Current Events > 12 Rules for Life by Jordan B Peterson comes out tomorrow, who's getting it?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 7
nicklebro 01/24/18 1:37:40 PM #51:	zH0mPfR posted... He's a liberal in the way that Sargon of Akkad is a liberal. I.e., they hate both nazis and commies, which is what America used to be about. Modern day liberals view Peterson as a nazi. No they don't. Modern day communists and SJWs do, but they don't represent most liberals. Peterson literally worked for the liberal party in Canada and identifies as a liberal himself while holding a liberal perspective. Just because he exposes the evils of communism and the irrationality of SJWs doesn't make him a conservative. averagejoel posted... he is pretty clearly ignorant on the subjects of marxism, postmodernism, and gender, and those are the things that he seems most lauded for talking about He is quite clearly an expert on all of those subjects and knows more about them than you ever will. averagejoel posted... incorrect. Marxism does not denounce people making money. try harder. I never said it does. I said you being a Marxist are likely to look down on people who make money. averagejoel posted... denouncing flawed, incomplete implementations of Marxism that were heavily attacked by imperialist countries is not a denouncement of Marxist ideology. All implementations of Marxism remain flawed and incomplete because it is fundamentally unstable and impossible to realize without altering human nature as we know it. Jordan Peterson explains all of this quite well. And he asks the question that you seem unable to answer: How many more 10s of millions of people need to die before you give up on this pipe dream that has never once given you any indication it can succeed? --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894710947] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>zH0mPfR posted...</cite> <quote>He's a liberal in the way that Sargon of Akkad is a liberal. I.e., they hate both nazis and commies, which is what America used to be about. Modern day liberals view Peterson as a nazi. </quote> No they don't. Modern day communists and SJWs do, but they don't represent most liberals. Peterson literally worked for the liberal party in Canada and identifies as a liberal himself while holding a liberal perspective. Just because he exposes the evils of communism and the irrationality of SJWs doesn't make him a conservative. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>he is pretty clearly ignorant on the subjects of marxism, postmodernism, and gender, and those are the things that he seems most lauded for talking about </quote> He is quite clearly an expert on all of those subjects and knows more about them than you ever will. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>incorrect. Marxism does not denounce people making money. try harder. </quote> I never said it does. I said you being a Marxist are likely to look down on people who make money. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>denouncing flawed, incomplete implementations of Marxism that were heavily attacked by imperialist countries is not a denouncement of Marxist ideology. </quote> All implementations of Marxism remain flawed and incomplete because it is fundamentally unstable and impossible to realize without altering human nature as we know it. Jordan Peterson explains all of this quite well. And he asks the question that you seem unable to answer: How many more 10s of millions of people need to die before you give up on this pipe dream that has never once given you any indication it can succeed?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nicklebro 01/24/18 1:38:48 PM #52:	hortanz posted... all I know about this guy is that a substantial amount of his writing is attacking a strawman of postmodernism but he also sounds like kermit the frog so its hard to tell whether he'd be fun to listen to or not A strawman of postmodernism? As in postmodernism is the strawman? Or he's making a strawman for postmodernism? Cuz either one is wrong, I just want to know how wrong you are. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894711027] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>hortanz posted...</cite> <quote>all I know about this guy is that a substantial amount of his writing is attacking a strawman of postmodernism but he also sounds like kermit the frog so its hard to tell whether he'd be fun to listen to or not</quote> A strawman of postmodernism? As in postmodernism is the strawman? Or he's making a strawman for postmodernism? Cuz either one is wrong, I just want to know how wrong you are.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hortanz 01/24/18 1:39:37 PM #53:	nicklebro posted... He is quite clearly an expert on all of those subjects and knows more about them than you ever will. idk I haven't read the book myself but I read the article antifar linked earlier today and it seems like his understanding of postmodernism is incredibly inaccurate --- http://i.imgur.com/JFmtaHB.gif <cite>hortanz posted [p:894711082] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>He is quite clearly an expert on all of those subjects and knows more about them than you ever will.</quote> idk I haven't read the book myself but I read the article antifar linked earlier today and it seems like his understanding of postmodernism is incredibly inaccurate</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 1:41:14 PM #54:	Yes. Jordan Peterson is fantastic. --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894711187] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>Yes. Jordan Peterson is fantastic.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 1:42:23 PM #55:	Romes187 posted... averagejoel posted... denouncing flawed, incomplete implementations of Marxism that were heavily attacked by imperialist countries is not a denouncement of Marxist ideology. There it is...incomplete implementations of Marxism. Please tell us exactly how you, great and all knowing person, would implement it CORRECTLY Because clearly you know how what does this have to do with anything? Communism, the final stage of Marxism, has never been reached. that is an objective fact. I made no claims about how I would implement it. I never said I would be a good leader for a country. --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894711262] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>denouncing flawed, incomplete implementations of Marxism that were heavily attacked by imperialist countries is not a denouncement of Marxist ideology. </quote> There it is...incomplete implementations of Marxism. Please tell us exactly how you, great and all knowing person, would implement it CORRECTLY Because clearly you know how</quote> what does this have to do with anything? Communism, the final stage of Marxism, has never been reached. that is an objective fact. I made no claims about how I would implement it. I never said I would be a good leader for a country.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
armandro 01/24/18 1:45:31 PM #56:	Romes187 posted... armandro posted... MC_BatCommander posted... armandro posted... He denies that women are paid less than men for the same job. No, he said women are paid less for many influencing factors and not just because they are women, that's a very important distinction. no i'm talking about the same job not in general its like you're using the same talking points that Cathy Newman used He is saying that them being a woman is one factor of many including the fact that agreeable people tend to not ask for raises as often as non agreeable people....women tend to be more agreeable...do the rest of the math yourself this isnt hard and its so annoying that people keep spouting the same nonsense to further their ideology why doesn't the job just pay them equal? why even offer less? thats my whole point --- http://i.imgur.com/sKghEcP.gif 8 October, 2023 <cite>armandro posted [p:894711468] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>MC_BatCommander posted...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote>He denies that women are paid less than men for the same job.</quote> No, he said women are paid less for many influencing factors and not just because they are women, that's a very important distinction.