guy?

It is little wonder, then, that Peterson is prominent among conservatives (he identifies as a "classical liberal," which is a conservative), angry young men, and the ranks of the alt-right. (Following her recent interview with Peterson, Channel 4 presenter Cathy Newman was deluged with death threats; thus giving Peterson the dubious distinction of being the rare "dangerous scholar" who is actually dangerous.) Peterson dresses up the language of misogyny in the woozy jargon of Eastern religion (he identifies chaos, his enemy, with the Taoist notion of the "eternal feminine"); he justifies existing structures of social dominance by deferring to the hard-wiring of ancient crustaceans; he capitalizes words such as Being and Woman and Nature with no apparent rationale. For all his wailing about the dangers of tyranny, Peterson's use of language is itself spookily Orwellian – justifying the most noxious, moronic ideas by making them seem intellectual or, in his words, "archetypal."

 

[21 Savage]

"They (Trump and Peterson) also do something which a lot of pseudo-intellectuals do as well, which is use second person at rates much higher than a normal person would use it. Adding "you know" to the beginning or end of a sentence when it has no meaning happens a lot.

Trump does something to a gigantic degree, but JBP only slightly less so, when they mean to describe an event. Instead of saying "John made a speech last night that was very complimentary of me", they will say, "You watch John's speech and he's just so flattering". Somehow it makes it harder to disagree, because he's made two different claims, one that you were watching the speech, and two that it was flattering. In order to disagree, you have to agree that you watched the speech, but disagree that it was flattering, which is more complicated than just saying "no you're wrong."

This video breaks down how Trump answers a question, but look at JBP do the same thing. The entire point he's making is given in a hypothetical second person.

I think he honestly uses it to just obfuscate objections to his arguments. If one wanted to object to this sentence, "You may be resentful, and that's the Eye of Horus talking through you", it would be hard! If one just said "I disagree" it's not immediately clear what he means. Does he mean he disagrees that he may not be resentful? Does he mean that he may be resentful, but at the moment he isn't? Does he mean that even if he's resentful, it has nothing to do with Horus? And if so, is he not then resentful, or is he resentful for a different reason?

It's very uncomfortable to listen to either of them, and honestly feels like they're making your case for you by using so much god damn second person."

what does he mean by this sherdog?

 

[Prefect]

What would be the political slant to what he says if he wasn't opposed to PC culture?

That is his identifying point and it is neither novel or new. For a philosopher, if you want to call him that, he has some rather odd ideas that are pretty unfounded. When you go the route of just blasting anti-PC rhetoric, you become identified as being a mouthpiece rather than a serious intellect. I bet near everyone that likes Peterson can't identify any of his other arguments or stances.

 

[Der Eisbär]

I don't think there would be a Peterson thread if he didn't rail against PC culture. I don't think that in itself makes anything he has to say mindblowing or anything.

This isn't an argument. You clearly don't know anything about the content he specializes in which is why you didn't say anything about it in your post here and why you didn't give any examples.

 

[Der Eisbär]

The mainstream media (this time it is the Globe and Mail) with another ridiculous hit piece:

The Jordan Peterson paradox: high intellect, or just another angry white guy?

It is little wonder, then, that Peterson is prominent among conservatives (he identifies as a "classical liberal," which is a conservative), angry young men, and the ranks of the alt-right. (Following her recent interview with Peterson, Channel 4 presenter Cathy Newman was deluged with death threats; thus giving Peterson the dubious distinction of being the rare "dangerous scholar" who is actually dangerous.) Peterson dresses up the language of misogyny in the woozy jargon of Eastern religion (he identifies chaos, his enemy, with the Taoist notion of the "eternal feminine"); he justifies existing structures of social dominance by deferring to the hard-wiring of ancient crustaceans; he capitalizes words such as Being and Woman and Nature with no apparent rationale. For all his wailing about the dangers of tyranny, Peterson's use of language is itself spookily Orwellian – justifying the most noxious, moronic ideas by making them seem intellectual or, in his words, "archetypal."

Ah yeah I forgot what an idiot and pseudo-intellectual Carl Jung was for his work on arche-types. Like honestly this shit is just getting so pathetic and anyone worth their intellectual salt can see right through this idiocy.

The MSM is getting desperate to discredit this man. He is reaching critical mass and red pilling the general population.

 

[Der Eisbär]

That is his identifying point and it is neither novel or new. For a philosopher, if you want to call him that, he has some rather odd ideas that are pretty unfounded. When you go the route of just blasting anti-PC rhetoric, you become identified as being a mouthpiece rather than a serious intellect. I bet near everyone that likes Peterson can't identify any of his other arguments or stances.

You're so wrong here. It's unreal. Go look at his new book on amazon. It's #5 on amazon charts for most read. It already has 358 reviews resulting in a 4.8 star rating. If you read through the reviews they're very very extensive. You're promoting ideas that simply aren't grounded in reality
-"peterson supporters dont even know his ideas outside of blasting pc culture"
-"he doesn't have anything worth saying outside of blasting pc culture"

Your ideological blinders are clearly on. Someone or something got to you along the way and you've determined for yourself to find something wrong with him rather than honestly exploring the truth.

