Yeah, Pinker has pretty much been a consistently great voice for years, but his recent publicity tour for his book has brought him back into the spotlight, all to the good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
I haven't read 12 Rules, and I'm no 'fan' of Peterson's. The basis of his popularity is his trenchant and articulate criticism of the illiberal left and identity politics.
|
For some people it is. Others are drawn to his pseudo-Jungian views about what makes "the good life". I'd go so far as to say the people who are most into him are into him as a cultish life coach sort of figure, not as a public intellectual talking about politics. You have to remember, his opposition to a certain segment of the left is more or less instrumental; they're getting in the way of his message, so he must oppose them. But his message is still what matters to him.
Quote:
|
There's strong public appetite for this sort of open dialogue, and tremendous resentment that the course of social policy is being steered by academics and their media allies without any public debate. Do these academics feel its beneath them to make their case to the wider public?
|
It's not that, it's a matter of losing the high ground. For most people who subscribe to these politics, it's something sacred, something automatically true that if it's not totally obvious to you it must be because you're just not a good enough person. Truly good people would feel these injustices intuitively, and immediately recognize the light of truth revealed to them without needing any explanation. The moment you invite debate, you acknowledge that these ideas are
up for debate, and that can't be, or the whole ideological structure falls apart. It would be like inviting someone to test the material composition of the Emperor's New Clothes.