</quote> no i'm talking about the same job not in general</quote> its like you're using the same talking points that Cathy Newman used He is saying that them being a woman is one factor of many including the fact that agreeable people tend to not ask for raises as often as non agreeable people....women tend to be more agreeable...do the rest of the math yourself this isnt hard and its so annoying that people keep spouting the same nonsense to further their ideology</quote> why doesn't the job just pay them equal? why even offer less? thats my whole point</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 1:47:08 PM #57:	averagejoel posted... Romes187 posted... averagejoel posted... denouncing flawed, incomplete implementations of Marxism that were heavily attacked by imperialist countries is not a denouncement of Marxist ideology. There it is...incomplete implementations of Marxism. Please tell us exactly how you, great and all knowing person, would implement it CORRECTLY Because clearly you know how what does this have to do with anything? Communism, the final stage of Marxism, has never been reached. that is an objective fact. I made no claims about how I would implement it. I never said I would be a good leader for a country. Have you ever thought that it has never been reached due to it being flawed? If you have no idea how to implement it, how do you know it was implemented incorrectly? Because it hasn't worked yet? <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894711582] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>denouncing flawed, incomplete implementations of Marxism that were heavily attacked by imperialist countries is not a denouncement of Marxist ideology. </quote> There it is...incomplete implementations of Marxism. Please tell us exactly how you, great and all knowing person, would implement it CORRECTLY Because clearly you know how</quote> what does this have to do with anything? Communism, the final stage of Marxism, has never been reached. that is an objective fact. I made no claims about how I would implement it. I never said I would be a good leader for a country.</quote> Have you ever thought that it has never been reached due to it being flawed? If you have no idea how to implement it, how do you know it was implemented incorrectly? Because it hasn't worked yet?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 1:47:55 PM #58:	Plenty of countries had socialists who tried to implement communism as it is written and encoded in communist writing. They all failed, and the experiments were disasters that killed over 100 million people in no time at all. Anyone who still wants to attempt communism or use socialism as some mechanism for equality is not worth debating because they are utterly clueless. --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894711632] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>Plenty of countries had socialists who tried to implement communism as it is written and encoded in communist writing. They all failed, and the experiments were disasters that killed over 100 million people in no time at all. Anyone who still wants to attempt communism or use socialism as some mechanism for equality is not worth debating because they are utterly clueless.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 1:48:22 PM #59:	nicklebro posted... He is quite clearly an expert on all of those subjects and knows more about them than you ever will. objectively incorrect I never said it does. I said you being a Marxist are likely to look down on people who make money. that depends entirely on how their money is made All implementations of Marxism remain flawed and incomplete because it is fundamentally unstable and impossible to realize without altering human nature as we know it. you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. also, human nature isn't static to begin with - it's constantly changing relative to our surroundings. --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894711652] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>He is quite clearly an expert on all of those subjects and knows more about them than you ever will.</quote> objectively incorrect <quote>I never said it does. I said you being a Marxist are likely to look down on people who make money.</quote> that depends entirely on how their money is made <quote>All implementations of Marxism remain flawed and incomplete because it is fundamentally unstable and impossible to realize without altering human nature as we know it.</quote> you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. also, human nature isn't static to begin with - it's constantly changing relative to our surroundings.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 1:49:03 PM #60:	Romes187 posted... Have you ever thought that it has never been reached due to it being flawed? If you have no idea how to implement it, how do you know it was implemented incorrectly? Because it hasn't worked yet? He's going to make up bullshit about the CIA meddling with socialist country politics, even though there are examples like Russia and Romania and etc where the socialist experiment to implement communism failed because of communism itself. It's literally not a stable worldview. It cannot sustain itself. --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894711707] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote>Have you ever thought that it has never been reached due to it being flawed? If you have no idea how to implement it, how do you know it was implemented incorrectly? Because it hasn't worked yet?</quote> He's going to make up bullshit about the CIA meddling with socialist country politics, even though there are examples like Russia and Romania and etc where the socialist experiment to implement communism failed because of communism itself. It's literally not a stable worldview. It cannot sustain itself.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 1:49:11 PM #61:	armandro posted... Romes187 posted... armandro posted... MC_BatCommander posted... armandro posted... He denies that women are paid less than men for the same job. No, he said women are paid less for many influencing factors and not just because they are women, that's a very important distinction. no i'm talking about the same job not in general its like you're using the same talking points that Cathy Newman used He is saying that them being a woman is one factor of many including the fact that agreeable people tend to not ask for raises as often as non agreeable people....women tend to be more agreeable...do the rest of the math yourself this isnt hard and its so annoying that people keep spouting the same nonsense to further their ideology why doesn't the job just pay them equal? why even offer less? thats my whole point They don't offer less... They offer the same and disagreeable people are more likely to not accept and ask for more Shit...my wife just got a promotion three days ago....she was on a conference call and called out her manager who has been failing as of late with the COO and CEO on the line (all male) she received a call later that day asking if she wanted his job... <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894711717] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>MC_BatCommander posted...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote>He denies that women are paid less than men for the same job.</quote> No, he said women are paid less for many influencing factors and not just because they are women, that's a very important distinction.</quote> no i'm talking about the same job not in general</quote> its like you're using the same talking points that Cathy Newman used He is saying that them being a woman is one factor of many including the fact that agreeable people tend to not ask for raises as often as non agreeable people....women tend to be more agreeable...do the rest of the math yourself this isnt hard and its so annoying that people keep spouting the same nonsense to further their ideology</quote> why doesn't the job just pay them equal? why even offer less? thats my whole point</quote> They don't offer less... They offer the same and disagreeable people are more likely to not accept and ask for more Shit...my wife just got a promotion three days ago....she was on a conference call and called out her manager who has been failing as of late with the COO and CEO on the line (all male) she received a call later that day asking if she wanted his job...</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 1:50:01 PM #62:	averagejoel posted... you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. nah the communists in Russia and etc were literally citing Marx and other communist material, and heralding their attempts as a great success that was completely consistent with what Marx wrote. --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894711774] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. </quote> nah the communists in Russia and etc were literally citing Marx and other communist material, and heralding their attempts as a great success that was completely consistent with what Marx wrote.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MC_BatCommander 01/24/18 1:50:38 PM #63:	armandro posted... Romes187 posted... armandro posted... MC_BatCommander posted... armandro posted... He denies that women are paid less than men for the same job. No, he said women are paid less for many influencing factors and not just because they are women, that's a very important distinction. no i'm talking about the same job not in general its like you're using the same talking points that Cathy Newman used He is saying that them being a woman is one factor of many including the fact that agreeable people tend to not ask for raises as often as non agreeable people....women tend to be more agreeable...do the rest of the math yourself this isnt hard and its so annoying that people keep spouting the same nonsense to further their ideology why doesn't the job just pay them equal? why even offer less? thats my whole point There's many many factors that could apply here, some that spring to mind: -Maybe the men are working more hours -The men could have negotiated their pay more agressively -The men have more experience / have been there longer -They could just be doing a better job No reasonable person is saying sexism isn't a thing, but to assume a woman is paid less strictly because of sexism is faulty reasoning and doesn't benefit anyone. --- The Legend is True! <cite>MC_BatCommander posted [p:894711811] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>MC_BatCommander posted...