 

[sangreporsangre]

The mainstream media (this time it is the Globe and Mail) with another ridiculous hit piece:

The Jordan Peterson paradox: high intellect, or just another angry white guy?

It is little wonder, then, that Peterson is prominent among conservatives (he identifies as a "classical liberal," which is a conservative), angry young men, and the ranks of the alt-right. (Following her recent interview with Peterson, Channel 4 presenter Cathy Newman was deluged with death threats; thus giving Peterson the dubious distinction of being the rare "dangerous scholar" who is actually dangerous.) Peterson dresses up the language of misogyny in the woozy jargon of Eastern religion (he identifies chaos, his enemy, with the Taoist notion of the "eternal feminine"); he justifies existing structures of social dominance by deferring to the hard-wiring of ancient crustaceans; he capitalizes words such as Being and Woman and Nature with no apparent rationale. For all his wailing about the dangers of tyranny, Peterson's use of language is itself spookily Orwellian – justifying the most noxious, moronic ideas by making them seem intellectual or, in his words, "archetypal."

"Deluged with death threats"?? I'd like to see them back that up with something. Did she get a single, actual threat? No doubt that she got a lot of people calling her an idiot, but I haven't seen any threats or even any really foul comments about her or anything like that. So they're just gonna assert it as a fact that she received death threats? Globe and Fail is trash. No wonder all the Canadian newspapers want the federal government to start subsidizing them.

 

[Der Eisbär]

"Deluged with death threats"?? I'd like to see them back that up with something. Did she get a single, actual threat? No doubt that she got a lot of people calling her an idiot, but I haven't seen any threats or even any really foul comments about her or anything like that. So they're just gonna assert it as a fact that she received death threats? Globe and Fail is trash. No wonder all the Canadian newspapers want the federal government to start subsidizing them.

Someone actually did an audit of ALL the tweets regarding this interview and they actually found Newman supporters making negative or threatening comments towards Peterson over anti-newman threats by like a 5:1 margin. They refuse to comment on that despite that analysis being blasted all over her twitter and the internet at large.

 

[Prefect]

You're so wrong here. It's unreal. Go look at his new book on amazon. It's #5 on amazon charts for most read. It already has 358 reviews resulting in a 4.8 star rating. If you read through the reviews they're very very extensive. You're promoting ideas that simply aren't grounded in reality
-"peterson supporters dont even know his ideas outside of blasting pc culture"
-"he doesn't have anything worth saying outside of blasting pc culture"

Your ideological blinders are clearly on. Someone or something got to you along the way and you've determined for yourself to find something wrong with him rather than honestly exploring the truth.

Rush Limbaugh's "Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exception Americans has 6207 reviews, way more than Peterson's book and it is rated 5 stars. Sales on Amazon don't mean shit or add credibility.

Jordan Peterson adds nothing to the discourse and just resonates with the alt-right. No one in academia takes what he has seriously. He has very old concepts about men and women and has videos on youtube like "how to not become a beta male". It is quackery put together because it sells.

 

[Der Eisbär]

Rush Limbaugh's "Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exception Americans has 6207 reviews, way more than Peterson's book and it is rated 5 stars. Sales on Amazon don't mean shit or add credibility.

Jordan Peterson adds nothing to the discourse and just resonates with the alt-right. No one in academia takes what he has seriously. He has very old concepts about men and women and has videos on youtube like "how to not become a beta male". It is quackery put together because it sells.

You made an assertion that "peterson fans cant identify his ideas". That is categorically wrong when people are reading entire books written by him and leaving soaring reviews. You then proceeded to move the goal post and change your assertion to "well rush limbaugh....x, y and z, that doesn't add to his credibility." I didn't mention credibility. I mentioned that his fans are very well familiar with peterson's ideas and that's why his following is growing so exponentially. His ideas are fascinating.

You CLEARLY are not familiar with what he is teaching in his lectures and books and that is evidenced by the fact you make overly reductionist (and laughable) statements like

"He has very old concepts about men and women and has videos on youtube like "how to not become a beta male". It is quackery put together because it sells".

If you were actually familiar with what he really teaches you wouldn't be spouting nonsense like this.

 

[USA!USA!]

If people would actually listen to what he is saying, it is apparent he is not a racist, sexist or hateful guy.

He just says some things people don't want to hear and it triggers them.

That is the world we are in. If someone says something you don't agree with, they are evil.

 

[Hogey]

Rush Limbaugh's "Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims: Time-Travel Adventures with Exception Americans has 6207 reviews, way more than Peterson's book and it is rated 5 stars. Sales on Amazon don't mean shit or add credibility.

Jordan Peterson adds nothing to the discourse and just resonates with the alt-right. No one in academia takes what he has seriously. He has very old concepts about men and women and has videos on youtube like "how to not become a beta male". It is quackery put together because it sells.

This guy defitnley does not clean his room. Stop being so angry with yourself and spouting bullshit. Are you doing this to troll or just offended by what Jordan Peterson says?