Why the Left Is So Afraid of Jordan Peterson

[TheGoverness]

Who is Jordan Peterson?

- The Vast Liberal Conspiracy

I'll do you one better: Why is Jordan Peterson?

 

[Beaudreaux]

Absolutely adored Stephen Fry in this debate

Stephen’s retorts were so inspirationally witty while remaining so basic and logical that they were almost axiomatic and impossible for the other side to counter without damaging their own position further.

He was brilliant.

 

[PirateMk1]

1.) no, its dishonest or ignorance because its factually not true pick one...
2.) plenty? how many is that? I also never said plenty dont, i said ALL dont. try to keep up but the main point is, its not ALL or even most.. so whats that leave? it makes it dishonest and factually wrong like i said. When people say the left want to take away guns, the left hate religion, the right hate equal rights, the right is racist, the right hates gay etc etc they are being dishonest or ignorant and they are part of the problem with politics. they arent interested in honest conversation nor do they have integrity.
3.) nope its just accurate its not trolling at all if you think otherwise report it and let me know how it goes.
4.) I win? when did i say I win? see thats MORE dishonesty or ignorance. Also when did i say i think that or wonder that? see, there you go making more things up LMAO
5.) Didnt call any person (let alone everybody) dishonest in this thread i called a post and thread title and they factually were (or based ignorance)
6.) of course it doesnt cause i didnt do any of the stuff you just made up?? are you drinking and posting right now?? :lol:

Fact remains the thread title is dishonest

Your problem is, you are a one trick pony. You called me dishonest and then hashed my post to make your point. Perhaps you are the one who is dishonest.


Your hashing my post:

Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post

1.)Its properly called bias and hyperbole. Because that's what is.
2.) When you get down to the brass tacks there are plenty of lefties who would and do exactly what you just said plenty don't.
3.) Calling it dishonest is your version of trolling, which you are want to do on occasion.
4.) That and the I win because I say its fact shtick and you wonder why people don't want to debate with you.
5.) Calling people dishonest for everything is just as dumb as the hyperbole lots of other posters use on this board, of which I am quite guilty, in spades I might add, as you are as well on occasion.
6.)Does that make YOU dishonest? The correct answer is NO, this applies to not only you.

My original post:

Its properly called bias and hyperbole. Because that's what is. When you get down to the brass tacks there are plenty of lefties who would and do exactly what you just said plenty don't. Calling it dishonest is your version of trolling, which you are want to do on occasion. That and the I win because I say its fact shtick and you wonder why people don't want to debate with you. Calling people dishonest for everything is just as dumb as the hyperbole lots of other posters use on this board, of which I am quite guilty, in spades I might add, as you are as well on occasion. Does that make YOU dishonest? The correct answer is NO, this applies to not only you.

Who's dishonest? That would be you. And I originally went out of my way to point out that you were not dishonest. You proved otherwise. Sad.

 

[AGENT J]

1.)Your problem is, you are a one trick pony. You called me dishonest and then hashed my post to make your point. Perhaps you are the one who is dishonest.
2.)Your hashing my post:
3.)My original post:
4.)Who's dishonest? That would be you. And I originally went out of my way to point out that you were not dishonest. You proved otherwise. Sad.

1.) LMAO more deflection and lies
2.) and it changed nothing
3.) yep changed nothing
4.) hey look another failed claim. Please feel free to support your false claim with one fact that makes it true, id love to read it thanks!

Fact remains thread title is dishonest (or ignorance), let me know when that fact changes

 

[JackA]

I'm to the left of many people. I haven't been afraid of Jordan Peterson because I've never heard of him before. Now that I have, I did the Google, watched a couple of videos, and read a Guardian piece about him and I'm still not afraid of him. I can't see any reason why I should be. Maybe those who are could explain it.

You're looking in the direction. You need a conservative to explain it. Conservatives never tire of explaining leftists, who haunt them.

 

[kitsune]

You're looking in the direction. You need a conservative to explain it. Conservatives never tire of explaining leftists, who haunt them.

