I always wish the people who defend this kind of weird woke behaviour actually took some time to examine the forces manipulating it behind the scenes. That is, when you attack the foundations of your own society ceaselessly and without basis, you open it up to be exploited by entities who are completely against liberal democratic values.
Anyone - especially white cis men - who defends cancel culture or the rising theme of progressive intolerance in the guise of protecting minority opinions has been completely hoodwinked. It's quisling-like cowardice to defend this new type of political phenomenon.
I'm not sure what exactly you're criticizing. Is it the left for calling abhorrent speech abhorrent or companies/governments/organizations for protecting their brands by distancing themselves from people whose association with might damage said brand?
I always wish the people who defend this kind of weird woke behaviour actually took some time to examine the forces manipulating it behind the scenes. That is, when you attack the foundations of your own society ceaselessly and without basis, you open it up to be exploited by entities who are completely against liberal democratic values.
So we should just ceaselessly promote our society's values and ignore the foibles, lest some dictator use our words for their own gain? Can't see any situation where that could go horribly wrong.
So we should just ceaselessly promote our society's values and ignore the foibles, lest some dictator use our words for their own gain? Can't see any situation where that could go horribly wrong.
We can be definitely be critical, but it's good to remember how to be properly critical within a liberal democratic society. Ie. understanding the underpinnings of the laws and values that guide our cultures.
Too often, radicals on both sides graft criticisms onto ideas that are frankly totalitarian.
We can be definitely be critical, but it's good to remember how to be properly critical within a liberal democratic society. Ie. understanding the underpinnings of the laws and values that guide our cultures.
Too often, radicals on both sides graft criticisms onto ideas that are frankly totalitarian.
I think that's more of an education issue, TBH. I can't even count the number of times I've been in debates with people who fundamentally don't understand the common law system, Charter rights, etc.
I think that's more of an education issue, TBH. I can't even count the number of times I've been in debates with people who fundamentally don't understand the common law system, Charter rights, etc.
Right, so why do you play into the cheap and lousy hands of the woke radicalism so often? You see my point.
Right, so why do you play into the cheap and lousy hands of the woke radicalism so often? You see my point.
In what sense? I can see value in the criticisms without necessarily agreeing with the conclusions.
We also all have our biases that should be called out from time to time and cause us to pause for self-reflection. I'm no different. Considering your posting history in the COVID threads over the past year and a bit, I'd have thought you of all people could relate to that.
I don't reflect. I'm a server farm in Richmond. Nearing self-awareness but really just spitting out posts created by an algorithm that just read all of the classical liberal texts. I'm also your conscience.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to peter12 For This Useful Post:
I don't reflect. I'm a server farm in Richmond. Nearing self-awareness but really just spitting out posts created by an algorithm that just read all of the classical liberal texts.
Great, another Cliff. Damn you, Virginia!
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
I actually disagree with this because even when he does this, he basically engages in essentialism that either intentionally or unintentionally denegrates women, as well as men who don't conform to his "masculine" archetype.
In the video I posted, you can kind see he just kind of lazily falls into calling "competency" a masculine trait. I apologize that it's an HasanAbi clip, because that guy can be super bro-y and irritating, but I didn't want to go digging around for the actual Schultz clip.
If you have 15 minutes you have nothing better to waste on, you can see that Peterson does his usual trick of refusing to commit to defining what he's talking about, and just kind of flails around with circular reasoning.
His argument regarding power and greatness when taken to its logical conclusion is a) complete nonsense and b) a little fascist sounding. And I don't mean fascist as in "he's Hitler," just that the foundations of what he believes regarding power and greatness is at least philosophically adjacent to the philosophies that underpin fascism.
I think what my biggest problem with Peterson is that the guy just seems completely unwilling to accept criticism from anyone, and instead resorts to saying he's being attacked. In some cases he's right. Some of his critics have come for him with baseless nonsense and are clearly motivated by an agenda, but not all of them. A truly honest intellectual would at least acknowledge some of the more valid criticisms or, at the very least, why his work has been perceived in a certain manner.
I kind of liken it to someone who does art that depicts children in a manner that some criticize as pedophilic, and the artist and his fans go "Nuh uh, you're just too stupid and uncultured to understand it." Meanwhile his work is consistently being purchased by pedophiles. It doesn't necessarily mean that the art itself is pedophilic nor that his critics are entirely correct, but it's probably something the artist should examine.
If Peterson's content is being heavily consumed by incels and misogynists, and women consistently find it sexist, there's at the very least a presentation/communication issue.
Last edited by rubecube; 05-06-2021 at 02:08 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
I think the most important stuff that he’s right about - that the most important thing for most people is going to be the relationships they have with their family and their children, so you should take very good care of them - gets lost in the madness.
People are frequently wrong about most things - but if there’s a thing or two that they’re right about, take it with you and let the rest burn.
__________________
Mom and Dad love you, Rowan - February 15, 2024
I think the most important stuff that he’s right about - that the most important thing for most people is going to be the relationships they have with their family and their children, so you should take very good care of them - gets lost in the madness.
People are frequently wrong about most things - but if there’s a thing or two that they’re right about, take it with you and let the rest burn.
He's still too Manichean even on some of that stuff when he bases it on his archetype nonsense. If he stuck to "psychological studies show that children who are raised in this environment, etc.," that's totally in his wheel house and I wouldn't even try to pretend I know more on the topic than he does.
He's still too Manichean even on some of that stuff when he bases it on his archetype nonsense. If he stuck to "psychological studies show that children who are raised in this environment, etc.," that's totally in his wheel house and I wouldn't even try to pretend I know more on the topic than he does.
I must confess I don’t know what Manichean means - I’m just a humble ULeth B.A.
__________________
Mom and Dad love you, Rowan - February 15, 2024
I must confess I don’t know what Manichean means - I’m just a humble ULeth B.A.
My bad. Basically like a dualistic view of things (black/white, good/evil, right/wrong, etc.). I find he leaves very little room for nuance and alternative views. We're all guilty of it at times, but he seems to regularly use it in ordering his world and beliefs (e.g. chaos vs. order).
The Following User Says Thank You to rubecube For This Useful Post:
In the video I posted, you can kind see he just kind of lazily falls into calling "competency" a masculine trait. I apologize that it's an HasanAbi clip, because that guy can be super bro-y and irritating, but I didn't want to go digging around for the actual Schultz clip.
My bad. Basically like a dualistic view of things (black/white, good/evil, right/wrong, etc.). I find he leaves very little room for nuance and alternative views. We're all guilty of it at times, but he seems to regularly use it in ordering his world and beliefs (e.g. chaos vs. order).
Agreed. You should go listen to his interview on Megyn Kelly. She agrees with most of what he says in the first half, but the second half she takes him to task on gender generalizations and that women fail because they are more agreeable and can't get what they want crap, and also clothes and makeup which Peterson pretends to know about.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
Honestly, what I have seen from Peterson is pretty boilerplate self-help stuff. I have no idea why people find him so offensive. Like, I get some of his stuff on alpha-male traits, femininity, etc... is kind of old-fashioned, but honestly, isn't his central message about taking responsibility for your actions? Some people - especially incels - need that kind of encouragement.
For what its worth, there is clearly something going on with young men that is overall pretty detrimental for a society shooting for egalitarian outcomes etc... I don't know what it is, but I am sure that Peterson's fairly significant social outcome has more to do with him just being a kind of sneaky alt-right propagandist.