</cite> <quote><cite>armandro posted...</cite> <quote>He denies that women are paid less than men for the same job.</quote> No, he said women are paid less for many influencing factors and not just because they are women, that's a very important distinction.</quote> no i'm talking about the same job not in general</quote> its like you're using the same talking points that Cathy Newman used He is saying that them being a woman is one factor of many including the fact that agreeable people tend to not ask for raises as often as non agreeable people....women tend to be more agreeable...do the rest of the math yourself this isnt hard and its so annoying that people keep spouting the same nonsense to further their ideology</quote> why doesn't the job just pay them equal? why even offer less? thats my whole point</quote> There's many many factors that could apply here, some that spring to mind: -Maybe the men are working more hours -The men could have negotiated their pay more agressively -The men have more experience / have been there longer -They could just be doing a better job No reasonable person is saying sexism isn't a thing, but to assume a woman is paid less strictly because of sexism is faulty reasoning and doesn't benefit anyone.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 1:52:29 PM #64:	FLUFFYGERM posted... averagejoel posted... you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. nah the communists in Russia and etc were literally citing Marx and other communist material, and heralding their attempts as a great success that was completely consistent with what Marx wrote. Also, read (on JP's suggestion) the Gulag Archipelago and you will see exactly how Marxist ideas turn into mass killings it is not sustainable <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894711945] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. </quote> nah the communists in Russia and etc were literally citing Marx and other communist material, and heralding their attempts as a great success that was completely consistent with what Marx wrote.</quote> Also, read (on JP's suggestion) the Gulag Archipelago and you will see exactly how Marxist ideas turn into mass killings it is not sustainable</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 1:52:33 PM #65:	Romes187 posted... Have you ever thought that it has never been reached due to it being flawed? it hasn't been reached because the US has been very diligent about funding counter-revolutionary groups, kidnapping and killing democratically elected socialist leaders, and installing fascist dictatorships in their stead. If you have no idea how to implement it, how do you know it was implemented incorrectly? Because it hasn't worked yet? I didn't say that I had no idea how to implement it. I made no claims about that one way or the other. this is an irrelevant point. --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894711952] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote>Have you ever thought that it has never been reached due to it being flawed?</quote> it hasn't been reached because the US has been very diligent about funding counter-revolutionary groups, kidnapping and killing democratically elected socialist leaders, and installing fascist dictatorships in their stead. <quote>If you have no idea how to implement it, how do you know it was implemented incorrectly? Because it hasn't worked yet?</quote> I didn't say that I had no idea how to implement it. I made no claims about that one way or the other. this is an irrelevant point.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
COVxy 01/24/18 1:52:59 PM #66:	Anteaterking posted... How does everyone on CE know who this guy is? I've never heard of him. Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Dude spouts self help book level rhetoric. --- =E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])] <cite>COVxy posted [p:894711982] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Anteaterking posted...</cite> <quote>How does everyone on CE know who this guy is? I've never heard of him.</quote> Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Dude spouts self help book level rhetoric.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 1:54:32 PM #67:	COVxy posted... Anteaterking posted... How does everyone on CE know who this guy is? I've never heard of him. Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Dude spouts self help book level rhetoric. Nice analysis...very thorough. I'm sure you actually read his books :) like any good PhD student you know how to make arguments <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894712093] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Anteaterking posted...</cite> <quote>How does everyone on CE know who this guy is? I've never heard of him.</quote> Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Dude spouts self help book level rhetoric.</quote> Nice analysis...very thorough. I'm sure you actually read his books :) like any good PhD student you know how to make arguments</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 01/24/18 1:55:21 PM #68:	COVxy posted... Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do. --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:894712146] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. </quote> Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 1:56:19 PM #69:	Romes187 posted... FLUFFYGERM posted... averagejoel posted... you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. nah the communists in Russia and etc were literally citing Marx and other communist material, and heralding their attempts as a great success that was completely consistent with what Marx wrote. Also, read (on JP's suggestion) the Gulag Archipelago and you will see exactly how Marxist ideas turn into mass killings it is not sustainable exactly. another great book is The Black Book of Communism --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894712210] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. </quote> nah the communists in Russia and etc were literally citing Marx and other communist material, and heralding their attempts as a great success that was completely consistent with what Marx wrote.</quote> Also, read (on JP's suggestion) the Gulag Archipelago and you will see exactly how Marxist ideas turn into mass killings it is not sustainable</quote> exactly. another great book is The Black Book of Communism</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 1:56:40 PM #70:	Antifar posted... COVxy posted... Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do. If you would like to do more research on him instead of having a low resolution image of what he actually believes, I'd recommend his bible lectures. I'm about as atheist as you can be and they were VERY interesting and illuminating (he attacks it from a psychological perspective) <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894712227] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. </quote> Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do.</quote> If you would like to do more research on him instead of having a low resolution image of what he actually believes, I'd recommend his bible lectures. I'm about as atheist as you can be and they were VERY interesting and illuminating (he attacks it from a psychological perspective)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
zH0mPfR 01/24/18 1:57:01 PM #71:	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USg3NR76XpQ ^For anyone who is genuinely curious about the man and isn't just trolling. --- https://i.imgur.com/I0pg9tT.jpg https://i.imgur.com/b3gLOdA.jpg <cite>zH0mPfR posted [p:894712251] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USg3NR76XpQ ^For anyone who is genuinely curious about the man and isn't just trolling.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 1:57:06 PM #72:	Antifar posted... COVxy posted... Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do. imagine literally thinking that's why he's famous like how dishonest do you have to be to reduce JP's entire sophisticated and nuanced worldview to this dishonest one-liner --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894712256] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. </quote> Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do.</quote> imagine literally thinking that's why he's famous like how dishonest do you have to be to reduce JP's entire sophisticated and nuanced worldview to this dishonest one-liner</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 1:57:12 PM #73:	Antifar posted... COVxy posted... Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do. it's not too surprising given how often those right wingers claim I Am Logical And My Enemy Is Emotional --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894712262] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Because he got into an spat with students about misgendering/labels. Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. </quote> Yeah, it's wild how The Logical Professor's claim to fame is just the same troll shit half of CE's right wingers do.