I'm sure I do need a Conservative to explain to me why I should care about this guy, much more be afraid of him. Conservatives are usually really perceptive and revealing when explaining themselves, even though I don't think they always intend to be.

 

[Xelor]

The right-wing identitarians have their panties in a knot about what I've said about the pathology of racial pride.... Demonstrating (as if it is necessary) that the mirror reflection of malevolence is also.... malevolence.
-- Jordan B. Peterson
​

But it's no surprise that the right adores Peterson. In the best tradition of right wingers and Trumpists, the man zealously misrepresents reality, context and meaning, which works for folks on the right because few of them actually read things like footnotes references and hyperlinked explanations. To wit, consider his "12 Rules":

​

Who is Jordan Peterson?

The short is that he's the extreme right's current "pet rock."

​

He's a Canadian academic who can, unlike the vast majority of the vocal-right, can string together sentences that bookend words such as "ideology," "identity politics" and "political correctness" with others that most right-wingers misapprehend while gleaning his disapproval of notions they think they too oppose, yet his contemptuous derision of them elides their notice. But, hey, it's amusing watching folks laurel one who berates them and they're too ignorant to know it.

Too his rhetoric and behavior are incoherent. Peterson styles himself a free-speech advocate, yet he's threatened to sue someone for aspersing him.

Compendia:

• Argue Like Jordan Peterson
• What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?
• The Jordan Peterson paradox: high intellect, or just another angry white guy?
• Why Jordan Peterson Is A Charlatan In His Own Words
• Jordan Peterson's BS
• A Critique of Jordan Peterson
• Is Jordan Peterson the stupid man’s smart person?
• No, ‘Dark Web Intellectuals’ Like Sam Harris And Jordan Peterson Are Not Being Silenced
• The Professor of Piffle

Specific analysis:

• Bill C-16
  • Are Jordan Peterson’s Claims About Bill C-16 Correct?
  • Gender identity, gender pronouns, and freedom of expression: Bill C-16 and the traction of specious legal claims
• Lobsters and Humans (12 Rules)
  • Reconsider the lobster: Kate Manne on Jordan Peterson’s failed antidote for ‘toxic masculine despair’
  • A Messiah-cum-Surrogate-Dad for Gormless Dimwits: On Jordan B. Peterson’s “12 Rules for Life”
  • Psychologist Jordan Peterson says lobsters help to explain why human hierarchies exist – do they?
  • The Fundamental Errors of Jordan Peterson A critical reading of the controversial Psychology professor's book, '12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos'.
  • Jordan Peterson and the Lobster
• The Map of Meaning
  • The Map of Meaning Is Not the Territory (Part 1.1: Context-Free Tangents)
  • The Map of Meaning Is Not the Territory (Part 1.2: William James, Darwin, and God walk into a bar...)
  • The Map of Meaning Is Not the Territory (Part 2.1: From Alpha to Beta to Lobster)
  • The Map of Meaning is Not the Territory (Part 2.2: The Nature of Nature, the Universe, and Everything)
  • The Map of Meaning Is Not the Territory (Parts 2.3, 3, 4: Pinocchio's Oedipal Fever Dream)
  • The Map of Meaning is Not the Territory (Parts 5-8: The Meta-Map of Meaning is Not the Territory Either)
  • The Map of Meaning Is Not the Territory (Parts 9-12.1: Chasing the Jungian Dragon)
  • The Map of Meaning Is Not the Territory (Part 12.2, Wrap-up, and Post-Mortem)
  • THE PSYCHOLOGY OF WHAT IS AND WHAT SHOULD BE: AN EXPERIENTIAL AND MORAL PSYCHOLOGY OF THE KNOWN AND THE UNKNOWN -- Review of Peterson on Meaning-Belief -- This review is what first (and briefly) brought Peterson to my attention.

 

[Redress]

I'm sure I do need a Conservative to explain to me why I should care about this guy, much more be afraid of him. Conservatives are usually really perceptive and revealing when explaining themselves, even though I don't think they always intend to be.

