The intellectual dark web

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Do you really not see the difference? I explained why I thought he was a loon. You've just confidently asserted bare opinions over and over without any justification.

For a supporter of free speech, you sure have a lot of opinions on how often one gets to speak and what they should say in an open forum.

How about we agree to disagree on posting style and what I get to say (and how often or not I get to say it), you start to focus on the message instead, we rise above the pettiness. Cool?

Want to prove to me why what I said it wrong? Go for it, but read the links I posted, and get it together. Your opinion on my competence is subject to all the same things you’re ranting about: if you’re not an expert, and all you wanted to do was share your opinion, just say so, once.

You like it better when people do, so might as well do it yourself. Seems straightforward.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Hahaha, what? You don't just get to stroll into a discussion, make a mess and then ask others to clean it up. Someone might as well say "Jordan Peterson is a rape apologist! If you don't like my message, prove me wrong!" Well, no, that's not worth anyone's time; they're just going to tell you to stop doing that.

As for my opinion on your competence, I think people can judge for themselves whether or not you're an expert on "philosophy, culture, history, and politics". If they think you are, they can credit your opinions. I doubt there will be too many takers, though.

Anyway... fine. Whatever. I've made the point as best I can, no sense beating a dead horse.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Hahaha, what? You don't just get to stroll into a discussion, make a mess and then ask others to clean it up. Someone might as well say "Jordan Peterson is a rape apologist! If you don't like my message, prove me wrong!" Well, no, that's not worth anyone's time; they're just going to tell you to stop doing that.

As for my opinion on your competence, I think people can judge for themselves whether or not you're an expert on "philosophy, culture, history, and politics". If they think you are, they can credit your opinions. I doubt there will be too many takers, though.

Anyway... fine. Whatever. I've made the point as best I can, no sense beating a dead horse.

Competence and expertise are different, fyi. Good thing to know when you build an argument around your opinions of how much others have. Especially if you’re going to pose as an authority and make demands of others.

Petty habit comments like “won’t be too many takers” aside, to distract you from your distress, did you read the links I provided?

Worth a look if you want to discuss some of the issues brought up surround Peterson within. I’m curious what anyone thinks about some of the issues brought up therein of Peterson’s misunderstandings surrounding social justice and Marxism, as well as his total misreading of the Bill he was afraid would make it criminal not to use correct pronouns.

[PepsiFree]

This is also an interesting article on the problems with the Channel 4 interview, and the problems we run into (especially when debating a “loon”) when we impose our interpretation of intent and meaning over the words right in front of us.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thea...rticle/550859/

[Nyah]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yet again, Pepsifree tries to take it upon himself to declare outright….

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

For one, the hypocrisy of your declaration on who is and who is not competent enough to make claims….

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Another classic Pepsifree strategy: "No, you! You're the problem….

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Either way, it’s silly for you to continually respond making judgements on my competence….

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

In all of these cases, without exception, you make strong assertions without any support….

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

For a supporter of free speech, you sure have a lot of opinions on how often one gets to speak…..

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Hahaha, what? You don't just get to stroll into a discussion….

[lambeburger]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I suppose you could look at how few hits that video has compared to most of Peterson's videos on Youtube, and at the vile up-voted comments, and conclude that most of his supporters are misogynist racists. Which could very well be true (it could also be true that misanthropic neckbeards are over-represented in Youtube comments in general). But the ugliness of many of Peterson's supporters doesn't invalidate his criticisms of the activist progressive left.

One thing to note that this video wasn't uploaded by Peterson, but some other youtuber ripping a clip from one of his longer videos, explaining the low view count and the gross comments.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This is also an interesting article on the problems with the Channel 4 interview, and the problems we run into (especially when debating a “loon”) when we impose our interpretation of intent and meaning over the words right in front of us.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thea...rticle/550859/

One explanation I heard for Newman's interviewing approach is that she's accustomed to interviewing politicians and other slippery characters who rarely come out and say what they mean, especially when discussing controversial issues. Dealing with Peterson - who is extraordinarily specific and clear in his language, while also saying controversial things - was outside her experience as a journalist.