</quote> it's not too surprising given how often those right wingers claim I Am Logical And My Enemy Is Emotional</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 1:59:25 PM #74:	I have a feeling @averagejoel @Antifar and @COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe? <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894712398] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>I have a feeling @averagejoel @Antifar and @COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 2:02:04 PM #75:	Romes187 posted... I have a feeling @averagejoel @Antifar and @COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe? Admiral and I have routinely spanked averagejoel. He blocks anyone who proves him wrong though. Antifar just stops responding when he realizes his argument is nonsense. Godnorgosh gets routinely spanked. Here's a great topic to read of his to read: https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/400-current-events/76224535 The other CE communists just deflect rather than attempt to argue. But yeah, they're a dishonest bunch and they refuse to concede anything whatsoever. --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894712565] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote>I have a feeling @averagejoel @Antifar and @COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe?</quote> Admiral and I have routinely spanked averagejoel. He blocks anyone who proves him wrong though. Antifar just stops responding when he realizes his argument is nonsense. Godnorgosh gets routinely spanked. Here's a great topic to read of his to read: https://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/400-current-events/76224535 The other CE communists just deflect rather than attempt to argue. But yeah, they're a dishonest bunch and they refuse to concede anything whatsoever.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 2:06:56 PM #76:	Romes187 posted... I have a feeling averagejoel Antifar and COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe? I've watched more than enough Jordan Peterson. I'm sure he's knowledgeable about some things. maybe the bible is one of them, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not. also his voice is really annoying - I'd consider reading a transcription of a bible lecture, but I won't watch the video itself. --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894712865] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote>I have a feeling averagejoel Antifar and COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe?</quote> I've watched more than enough Jordan Peterson. I'm sure he's knowledgeable about some things. maybe the bible is one of them, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not. also his voice is really annoying - I'd consider reading a transcription of a bible lecture, but I won't watch the video itself.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Anteaterking 01/24/18 2:09:09 PM #77:	Romes187 posted... I have a feeling averagejoel Antifar and COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe? I mean, to be fair, I watch 0% of "informational videos" CE links me to. I'd much rather read a transcript. --- http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b136/Anteaterking/scan00021.jpg http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b136/Anteaterking/scan00021.jpg <cite>Anteaterking posted [p:894712993] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote>I have a feeling averagejoel Antifar and COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe?</quote> I mean, to be fair, I watch 0% of "informational videos" CE links me to. I'd much rather read a transcript.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 2:09:28 PM #78:	averagejoel posted... , but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not. OK - thats a fair stance to take. But can you provide SOME sort of evidence as to what you believe he is saying about Marxism, Gender, and Postmodernism that is misinformed? Or let's just take it one at a time....what is he saying about Gender that you feel is misinformed? <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894713012] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not.</quote> OK - thats a fair stance to take. But can you provide SOME sort of evidence as to what you believe he is saying about Marxism, Gender, and Postmodernism that is misinformed? Or let's just take it one at a time....what is he saying about Gender that you feel is misinformed?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 2:10:31 PM #79:	Antifar posted... 85% of this review is over my head but I came across it on Twitter and it seems relevant: https://www.viewpointmag.com/2018/01/23/postmodernism-not-take-place-jordan-petersons-12-rules-life/ oh man that review is awesome Peterson is left making statements that are not only mired in factual error, but espouse a comically reductive conception of how social life and history work. He takes a common misunderstanding at face value, proceeding to build a whole outlook on it. this is a perfect summary of basically everything he stands for --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894713084] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Antifar posted...</cite> <quote>85% of this review is over my head but I came across it on Twitter and it seems relevant: https://www.viewpointmag.com/2018/01/23/postmodernism-not-take-place-jordan-petersons-12-rules-life/</quote> oh man that review is awesome <quote>Peterson is left making statements that are not only mired in factual error, but espouse a comically reductive conception of how social life and history work. He takes a common misunderstanding at face value, proceeding to build a whole outlook on it.</quote> this is a perfect summary of basically everything he stands for</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
COVxy 01/24/18 2:10:34 PM #80:	I mean, I've watched the video in the OP, and to the extent to which he is talking about psychology, it's self-help book level psychology. It is a shitty representation of psychology as a scientific discipline. More-or-less, the only reason people like him is that he fights against feminism and "SJWs". The fact that the interviewer is shit only makes him better by comparison. --- =E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])] <cite>COVxy posted [p:894713086] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>I mean, I've watched the video in the OP, and to the extent to which he is talking about psychology, it's self-help book level psychology. It is a shitty representation of psychology as a scientific discipline. More-or-less, the only reason people like him is that he fights against feminism and "SJWs". The fact that the interviewer is shit only makes him better by comparison.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 2:11:42 PM #81:	Romes187 posted... averagejoel posted... , but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not. OK - thats a fair stance to take. But can you provide SOME sort of evidence as to what you believe he is saying about Marxism, Gender, and Postmodernism that is misinformed? Or let's just take it one at a time....what is he saying about Gender that you feel is misinformed? are you going to actually listen to what I say, or will you just ignore it and spout platitudes and empty talking points at me like nicklebro? --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894713138] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not.</quote> OK - thats a fair stance to take. But can you provide SOME sort of evidence as to what you believe he is saying about Marxism, Gender, and Postmodernism that is misinformed? Or let's just take it one at a time....what is he saying about Gender that you feel is misinformed?</quote> are you going to actually listen to what I say, or will you just ignore it and spout platitudes and empty talking points at me like nicklebro?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FLUFFYGERM 01/24/18 2:12:38 PM #82:	Note that to averagejoel, pointing out how his reasoning is nonsense is the same thing as ignoring him and spouting platitudes/empty talking points. He literally has no capacity for debate or for justifying his reasoning. Go ahead and try, you'll see lmao Also worth noting that he literally said he wants there to be a genocide against people who are wealthy. --- but Marxist theory is extremely consistent, both internally and with reality. -averagejeol <cite>FLUFFYGERM posted [p:894713181] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>Note that to averagejoel, pointing out how his reasoning is nonsense is the same thing as ignoring him and spouting platitudes/empty talking points. He literally has no capacity for debate or for justifying his reasoning. Go ahead and try, you'll see lmao Also worth noting that he literally said he wants there to be a genocide against people who are wealthy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hortanz 01/24/18 2:14:36 PM #83:	if you know he has you on ignore why do you follow him around and try to debate him I don't really understand --- http://i.imgur.com/JFmtaHB.gif <cite>hortanz posted [p:894713328] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>if you know he has you on ignore why do you follow him around and try to debate him I don't really understand</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Romes187 01/24/18 2:14:42 PM #84:	averagejoel posted... Romes187 posted... averagejoel posted... , but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not. OK - thats a fair stance to take. But can you provide SOME sort of evidence as to what you believe he is saying about Marxism, Gender, and Postmodernism that is misinformed? Or let's just take it one at a time....what is he saying about Gender that you feel is misinformed? are you going to actually listen to what I say, or will you just ignore it and spout platitudes and empty talking points at me like nicklebro? I will listen to what you say :) That is why I asked you to say it <cite>Romes187 posted [p:894713337] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not.</quote> OK - thats a fair stance to take. But can you provide SOME sort of evidence as to what you believe he is saying about Marxism, Gender, and Postmodernism that is misinformed? Or let's just take it one at a time....what is he saying about Gender that you feel is misinformed?</quote> are you going to actually listen to what I say, or will you just ignore it and spout platitudes and empty talking points at me like nicklebro?</quote> I will listen to what you say :) That is why I asked you to say it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Balrog0 01/24/18 2:28:11 PM #85:	Today, it is not uncommon to see condemnations of postmodernism and pleas for a return to Enlightenment rationality in the pages of Jacobin. is that really true? --- He would make his mark, if not on this tree, then on that wall; if not with teeth and claws, then with penknife and razor. <cite>Balrog0 posted [p:894714155] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote>Today, it is not uncommon to see condemnations of postmodernism and pleas for a return to Enlightenment rationality in the pages of Jacobin. is that really true?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
zH0mPfR 01/24/18 2:34:10 PM #86:	averagejoel posted... Romes187 posted... I have a feeling averagejoel Antifar and COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe? I've watched more than enough Jordan Peterson. I'm sure he's knowledgeable about some things. maybe the bible is one of them, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not. lmao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klvNX8Lp4FI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w84uRYq0Uc8 --- https://i.imgur.com/I0pg9tT.jpg https://i.imgur.com/b3gLOdA.jpg <cite>zH0mPfR posted [p:894714529] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Romes187 posted...</cite> <quote>I have a feeling averagejoel Antifar and COVxy will not watch any of the recommendations we put forth :( much easier to cling to their preconceived notions maybe?</quote> I've watched more than enough Jordan Peterson. I'm sure he's knowledgeable about some things. maybe the bible is one of them, but Marxism, Postmodernism, and Gender are not.</quote> lmao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klvNX8Lp4FI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w84uRYq0Uc8</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Antifar 01/24/18 2:48:05 PM #87:	Balrog0 posted... Today, it is not uncommon to see condemnations of postmodernism and pleas for a return to Enlightenment rationality in the pages of Jacobin. I don't read Jacobin too regularly these days, but a couple searches found... https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/03/jason-reza-jorjani-stony-brook-alt-right-arktos-continental-philosophy-modernity-enlightenment/ Alt-right conspiracy theorists have embraced postmodern philosophy. The Left should return to the Enlightenment to oppose their irrational and hateful politics. https://jacobinmag.com/2017/05/radical-enlightenment-philosophy-spinoza-materialism-marxism The socialist project isn't to rebel against the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity, but to show how capitalism is incapable of fulfilling them. FWIW, both of those pieces come from the same authors, so --- kin to all that throbs <cite>Antifar posted [p:894715384] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>Balrog0 posted...</cite> <quote>Today, it is not uncommon to see condemnations of postmodernism and pleas for a return to Enlightenment rationality in the pages of Jacobin.</quote> I don't read Jacobin too regularly these days, but a couple searches found... https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/03/jason-reza-jorjani-stony-brook-alt-right-arktos-continental-philosophy-modernity-enlightenment/ <quote>Alt-right conspiracy theorists have embraced postmodern philosophy. The Left should return to the Enlightenment to oppose their irrational and hateful politics.</quote> https://jacobinmag.com/2017/05/radical-enlightenment-philosophy-spinoza-materialism-marxism <quote>The socialist project isn't to rebel against the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity, but to show how capitalism is incapable of fulfilling them.</quote> FWIW, both of those pieces come from the same authors, so</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nicklebro 01/24/18 2:49:41 PM #88:	hortanz posted... idk I haven't read the book myself but I read the article antifar linked earlier today and it seems like his understanding of postmodernism is incredibly inaccurate He's literally an expert on it. averagejoel posted... objectively incorrect Looks like you subscribe to alternative facts averagejoel posted... that depends entirely on how their money is made Seems more like it depends on whether you agree with their politics or not averagejoel posted... you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. also, human nature isn't static to begin with - it's constantly changing relative to our surroundings. Wrong, you can't defend an ideology by claiming its never been successfully implemented if there's no reason to believe its possible to to successfully implement. And that's what you're trying to do. Every time someone attempts to create a communist utopia it fails miserable and you point to that failure as an excuse to not label it true communism. And while human nature in general isn't static, parts of it certainly are, and those parts contradict the very foundation of Marxism. COVxy posted... Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius. and COVxy exposes his ignorance yet again lol. While that may be the reason he caught someone's attention, in no way is that the reason people think he's a genius. I love proving that you're not half as smart as you think you are and instead are just another political hack with an above average vocabulary --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894715486] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>hortanz posted...</cite> <quote>idk I haven't read the book myself but I read the article antifar linked earlier today and it seems like his understanding of postmodernism is incredibly inaccurate </quote> He's literally an expert on it. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>objectively incorrect </quote> Looks like you subscribe to alternative facts <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>that depends entirely on how their money is made </quote> Seems more like it depends on whether you agree with their politics or not <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote> you can't denounce an ideology by attacking implementations of that ideology, especially when every single person who follows that ideology says it was flawed and incomplete. If you want to have a legitimate argument about this, start by attacking Marx's writing. there's plenty there to criticize. quote something, and attack it. also, human nature isn't static to begin with - it's constantly changing relative to our surroundings. </quote> Wrong, you can't defend an ideology by claiming its never been successfully implemented if there's no reason to believe its possible to to successfully implement. And that's what you're trying to do. Every time someone attempts to create a communist utopia it fails miserable and you point to that failure as an excuse to not label it true communism. And while human nature in general isn't static, parts of it certainly are, and those parts contradict the very foundation of Marxism. <cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Literally the only reason CE thinks he's a genius.</quote> and COVxy exposes his ignorance yet again lol. While that may be the reason he caught someone's attention, in no way is that the reason people think he's a genius. I love proving that you're not half as smart as you think you are and instead are just another political hack with an above average vocabulary</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nicklebro 01/24/18 2:50:51 PM #89:	FLUFFYGERM posted... Note that to averagejoel, pointing out how his reasoning is nonsense is the same thing as ignoring him and spouting platitudes/empty talking points. He literally has no capacity for debate or for justifying his reasoning. Go ahead and try, you'll see lmao Also worth noting that he literally said he wants there to be a genocide against people who are wealthy. He embodies postmodernism to a T. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894715561] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>FLUFFYGERM posted...</cite> <quote>Note that to averagejoel, pointing out how his reasoning is nonsense is the same thing as ignoring him and spouting platitudes/empty talking points. He literally has no capacity for debate or for justifying his reasoning. Go ahead and try, you'll see lmao Also worth noting that he literally said he wants there to be a genocide against people who are wealthy.</quote> He embodies postmodernism to a T.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
