LogFAQs > #902667865

Balrog0 posted...

so was asking for specific criticisms just a smokescreen or have I been dismissed/ignored like the OP

I was waiting for the person you responded to to address them, but I'll take a stab. I think a key problem with your response, and Axiom above is a perfect example of this at work, is "Peterson said this wrong thing here, so I'm going to ignore every argument he makes on every topic."

First off let me just lay this down as a foundation: He's said stupid things. He's not an expert in every field, and that leads to things like the infamous lobster analogy. I'd argue you're losing the forest for the trees, though. He says very clear, concise things like "hierarchies must exist in society" or "the individual is paramount in western societies" but then he'll make a lobster or dragon analogy... and THAT becomes the focal point of criticism. Then people see the one dumb thing, hear that he's "anti SJW", and decide that rather than deal with specific points they're just going to handwave his entire career away.

Or take your comment about "woman wanting to be dominated"... this probably ties back to when he let that reporter shadow him for a day and he made the mistake of using specific academic terminology... it's not that hes "redefining words", but he's using academically appropriate words... the kind you'd expect to see in a peer reviewed journal, around people that aren't going to interpret it the same way. That's his fault for not speaking to his audience, but it STILL doesn't make his arguments wrong. It just makes them a bit harder to unravel. Don't fall to the same "so what you're saying is..." level of the people looking rewrite his arguments to make them sound bad.
---

"History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz