Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
According to Peterson, if thinking "the moon is made of Emmental cheese" is a more evolutionarily useful concept than not thinking that, then it is true that the moon is made of Emmental.
|
I've never watched this guy or read anything of his, first exposure being this interview. I don't understand him to be saying what you've posted here.
He is suggesting there are certain truths in that women and men have inherent differences, but he is not arguing that thinking so makes it so. His arguments appear to be based empirically which is inherently epistemological. If you have an example tied to something he's said, post it. I know nothing of this guy.
I found the interview fascinating. I think the host would like to have a second go at him, she doesn't seem to have been prepared for his responses which she probably should have expected. His views are more nuanced than what she was putting forward, and her fundamental arguments about the pay gap and the fact there are fewer women at the top of major corporations does not mean it is desirable to just start making things equal as a manner of legislation.
It was also interesting where he responded by saying that if a company wanted to organize around more "female" traits, as he called them, they should do so, there is nothing preventing them doing so and trying to make it a success.
He disagreed with equality of outcome, which he deemed "undesirable". I think that's obvious in all facets of life. She seemed to be suggesting that was desirable. He stated that you had to look at the reasons the outcomes were different and then address that.