COVxy 01/24/18 2:52:48 PM #90:	nicklebro posted... and COVxy exposes his ignorance yet again lol. While that may be the reason he caught someone's attention, in no way is that the reason people think he's a genius. I love proving that you're not half as smart as you think you are and instead are just another political hack with an above average vocabulary His first rule is based on bad science, as far as I can tell. "Stand up straight" either based on lobster physiology or debunked studies. Everything I have seen from him sounds like neuroflobology, at best. nicklebro posted... hortanz posted... idk I haven't read the book myself but I read the article antifar linked earlier today and it seems like his understanding of postmodernism is incredibly inaccurate He's literally an expert on it. Also, I think this is literally false. His expertise lie within clinical psychology, but that doesn't even stop him from being a hack at talking about that subject. --- =E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])] <cite>COVxy posted [p:894715690] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>and COVxy exposes his ignorance yet again lol. While that may be the reason he caught someone's attention, in no way is that the reason people think he's a genius. I love proving that you're not half as smart as you think you are and instead are just another political hack with an above average vocabulary </quote> His first rule is based on bad science, as far as I can tell. "Stand up straight" either based on lobster physiology or debunked studies. Everything I have seen from him sounds like neuroflobology, at best. <cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hortanz posted...</cite> <quote>idk I haven't read the book myself but I read the article antifar linked earlier today and it seems like his understanding of postmodernism is incredibly inaccurate </quote> He's literally an expert on it.</quote> Also, I think this is literally false. His expertise lie within clinical psychology, but that doesn't even stop him from being a hack at talking about that subject.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nicklebro 01/24/18 2:55:56 PM #91:	COVxy posted... His first rule is based on bad science, as far as I can tell. "Stand up straight" either based on lobster physiology or debunked studies. Everything I have seen from him sounds like neuroflobology, at best. Lol as far as you can tell? Maybe you should actually read the book and then actually have a clue what he's even talking about before you judge him on it. COVxy posted... Also, I think this is literally false. Why does what you think matter? Again this is based completely on you having no clue what you're talking about. He's a psychologist, studying these things is literally his job. He gives lectures at Harvard and the University of Toronto on these exact subjects. Who is an expert on this stuff if he isn't? --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894715901] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>His first rule is based on bad science, as far as I can tell. "Stand up straight" either based on lobster physiology or debunked studies. Everything I have seen from him sounds like neuroflobology, at best. </quote> Lol as far as you can tell? Maybe you should actually read the book and then actually have a clue what he's even talking about before you judge him on it. <cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Also, I think this is literally false. </quote> Why does what you think matter? Again this is based completely on you having no clue what you're talking about. He's a psychologist, studying these things is literally his job. He gives lectures at Harvard and the University of Toronto on these exact subjects. Who is an expert on this stuff if he isn't?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
COVxy 01/24/18 2:58:11 PM #92:	nicklebro posted... Why does what you think matter? Again this is based completely on you having no clue what you're talking about. He's a psychologist, studying these things is literally his job. He gives lectures at Harvard and the University of Toronto on these exact subjects. Who is an expert on this stuff if he isn't? Psychology has nothing to do with postmodernism, lol. nicklebro posted... Lol as far as you can tell? Maybe you should actually read the book and then actually have a clue what he's even talking about before you judge him on it. I mean, I was just listening to an interview by him on the subject... The analogy to lobster physiology is really really shitty scientific reasoning. And if you were ever wondering about whether the claim was tenuous at best, why not look into the psychological literature on power posing? You know, where people have actually tried to systematically analyze whether or not standing up straight has a psychological impact. --- =E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])] <cite>COVxy posted [p:894716053] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>Why does what you think matter? Again this is based completely on you having no clue what you're talking about. He's a psychologist, studying these things is literally his job. He gives lectures at Harvard and the University of Toronto on these exact subjects. Who is an expert on this stuff if he isn't? </quote> Psychology has nothing to do with postmodernism, lol. <cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>Lol as far as you can tell? Maybe you should actually read the book and then actually have a clue what he's even talking about before you judge him on it. </quote> I mean, I was just listening to an interview by him on the subject... The analogy to lobster physiology is really really shitty scientific reasoning. And if you were ever wondering about whether the claim was tenuous at best, why not look into the psychological literature on power posing? You know, where people have actually tried to systematically analyze whether or not standing up straight has a psychological impact.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 2:59:02 PM #93:	nicklebro posted... Seems more like it depends on whether you agree with their politics or not I'm not sure where you got that idea - I've certainly never said that someone should be rich or poor based on whether or not I agree with them politically nicklebro posted... Wrong, you can't defend an ideology by claiming its never been successfully implemented if there's no reason to believe its possible to to successfully implement. And that's what you're trying to do. then it's a good thing I wasn't defending the ideology here. I was merely correcting false information there's also no reason to believe that it's impossible to implement, so this is a non-argument. Every time someone attempts to create a communist utopia it fails miserable and you point to that failure as an excuse to not label it true communism. this is a disingenuous analysis of the conditions in socialist states, and one which I have already addressed in this topic, as well as many, many, many times before on this board. And while human nature in general isn't static, parts of it certainly are, and those parts contradict the very foundation of Marxism. there we go. this could be the start of a legitimate critique of the ideology. which specific aspects of human nature are static, and how do they contradict the foundation of Marxism? --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894716103] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>Seems more like it depends on whether you agree with their politics or not</quote> I'm not sure where you got that idea - I've certainly never said that someone should be rich or poor based on whether or not I agree with them politically <cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>Wrong, you can't defend an ideology by claiming its never been successfully implemented if there's no reason to believe its possible to to successfully implement. And that's what you're trying to do.</quote> then it's a good thing I wasn't defending the ideology here. I was merely correcting false information there's also no reason to believe that it's impossible to implement, so this is a non-argument. <quote>Every time someone attempts to create a communist utopia it fails miserable and you point to that failure as an excuse to not label it true communism.</quote> this is a disingenuous analysis of the conditions in socialist states, and one which I have already addressed in this topic, as well as many, many, many times before on this board. <quote>And while human nature in general isn't static, parts of it certainly are, and those parts contradict the very foundation of Marxism.</quote> there we go. this could be the start of a legitimate critique of the ideology. which specific aspects of human nature are static, and how do they contradict the foundation of Marxism?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
#94	Post #94 was unavailable or deleted.
