Jordan Peterson is brilliant - If you disagree and dislike him or object to his views, make your case. (1 Viewer)

[Grim17]

Jordan Peterson is not only brilliant, but is a true force for good in western society. He's an expert on human behavior and 20th century history with an ability to objectively and scientifically break down and detail the ideological origins of various beliefs and movements taking place around the world, as well as point out their assets, their flaws, and the likelihood of how they will play out in the future.

Far too often I see those of you on the left attack and criticize Jordan Peterson personally, as a psychologist, and on things he says that cross into the political domain. People will claim he's been discredited, therefore anything he has to say is invalid and not worthy of consideration or discussion. So if you disagree with me and dislike Peterson, think he's evil, think he's spouts alt-right hate, believe he uses pseudo science, or simply thinks he talks out of his ass and his opinions shouldn't be considered as valid points for discussion, then I invite you to make your case here and now.

First understand that when I say "make your case" the emphasis is on the word "your". Don't post a link to what some journalist claims he said. If you have an opinion about something you claim he said, show me what he said yourself. Peterson has hundreds and hundreds of hours of videos on YouTube that include his college lectures, public speaking engagements, press interviews and panel discussions from around the world, interviews on podcasts, his own podcast where he interviews others, and several public debates with the worlds top thinkers and intellectuals. He even did a TEDx talk. What I'm saying is, YOU back up your claim with direct evidence, not with the claims of someone else.

Here's an example of someone who made claims about Peterson's views and beliefs, claimed he could substantiate it, but ultimately never did and disappeared from the discussion:

Questerr said:

"…ummm… you mean the same Jordan Peterson who thinks there’s a “white genocide” going on and that Christians are oppressed?"

You have the floor...

.

 

[Irredentist]

Jordan Peterson is not only brilliant, but is a true force for good in western society. He's an expert on human behavior and 20th century history with an ability to objectively and scientifically break down and detail the ideological origins of various beliefs and movements taking place around the world, as well as point out their assets, their flaws, and the likelihood of how they will play out in the future.

Far too often I see those of you on the left attack and criticize Jordan Peterson personally, as a psychologist, and on things he says that cross into the political domain. People will claim he's been discredited, therefore anything he has to say is invalid and not worthy of consideration or discussion. So if you disagree with me and dislike Peterson, think he's evil, think he's spouts alt-right hate, believe he uses pseudo science, or simply thinks he talks out of his ass and his opinions shouldn't be considered as valid points for discussion, then I invite you to make your case here and now.

First understand that when I say "make your case" the emphasis is on the word "your". Don't post a link to what some journalist claims he said. If you have an opinion about something you claim he said, show me what he said yourself. Peterson has hundreds and hundreds of hours of videos on YouTube that include his college lectures, public speaking engagements, press interviews and panel discussions from around the world, interviews on podcasts, his own podcast where he interviews others, and several public debates with the worlds top thinkers and intellectuals. He even did a TEDx talk. What I'm saying is, YOU back up your claim with direct evidence, not with the claims of someone else.

Here's an example of someone who made claims about Peterson's views and beliefs, claimed he could substantiate it, but ultimately never did and disappeared from the discussion:



You have the floor...

.

Jordan Peterson is a man with a lot of strong opinions about many things. Some of them are valid and interesting. Others are simply ignorant. I do enjoy his discussion of the psychology of belief and ideology. And I appreciate that he condemns "identity politics" as practiced by both the right and left wing. Not that I agree with his assessments, but he tries not to politically align himself too strongly, despite taking primarily conservative stances on social issues.

 

[lemmiwinx]

From Wikipedia:

Jordan Bernt Peterson (born 12 June 1962) is a Canadian clinical psychologist, YouTube personality, author, and a professor emeritus at the University of Toronto. Peterson began to receive widespread attention as a public intellectual in the late 2010s for his views on cultural and political issues, often described as conservative.

Peterson's a conservative according to Wiki so the long knives in the media will be after him. Look at what the media is doing against black Supreme Court Justice Thomas today and learn.

 

[Simpletruther]

Jordan Peterson is a man with a lot of strong opinions about many things. Some of them are valid and interesting. Others are simply ignorant. I do enjoy his discussion of the psychology of belief and ideology. And I appreciate that he condemns "identity politics" as practiced by both the right and left wing. Not that I agree with his assessments, but he tries not to politically align himself too strongly, despite taking primarily conservative stances on social issues.