I don't think any one needs fear any political pundit. But people are strangely attracted to pundits who tell them what they want to hear, and so of course the other side must fear them. The OP poster is kinda famous for this kinda silly nonsense.

And I must say I like your username/avatar combination. Well done!

 

[poweRob]

I'll do you one better: Why is Jordan Peterson?

Okay Drax.

 

[kitsune]

I don't think any one needs fear any political pundit. But people are strangely attracted to pundits who tell them what they want to hear, and so of course the other side must fear them. The OP poster is kinda famous for this kinda silly nonsense.

And I must say I like your username/avatar combination. Well done!

I didn't need a Conservative to explain it to me after all.

And thank you! :2wave:

 

[Xelor]

Its properly called bias and hyperbole. Because that's what is. When you get down to the brass tacks there are plenty of lefties who would and do exactly what you just said plenty don't. Calling it dishonest is your version of trolling, which you are want to do on occasion. That and the I win because I say its fact shtick and you wonder why people don't want to debate with you. Calling people dishonest for everything is just as dumb as the hyperbole lots of other posters use on this board, of which I am quite guilty, in spades I might add, as you are as well on occasion. Does that make YOU dishonest? The correct answer is NO, this applies to not only you.

Red:
Yep.

Blue:
Well, there are plenty who wouldn't and plenty who would, so many of either predilection that one cannot aptly generalize about liberals' desires in either regard.

 

[Cardinal]

Peterson's lectures are fine enough (I've watched the Maps of Meaning series), but he's an absolutely loony bin outside the lecture hall. He just raves on and on and on and on about social justice warriors and identity politics....but only the identity politics on the left. If he has anything to say about the white identity politics of the right then I have yet to come across it.

 

[Grand Mal]

I only discovered him this year, so I'm kind of late to the game when it comes to Jordan Peterson, clinical psychologist and professor at the University of Toronto... But the man is incredible. Even though Peterson is not a political person, he is hands down the greatest political thinker and public intellectual out there today. I have watched dozens of videos over the last several months and have yet to see anyone who has interviewed or debated him (in opposition to his views) not walk away with their tail tucked between their legs.

Anyway, this is an article published today by The Atlantic that attempts to explain why Peterson is seen as such a threat by progressives and those on the left. Even though I don't think the article ever completely nailed it down, it was never the less a good read.





Peterson discusses a whole host of things in his lectures and public appearances, but for me, the following clip represents the essence of the man. I recommend that everyone take the time to watch this video, regardless of where you stand politically. It's simply brilliant.



.

Been a Canadian liberal all my life and reasonably well-informed but I've never heard of that guy, much less fear him.
Have you found anyone, anywhere, who fears him?

 

[Grim17]

Been a Canadian liberal all my life and reasonably well-informed but I've never heard of that guy, much less fear him.
Have you found anyone, anywhere, who fears him?

I don't expect anyone would ever admit it, but based on the number of times he's been falsely represented by the media, and the number of personal attacks launched by the far left, it's rather obvious.

.

 

[Deuce]

Who the **** is Jordan Peterson?

 

[blarg]

I only discovered him this year, so I'm kind of late to the game when it comes to Jordan Peterson, clinical psychologist and professor at the University of Toronto... But the man is incredible. Even though Peterson is not a political person, he is hands down the greatest political thinker and public intellectual out there today. I have watched dozens of videos over the last several months and have yet to see anyone who has interviewed or debated him (in opposition to his views) not walk away with their tail tucked between their legs.

Anyway, this is an article published today by The Atlantic that attempts to explain why Peterson is seen as such a threat by progressives and those on the left. Even though I don't think the article ever completely nailed it down, it was never the less a good read.





Peterson discusses a whole host of things in his lectures and public appearances, but for me, the following clip represents the essence of the man. I recommend that everyone take the time to watch this video, regardless of where you stand politically. It's simply brilliant.



.