The intellectual dark web

[2Stonedbirds]

Ha got eem

[dobbles]

This is why I love this thread. Its the anti US politics thread.

Someone posts Peterson saying quite ridiculous things and immediately its a 'hit piece' and 'gotcha journalism'.

Or maybe its just him saying some pretty stupid things and a reminder that he may not be as genius as you all think he is? If he is willing to pile on so much bull#### and hyperbole into a story about his diet, that makes me feel pretty confident about the authenticity of his other stances.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Again. The guy does not believe in the dictionary definition of the word "true" and his world view is that archetypal myths and stories (like much of the bible) are "true" because they're "useful".

Why would you expect him not to take liberties with reality in talking about himself? He's consistently full of crap.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

One of Canada’s foremost intellectuals.

Why didn’t CBC pick this incredible story up? Can you say BIAS?

Yeah, I'm sure the CBC started basically no platforming Peterson two years ago because they knew he would adopt a flakey diet in 2018. Had nothing at all to do with his stance towards the politics they champion.

The identarian left's obsession with Peterson is juvenile. If they want to get their message across, then cultivate long-form podcasts, Youtube channels, and forums for people to present their ideas. Playing the social media gotcha game doesn't do anything to lend weight and credibility to those playing the game. But I suppose some people don't know any other way to engage with issues and politics besides tribal coup-counting.

Originally Posted by dobbles

This is why I love this thread. Its the anti US politics thread.

Someone posts Peterson saying quite ridiculous things and immediately its a 'hit piece' and 'gotcha journalism'.

Who here thinks he's a genius? Peterson is astute and incisive about some stuff and flakey and muddled about other stuff. Only simple-minded partisans divide the world into our people and their people, and passionately defend everything our people do and attack everything their people do.

[PsYcNeT]

Ah yes, Jordan Peterson, noted paragon of getting his message across

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Who here thinks he's a genius? Peterson is astute and incisive about some stuff and flakey and muddled about other stuff. Only simple-minded partisans divide the world into our people and their people, and passionately defend everything our people do and attack everything their people do.

Lets be honest here. This forum consists of a lot of posters that fit the bolded.

[CliffFletcher]

A sterling example of a review that only illustrates the argument of the book being criticized.

The Coddling of the American Mind review – how elite US liberals have turned rightwards

A civil liberties advocate and a social psychologist warn that a pathological safety culture is undermining liberalism and fostering anxiety and mental illness. So clearly the only explanation for their concern is that their patriarchal white privilege is being challenged.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That's actually pretty interesting as a sort of "literary analysis" approach to the magnum opus trope. I can't read the right side of the chart but I now want to know what he's talking about.

That's the thing, Peterson would generally be good if he were just throwing interesting and occasionally kooky perspectives about the world and society out there. It's actually a plus to have public intellectuals who approach social life from a totally different angle than the mainstream. It's the whole "cult leader" aspect of his phenomenon, and his cultivation of that aspect by insisting that he's offering profound truths about the proper way to live life, that are concerning.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

That's actually pretty interesting as a sort of "literary analysis" approach to the magnum opus trope. I can't read the right side of the chart but I now want to know what he's talking about.

That's the thing, Peterson would generally be good if he were just throwing interesting and occasionally kooky perspectives about the world and society out there. It's actually a plus to have public intellectuals who approach social life from a totally different angle than the mainstream. It's the whole "cult leader" aspect of his phenomenon, and his cultivation of that aspect by insisting that he's offering profound truths about the proper way to live life, that are concerning.

Bang on. The crux of why Peterson is troubling is because instead of driving conversation and presenting ideas under the pretext of “what if there is truth in this?” he espouses those ideas as truths themselves, and believes it.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Matata

Sounds like one of those gotcha journalism articles where you dig into someone's past, find a time they mispoke and blow it up into some kind of great tragedy for people who are previously inclined to dislike the target.

Also, you should probably have read the article before commenting to save some face. The article isn’t even about Peterson Sr. The title is obviously constructed to get clicks, but the article itself centres around his daughter and the diet, and dangerous line between diet and eating disorder. The section referencing the July podcast is a small point of reference.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

That's actually pretty interesting as a sort of "literary analysis" approach to the magnum opus trope. I can't read the right side of the chart but I now want to know what he's talking about.

That's the thing, Peterson would generally be good if he were just throwing interesting and occasionally kooky perspectives about the world and society out there. It's actually a plus to have public intellectuals who approach social life from a totally different angle than the mainstream. It's the whole "cult leader" aspect of his phenomenon, and his cultivation of that aspect by insisting that he's offering profound truths about the proper way to live life, that are concerning.

This sums up my position on Peterson as well.

[Matata]

I'm not really interested in JP or the article, I just think it is super dumb to do the whole "can you believe this guy said something in an informal conversation that wasn't literally true!" routine followed by all the self congratulation over pointing out something obvious.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

That's the thing, Peterson would generally be good if he were just throwing interesting and occasionally kooky perspectives about the world and society out there. It's actually a plus to have public intellectuals who approach social life from a totally different angle than the mainstream. It's the whole "cult leader" aspect of his phenomenon, and his cultivation of that aspect by insisting that he's offering profound truths about the proper way to live life, that are concerning.

Yeah, Peterson's guru persona is more than a little off-putting. Any time people attribute their salvation to a charismatic leader should set off alarm bells. I suppose there's value in realizing just how desperate a lot of people, especially young men, are today for meaning and self-actualization. But someone as emotionally volatile as Jordan Peterson probably isn't the best source for that help.

People genuinely interested in archetypes and meaning would be much better served watching the Power of Myth, where Bill Moyers conducts a half-dozen fascinating interviews with Joseph Campbell. It was recently added to Netflix.

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ Hey, that’s great. I read some of those interviews way back, didn’t know they were on Netflix now!

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Matata

I'm not really interested in JP or the article, I just think it is super dumb to do the whole "can you believe this guy said something in an informal conversation that wasn't literally true!" routine followed by all the self congratulation over pointing out something obvious.

Right, which rings extremely hollow when you didn’t read the article, don’t follow Peterson, and are this unable to look at the situation within the context at all.

I think it’s super dumb to for people to comment that an article seemed like a hit piece on Peterson presented as a great tragedy to appease his detractors when you didn’t even read it, which is the basic foundation of forming an opinion on it, but who am I.

[Matata]

Awww, you're cute

[PepsiFree]

Is that ban worthy? I didn’t read the post, I just assume it’s slanderous.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Is that ban worthy? I didn’t read the post, I just assume it’s slanderous.

Somebody get banned?

[Matata]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Is that ban worthy? I didn’t read the post, I just assume it’s slanderous.

Are you sure you wouldn't rather say the exact same thing back to me, then act like you did something clever?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

No, he's suggesting Matata should be banned. I assume he's joking.