I think he social stances are far from conservative on the whole, they fust aren't far left woke.

 

[Antiwar]

Since you like his commentary so much, why haven't you made your case?

 

[Buckeyes85]

Since you like his commentary so much, why haven't you made your case?

Yea, I've never heard of the guy so I can't make a case for or against his positions.

 

[Grim17]

Jordan Peterson is a man with a lot of strong opinions about many things. Some of them are valid and interesting. Others are simply ignorant. I do enjoy his discussion of the psychology of belief and ideology. And I appreciate that he condemns "identity politics" as practiced by both the right and left wing. Not that I agree with his assessments, but he tries not to politically align himself too strongly, despite taking primarily conservative stances on social issues.

What opinions has he expressed that you feel are ignorant?

.

 

[Irredentist]

I think he social stances are far from conservative on the whole, they fust aren't far left woke.

Nevertheless, his social stances do align themselves with conservative groups and causes.

 

[Buckeyes85]

Ok, went to his wiki bio. Got to this part near the end regarding his 2017 lecture series: The Psychological Significance of the Biblical Stories..

That's all I need to know.

 

[Irredentist]

What opinions has he expressed that you feel are ignorant?

.

He has expressed opinions that women's studies should be defunded, and that students should not take courses such as English literature or anthropology, which I frankly find ridiculous. Many of his ideas seem rooted in toxic masculinity. He defines the essence of masculinity to be one of order, and the essence of feminity to be chaos, which I believe to be an oversimplification in the extreme. And he has also criticized the science of climate change, albeit from a political standpoint, rather than any place of scientific understanding.

 

[Antiwar]

I searched the Tube for 'short Jordan Peterson videos' and landed on the 2-minute zebra story.

About a dozen seconds in: "If you understand this story you understand absolutely everything about human beings."

Absolute term and absurd, but I can withstand two minutes.


About 0:42: "The stripes of zebras are the zebra's jargon." Interviewer reaction: "Woo."

Chuckle.


"You stand out, the lions will kill you."

That seems reasonable. Does the science that's supposedly behind this idea back it up?


I thought of a good nickname for him: Jordache. Jordan "Jordache" Peterson. The pronunciation is up to you.

 

[Acadia]

Jordan Peterson is not only brilliant, but is a true force for good in western society. He's an expert on human behavior and 20th century history with an ability to objectively and scientifically break down and detail the ideological origins of various beliefs and movements taking place around the world, as well as point out their assets, their flaws, and the likelihood of how they will play out in the future.

Far too often I see those of you on the left attack and criticize Jordan Peterson personally, as a psychologist, and on things he says that cross into the political domain. People will claim he's been discredited, therefore anything he has to say is invalid and not worthy of consideration or discussion. So if you disagree with me and dislike Peterson, think he's evil, think he's spouts alt-right hate, believe he uses pseudo science, or simply thinks he talks out of his ass and his opinions shouldn't be considered as valid points for discussion, then I invite you to make your case here and now.

First understand that when I say "make your case" the emphasis is on the word "your". Don't post a link to what some journalist claims he said. If you have an opinion about something you claim he said, show me what he said yourself. Peterson has hundreds and hundreds of hours of videos on YouTube that include his college lectures, public speaking engagements, press interviews and panel discussions from around the world, interviews on podcasts, his own podcast where he interviews others, and several public debates with the worlds top thinkers and intellectuals. He even did a TEDx talk. What I'm saying is, YOU back up your claim with direct evidence, not with the claims of someone else.

Here's an example of someone who made claims about Peterson's views and beliefs, claimed he could substantiate it, but ultimately never did and disappeared from the discussion:



You have the floor...

.

Politics is downstream of culture, which makes Peterson a lodestar for conservatives who wish to make sense of this expedited descent into post-modernist, dystopian hell.

 

[Grim17]

Ok, went to his wiki bio. Got to this part near the end regarding his 2017 lecture series: The Psychological Significance of the Biblical Stories..

That's all I need to know.

You are an example of exactly what I was talking about. Because one of the many topics he gives lectures on relates to religion (or Christianity, or what ever it is you despise) you completely disregard and dismiss him.

Here's a news flash for you... Peterson is not a religious zealot. His lectures on the bible discuss how some of the stories, not the religion itself, have had moral relevance through the centuries and are still embraced today whether you are religious or not.

Geez.

 

[Cordelier]

I've never heard of him either... so I looked up his wiki page. The gist I got from that is that he seems to speak in superficial generalities.