I honestly don't think the interview was all that bad. Newman certainly isn't deserving of the attacks she's been getting in some quarters. As a journalist, she's not any kind of expert on the subjects she interviews people about. She posed challenging questions, Peterson answered them in a manner that was both thought-provoking and entertaining, and the story generated massive publicity. Win-win-win.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by lambeburger

One thing to note that this video wasn't uploaded by Peterson, but some other youtuber ripping a clip from one of his longer videos, explaining the low view count and the gross comments.

[burn_this_city]

She seemed to be gunning for the gotcha moment but ended up coming across as foolish. I don't have a great deal of sympathy for journalists who attempt to misconstrue people's points to make them sound unreasonable or worse. Fox News does this all the time, and it was amusing to see it fall apart. I do wonder if the threat story that followed is an attempt to convince fence sitters that this guy is clearly nuts and his followers are dangerous.

Also enjoying seeing some posters here outing themselves as blatant ideologues.

[lambeburger]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

It's funny, ideologues want to bring Jordan Peterson down so much, but they can't actually form an argument on why his ideas are wrong without resorting to useless, ad hominem attacks because it's the best that they have.

[PsYcNeT]

No memes allowed in the super serious Jordan Peterson thread.

[V]

He didn't say it wasn't allowed, only that it's all you've got. Pretty apt for anything you stride into.

[BigNumbers]

Originally Posted by V

He didn't say it wasn't allowed, only that it's all you've got. Pretty apt for anything you stride into.

Obviously the truth is self-evident, so sayeth the meme-launching manager of a call-center.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

No memes allowed in the super serious Jordan Peterson thread.

The truth hurts dude.

[crazy_eoj]

https://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-...zon/zgbs/books


/notworthlisteningto

[burn_this_city]

I bought the book after the interview controversy and it arrived yesterday. My wife stole it while I was watching the game last night and has devoured quite a bit of it already. She never reads books so it was amusing to see her so enthralled by it.

[Nyah]

I'm about a quarter of the way through it - really enjoying it so far.

[CliffFletcher]

It's hilarious that the bestselling non-fiction book in North America is written by a Canadian, but it didn't even make the 21 works of Canadian nonfiction to watch for in the first half of 2018 list that the CBC put out two days ago. It will be fascinating to see the lengths to which the CBC goes pretending this book doesn't exist. Especially considering one of their core mandates is to promote Canadian writers.

[Bootsy]

A little background on Peterson's political background from this Star article.

"He spent a lot of time in the Notley home, getting to know Grant Notley, Sandy’s husband and leader of the Alberta NDP. Peterson sometimes joined double dates with their daughter Rachel, now the province’s premier.

And he shared the family’s politics.

“I was probably attracted by the essential idea of fairness, something like that,” he said, “interested in policies that were designed to help ordinary people.”

When he was 14, he ran for vice-president of the Alberta NDP. He attended party conventions and met Roy Romanow and Ed Broadbent. He sang the left-wing anthem “The Internationale” with labour leaders.

But around the age of 18, he became disillusioned with the “party functionaries,” although he still liked the leaders. “They were resentful, just like the social justice warriors” of today, Peterson said.

And he said he had a crisis of faith.

“I stopped believing that the philosophy that was embodied in socialism was sufficient to redress the problems that I felt were paramount,” said Peterson, who was becoming increasingly concerned about social conflict."

https://www.thestar.com/news/insight...t-is-back.html

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by crazy_eoj

https://www.amazon.com/best-sellers-...zon/zgbs/books


/notworthlisteningto

Just beat out “Dog man and Cat Kid: From the Creators of Captain Underpants”

And esteemed list indicative of the importance it holds in our time, surely. It’ll be interesting who wins the Nobel prize.