Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
Why should they? It's not like Peterson himself is providing much more than his own form of rhetoric. His lectures aren't exactly packed with statistics and empirical evidence.
|
This is correct. Having read 12 Rules, there’s little there beyond his own rhetoric. There’s no intellectual level with which anyone can really come at it.
Peterson heavily relies on rhetoric and lessons gleamed from dreams and religion. Much of rules play like well written tumblr posts, they sound like they should be fulfilling chapters that provide a well reasoned guide of the way the world should be, but they’re incredible empty.
It’s funny watching people using an appeal to authority to defend Peterson. “He’s an intellectual, so only intellectual criticism is worthy.” If you’ve read 12 rules, which I doubt many of his supporters who blindly defend him have, it’s not a very intellectual piece of literature.
At best, it’s “it’ll make you think.” But book shelves are lined with books that hold equal intellectual value from much less “intellectual” authors. If anything, Peterson’s desire to publish 12 rules is interesting. It’s empty enough to both appease even the dumbest of his followers, and at the same time invite the unintellectual criticism that galvanises his base. It makes the unintellectual feel intellectual, while angering them anytime others don’t take it seriously or discredit the validation they get from it.
It’s all very fascinating to watch.