Here's an example:

Peterson believes that "order" is masculine and "chaos" is feminine, and that these are inherent to human existence. To Peterson, "culture" is "symbolically, archetypally, mythically male," while "chaos—the unknown—is symbolically associated with the feminine." He has expressed that while it may be considered "unfortunate" that this is the case, any attempt to change or subvert these traits would result in a loss of humanity, saying, "You know you can say, 'Well isn't it unfortunate that chaos is represented by the feminine'—well, it might be unfortunate, but it doesn't matter because that is how it's represented. ... And there are reasons for it. You can't change it. It's not possible. This is underneath everything. If you change those basic categories, people wouldn't be human anymore. ... We wouldn't be able to talk to these new creatures."

I don't know if this is a representative sample of his writings, but it seems like a load of crap to me. Like listening to some 30 year-old undergrad expound on life while hitting his bong at 3 in the morning.

 

[The Old Soul]

This Jordan Peterson?

Jordan Peterson

 

[Grim17]

He has expressed opinions that women's studies should be defunded, and that students should not take courses such as English literature or anthropology, which I frankly find ridiculous. Many of his ideas seem rooted in toxic masculinity. He defines the essence of masculinity to be one of order, and the essence of feminity to be chaos, which I believe to be an oversimplification in the extreme. And he has also criticized the science of climate change, albeit from a political standpoint, rather than any place of scientific understanding.

I know about his thoughts on women's studies and the humanities, which I couldn't agree with more, but I don't recall him ever advocating for defunding courses on English literature or anthropology? I believe he has criticized those 2 for the way they are currently being taught, but nothing beyond that.

If you can show me what he said, I will watch it and comment on it.

 

[Buckeyes85]

You are an example of exactly what I was talking about. Because one of the many topics he gives lectures on relates to religion (or Christianity, or what ever it is you despise) you completely disregard and dismiss him.

Here's a news flash for you... Peterson is not a religious zealot. His lectures on the bible discuss how some of the stories, not the religion itself, have had moral relevance through the centuries and are still embraced today whether you are religious or not.

Geez.

You don't need the bible to give examples of morality. And if you do decide to go down that road, use the bible to tell stories that exemplify moral repugnance also.

He may very well be a bright guy. He may overall have a great message. I can't deny that because I've never read a word he's written. But again, if the bible is his reference point for providing examples of morality, then I don't need his message. It's that simple.

 

[Grim17]

I've never heard of him either... so I looked up his wiki page. The gist I got from that is that he seems to speak in superficial generalities.

Here's an example:

Peterson believes that "order" is masculine and "chaos" is feminine, and that these are inherent to human existence. To Peterson, "culture" is "symbolically, archetypally, mythically male," while "chaos—the unknown—is symbolically associated with the feminine." He has expressed that while it may be considered "unfortunate" that this is the case, any attempt to change or subvert these traits would result in a loss of humanity, saying, "You know you can say, 'Well isn't it unfortunate that chaos is represented by the feminine'—well, it might be unfortunate, but it doesn't matter because that is how it's represented. ... And there are reasons for it. You can't change it. It's not possible. This is underneath everything. If you change those basic categories, people wouldn't be human anymore. ... We wouldn't be able to talk to these new creatures."

I don't know if this is a representative sample of his writings, but it seems like a load of crap to me. Like listening to some 30 year-old undergrad expound on life while hitting his bong at 3 in the morning.

This again is what I'm talking about.

If you want to know who he is and what he believes, don't rely on wiki or anyone else to tell you, take 5 minutes out of your day and find out for yourself. Just go to YouTube, type his name in along with the topic, and you will hear exactly what he says and believes, and in context.

.

 

[Antiwar]

Politics is downstream of culture, which makes Peterson a lodestar for conservatives who wish to make sense of this expedited descent into post-modernist, dystopian hell.

I think he's more a loadstar, if you will.

 

[JMB802]

Jordan Peterson is not only brilliant, but is a true force for good in western society. He's an expert on human behavior and 20th century history with an ability to objectively and scientifically break down and detail the ideological origins of various beliefs and movements taking place around the world, as well as point out their assets, their flaws, and the likelihood of how they will play out in the future.