nicklebro 01/24/18 3:03:08 PM #95:	COVxy posted... Psychology has nothing to do with postmodernism, lol. Shows your complete ignorance of what clinical psychologists study. Again, if you had bothered to look into what you were trying to comment on, you might have learned this before making yourself look silly. COVxy posted... I mean, I was just listening to an interview by him on the subject... The analogy to lobster physiology is really really shitty scientific reasoning. And if you were ever wondering about whether the claim was tenuous at best, why not look into the psychological literature on power posing? And? Why should anyone care what your assessment is on a subject you have no expertise in? He wasn't using the lobster physiology as an analogy, he was pointing out how old those mechanisms are in the human brain. I mean its bad enough that you're trying to make vast generalizations about his understanding based on a single interview, but then when it becomes clear that you didn't even comprehend the one interview that you did supposedly watch, I really have to wonder why you're even posting at all. Why are you posting? Anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity would either be listening or doing more research to gain at least a basic understanding of the subject before trying to contribute to a discussion on the topic. Every single post you make requires a correction and an explanation on what you either got wrong or lack knowledge in. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894716371] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Psychology has nothing to do with postmodernism, lol. </quote> Shows your complete ignorance of what clinical psychologists study. Again, if you had bothered to look into what you were trying to comment on, you might have learned this before making yourself look silly. <cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote> I mean, I was just listening to an interview by him on the subject... The analogy to lobster physiology is really really shitty scientific reasoning. And if you were ever wondering about whether the claim was tenuous at best, why not look into the psychological literature on power posing?</quote> And? Why should anyone care what your assessment is on a subject you have no expertise in? He wasn't using the lobster physiology as an analogy, he was pointing out how old those mechanisms are in the human brain. I mean its bad enough that you're trying to make vast generalizations about his understanding based on a single interview, but then when it becomes clear that you didn't even comprehend the one interview that you did supposedly watch, I really have to wonder why you're even posting at all. Why are you posting? Anyone with a shred of intellectual integrity would either be listening or doing more research to gain at least a basic understanding of the subject before trying to contribute to a discussion on the topic. Every single post you make requires a correction and an explanation on what you either got wrong or lack knowledge in.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
COVxy 01/24/18 3:05:34 PM #96:	nicklebro posted... Shows your complete ignorance of what clinical psychologists study. Again, if you had bothered to look into what you were trying to comment on, you might have learned this before making yourself look silly. Try again. Postmodernism is completely outside the realm of expertise of a clinical psychologist. Literally. nicklebro posted... And? Why should anyone care what your assessment is on a subject you have no expertise in? He wasn't using the lobster physiology as an analogy, he was pointing out how old those mechanisms are in the human brain. I mean its bad enough that you're trying to make vast generalizations about his understanding based on a single interview, but then when it becomes clear that you didn't even comprehend the one interview that you did supposedly watch, I really have to wonder why you're even posting at all. Those mechanisms have never been shown in the human brain! In fact, in humans, the effects have been completely debunked! --- =E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])] <cite>COVxy posted [p:894716513] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>Shows your complete ignorance of what clinical psychologists study. Again, if you had bothered to look into what you were trying to comment on, you might have learned this before making yourself look silly. </quote> Try again. Postmodernism is completely outside the realm of expertise of a clinical psychologist. Literally. <cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>And? Why should anyone care what your assessment is on a subject you have no expertise in? He wasn't using the lobster physiology as an analogy, he was pointing out how old those mechanisms are in the human brain. I mean its bad enough that you're trying to make vast generalizations about his understanding based on a single interview, but then when it becomes clear that you didn't even comprehend the one interview that you did supposedly watch, I really have to wonder why you're even posting at all. </quote> Those mechanisms have never been shown in the human brain! In fact, in humans, the effects have been completely debunked!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nicklebro 01/24/18 3:07:37 PM #97:	averagejoel posted... I'm not sure where you got that idea - I've certainly never said that someone should be rich or poor based on whether or not I agree with them politically You've never said that, but its what it appears you believe. averagejoel posted... then it's a good thing I wasn't defending the ideology here. I was merely correcting false information there's also no reason to believe that it's impossible to implement, so this is a non-argument. The fact that its been attempted multiple times and failed miserably, and in the exact same manner, every single time is indeed a reason to believe its impossible to implement. It doesn't prove it, but it is a reason. And again there's the fact that it contradicts basic human nature. averagejoel posted... this is a disingenuous analysis of the conditions in socialist states, and one which I have already addressed in this topic, as well as many, many, many times before on this board. I don't really care to see this kind of baseless denial from you anymore. If you don't have anything of substance to say, then don't say anything at all. averagejoel posted... there we go. this could be the start of a legitimate critique of the ideology. which specific aspects of human nature are static, and how do they contradict the foundation of Marxism? Just as a generalization, people aren't going to work unless they are motivated to. Its why capitalism works, it gives people motivation to work and contribute to society. This does not exist in Marxism which is why you get labor camps filled with innocent people. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894716640] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>I'm not sure where you got that idea - I've certainly never said that someone should be rich or poor based on whether or not I agree with them politically </quote> You've never said that, but its what it appears you believe. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote> then it's a good thing I wasn't defending the ideology here. I was merely correcting false information there's also no reason to believe that it's impossible to implement, so this is a non-argument.</quote> The fact that its been attempted multiple times and failed miserably, and in the exact same manner, every single time is indeed a reason to believe its impossible to implement. It doesn't prove it, but it is a reason. And again there's the fact that it contradicts basic human nature. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote>this is a disingenuous analysis of the conditions in socialist states, and one which I have already addressed in this topic, as well as many, many, many times before on this board. </quote> I don't really care to see this kind of baseless denial from you anymore. If you don't have anything of substance to say, then don't say anything at all. <cite>averagejoel posted...</cite> <quote> there we go. this could be the start of a legitimate critique of the ideology. which specific aspects of human nature are static, and how do they contradict the foundation of Marxism?</quote> Just as a generalization, people aren't going to work unless they are motivated to. Its why capitalism works, it gives people motivation to work and contribute to society. This does not exist in Marxism which is why you get labor camps filled with innocent people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