Far too often I see those of you on the left attack and criticize Jordan Peterson personally, as a psychologist, and on things he says that cross into the political domain. People will claim he's been discredited, therefore anything he has to say is invalid and not worthy of consideration or discussion. So if you disagree with me and dislike Peterson, think he's evil, think he's spouts alt-right hate, believe he uses pseudo science, or simply thinks he talks out of his ass and his opinions shouldn't be considered as valid points for discussion, then I invite you to make your case here and now.

First understand that when I say "make your case" the emphasis is on the word "your". Don't post a link to what some journalist claims he said. If you have an opinion about something you claim he said, show me what he said yourself. Peterson has hundreds and hundreds of hours of videos on YouTube that include his college lectures, public speaking engagements, press interviews and panel discussions from around the world, interviews on podcasts, his own podcast where he interviews others, and several public debates with the worlds top thinkers and intellectuals. He even did a TEDx talk. What I'm saying is, YOU back up your claim with direct evidence, not with the claims of someone else.

Here's an example of someone who made claims about Peterson's views and beliefs, claimed he could substantiate it, but ultimately never did and disappeared from the discussion:



You have the floor...

.

What a stupid thread.

I LOve THIs JORdaN GuY!

YOu AreN'T ALLowED to HAVe DETRacTINg OPinION AboUT HIm UnLesS YoU REad AnD WAtch EvERytHinG HE SaID oR WROte!

 

[Grim17]

You don't need the bible to give examples of morality. And if you do decide to go down that road, use the bible to tell stories that exemplify moral repugnance also.

He may very well be a bright guy. He may overall have a great message. I can't deny that because I've never read a word he's written. But again, if the bible is his reference point for providing examples of morality, then I don't need his message. It's that simple.

Excuse me for saying this and I'm not trying to be insulting or vitriolic, but you are judging someone based on 1 topic out of the dozens that he discusses, and doing so without ever hearing a single word he has ever said.

I know no other way to describe your actions than close minded.

 

[Buckeyes85]

Excuse me for saying this and I'm not trying to be insulting or vitriolic, but you are judging someone based on 1 topic out of the dozens that he discusses, and doing so without ever hearing a single word he has ever said.

I know no other way to describe your actions than close minded.

Well that one topic is a pretty big one if you are using it as the basis for at least part of your. And I wouldn't say I'm judging him so much as simply saying, I am not interested in hearing his message. If he helps others, so be it. He could be a great dude and effective at what he does. I have no argument to the contrary.

 

[Grim17]

I searched the Tube for 'short Jordan Peterson videos' and landed on the 2-minute zebra story.

About a dozen seconds in: "If you understand this story you understand absolutely everything about human beings."

Absolute term and absurd, but I can withstand two minutes.


About 0:42: "The stripes of zebras are the zebra's jargon." Interviewer reaction: "Woo."

Chuckle.


"You stand out, the lions will kill you."

That seems reasonable. Does the science that's supposedly behind this idea back it up?


I thought of a good nickname for him: Jordache. Jordan "Jordache" Peterson. The pronunciation is up to you.

View attachment 67382311

Everything he says relates to the topic being discussed. He gives lots of example that are relative to what he's discussing with someone...

What was the topic being discussed?

.

 

[Grim17]

I've never heard of him either... so I looked up his wiki page. The gist I got from that is that he seems to speak in superficial generalities.

Here's an example:

Peterson believes that "order" is masculine and "chaos" is feminine, and that these are inherent to human existence. To Peterson, "culture" is "symbolically, archetypally, mythically male," while "chaos—the unknown—is symbolically associated with the feminine." He has expressed that while it may be considered "unfortunate" that this is the case, any attempt to change or subvert these traits would result in a loss of humanity, saying, "You know you can say, 'Well isn't it unfortunate that chaos is represented by the feminine'—well, it might be unfortunate, but it doesn't matter because that is how it's represented. ... And there are reasons for it. You can't change it. It's not possible. This is underneath everything. If you change those basic categories, people wouldn't be human anymore. ... We wouldn't be able to talk to these new creatures."

I don't know if this is a representative sample of his writings, but it seems like a load of crap to me. Like listening to some 30 year-old undergrad expound on life while hitting his bong at 3 in the morning.

Link to the video please.

 

[Grim17]

Well that one topic is a pretty big one if you are using it as the basis for at least part of your. And I wouldn't say I'm judging him so much as simply saying, I am not interested in hearing his message. If he helps others, so be it. He could be a great dude and effective at what he does. I have no argument to the contrary.

Does giving lectures on the significance of bible stories, invalidate his views on everything?