nicklebro 01/24/18 3:11:22 PM #98:	COVxy posted... Try again. Postmodernism is completely outside the realm of expertise of a clinical psychologist. Literally. The psychology of a postmodernist is not though, and when studying the psychology of a post modernist (and Marxists and everyone else) it indeed gives him an expertise in the understanding of post modernism. I mean from your logic Nietzsche and Marx are not in the same realm either. COVxy posted... Those mechanisms have never been shown in the human brain! In fact, in humans, the effects have been completely debunked! That's not true at all... He even proves that modern anti depressants have the same effect on lobsters as in humans. I have no idea where you're getting this faulty information, but your posts are getting a bit annoying man, nothing you say on this subject is ever even close to correct. --- Now you can't call me a sigless user. <cite>nicklebro posted [p:894716876] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Try again. Postmodernism is completely outside the realm of expertise of a clinical psychologist. Literally. </quote> The psychology of a postmodernist is not though, and when studying the psychology of a post modernist (and Marxists and everyone else) it indeed gives him an expertise in the understanding of post modernism. I mean from your logic Nietzsche and Marx are not in the same realm either. <cite>COVxy posted...</cite> <quote>Those mechanisms have never been shown in the human brain! In fact, in humans, the effects have been completely debunked! </quote> That's not true at all... He even proves that modern anti depressants have the same effect on lobsters as in humans. I have no idea where you're getting this faulty information, but your posts are getting a bit annoying man, nothing you say on this subject is ever even close to correct.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
COVxy 01/24/18 3:15:45 PM #99:	nicklebro posted... The psychology of a postmodernist is not though, and when studying the psychology of a post modernist (and Marxists and everyone else) it indeed gives him an expertise in the understanding of post modernism. I mean from your logic Nietzsche and Marx are not in the same realm either. Lmao, he's an expert in postmodernism because postmodernists are humans and he has expertise in human psychology? What? nicklebro posted... That's not true at all... He even proves that modern anti depressants have the same effect on lobsters as in humans. I have no idea where you're getting this faulty information, but your posts are getting a bit annoying man, nothing you say on this subject is ever even close to correct. Lobster physiology is drastically different from humans, or mammals in general. They don't even have a brain. Generalizing the link of serotonin to a species specific behavior to another species and another behavior all together, especially when the actual neural organization is drastically different, is really shitty scientific reasoning. As far as the work examining this in humans: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_posing It would take you two seconds to google the key word I gave you earlier. --- =E[(x-E[x])(y-E[y])] <cite>COVxy posted [p:894717134] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>The psychology of a postmodernist is not though, and when studying the psychology of a post modernist (and Marxists and everyone else) it indeed gives him an expertise in the understanding of post modernism. I mean from your logic Nietzsche and Marx are not in the same realm either. </quote> Lmao, he's an expert in postmodernism because postmodernists are humans and he has expertise in human psychology? What? <cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>That's not true at all... He even proves that modern anti depressants have the same effect on lobsters as in humans. I have no idea where you're getting this faulty information, but your posts are getting a bit annoying man, nothing you say on this subject is ever even close to correct. </quote> Lobster physiology is drastically different from humans, or mammals in general. They don't even have a brain. Generalizing the link of serotonin to a species specific behavior to another species and another behavior all together, especially when the actual neural organization is drastically different, is really shitty scientific reasoning. As far as the work examining this in humans: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_posing It would take you two seconds to google the key word I gave you earlier.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
averagejoel 01/24/18 3:16:01 PM #100:	nicklebro posted... You've never said that, but its what it appears you believe. it is not what I believe. what have I said that indicates differently? The fact that its been attempted multiple times and failed miserably, and in the exact same manner, every single time is indeed a reason to believe its impossible to implement. It doesn't prove it, but it is a reason. And again there's the fact that it contradicts basic human nature. I have already addressed both of these points. I don't really care to see this kind of baseless denial from you anymore. what baseless denial? the idea that socialist states might have turned out better if the US wasn't waging war on them? If you don't have anything of substance to say, then don't say anything at all. is this satire? you keep going in circles Just as a generalization, people aren't going to work unless they are motivated to. Its why capitalism works, it gives people motivation to work and contribute to society. it's been proven, numerous times, that money is not the best motivator - it's not even a particularly good one. watch this video. you might learn something. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc This does not exist in Marxism again, objectively incorrect. do you actually know anything about Marxist theory, or did you learn everything from Jordan Peterson's misinterpretation of it? --- peanut butter and dick <cite>averagejoel posted [p:894717155] in 12 Rules f... [t:76232677]...</cite> <quote><cite>nicklebro posted...</cite> <quote>You've never said that, but its what it appears you believe.</quote> it is not what I believe. what have I said that indicates differently? <quote>The fact that its been attempted multiple times and failed miserably, and in the exact same manner, every single time is indeed a reason to believe its impossible to implement. It doesn't prove it, but it is a reason. And again there's the fact that it contradicts basic human nature.</quote> I have already addressed both of these points. <quote>I don't really care to see this kind of baseless denial from you anymore.</quote> what baseless denial? the idea that socialist states might have turned out better if the US wasn't waging war on them? <quote>If you don't have anything of substance to say, then don't say anything at all. </quote> is this satire? you keep going in circles <quote>Just as a generalization, people aren't going to work unless they are motivated to. Its why capitalism works, it gives people motivation to work and contribute to society.</quote> it's been proven, numerous times, that money is not the best motivator - it's not even a particularly good one. watch this video. you might learn something. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc <quote>This does not exist in Marxism</quote> again, objectively incorrect. do you actually know anything about Marxist theory, or did you learn everything from Jordan Peterson's misinterpretation of it?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 7

Current Events > 12 Rules for Life by Jordan B Peterson comes out tomorrow, who's getting it? (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > 12 Rules for Life by Jordan B Peterson comes out tomorrow, who's getting it?