Current Events > What are your thoughts on Jordan Peterson?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Don't really know anything about him. It's just annoying that he's all over my recommendations on YouTube though
---

Alkeez posted...

Romes187 posted...

his maps of meaning lectures are really cool and fun and i'd highly recommend everyone check them out regardless of what you think of his politics

I dont think ive seen those, ill give them a look ^_^ thanks!

it was his first book he wrote. its a cool course that outlines the bedrock of his philosophy...and its free to watch on youtube :)

SK8T3R215 posted...

Seems like he makes SJWs have meltdowns for some reason so that's P funny.

JamaalCharles39 posted...

Don't really know anything about him. It's just annoying that he's all over my recommendations on YouTube though

Maybe you should check him out?
What videos do you usually watch, that makes his videos being recommended to you? Im genuinly interested :)
I dont think i got any videos by him before i actually searched for him after listening to Joe Rogan (maybe a month after he did the second podcast with him, i missed the first one for some reason)

I got a lot of Hitchen after i gave Reza and Sam Harris a listen, so i think the algorythm does something right, haha :P + i get a lot of of political humor from "the left" Colbert, Maher etc. - so they basically have me pinned xD
---

silentwing26x posted...

SK8T3R215 posted...

Seems like he makes SJWs have meltdowns for some reason so that's P funny.

In other words, you've rallied behind someone who peddles pseudoscience because you think he rustles the people you perceive to be your opposition. Very empirical and nonreactive of you.
---

COVxy posted...

silentwing26x posted...

SK8T3R215 posted...

Seems like he makes SJWs have meltdowns for some reason so that's P funny.

In other words, you've rallied behind someone who peddles pseudoscience because you think he rustles the people you perceive to be your opposition. Very empirical and nonreactive of you.

You've rallied against him because he challenges all of the pseudoscience and social theory you were indoctrinated into and it threatens your narrative. Very empirical and nonreactive of you. I mean just take a nice, good look at the people who have something against him in this very topic and you'll know exactly why. It ain't empirical.
---

He argued with a Zizek bot lol
---

HippopotamusRex posted...

You've rallied against him because he challenges all of the pseudoscience and social theory you were indoctrinated into and it threatens your narrative.

No, I've already stated why I don't like him, he peddles jungian psychoanalytic theory and evo psych under the guise of authority. He makes psychology look bad as a discipline.
---

lmao at COVxy pretending to care about empiricism. One of the most dishonest CEmen who relies on obfuscation and unsubstantiated attacks.

Has literally never put forth a cogent refutation of JP's arguments or any independent piece of research worth reading.
---

COVxy posted...

HippopotamusRex posted...

You've rallied against him because he challenges all of the pseudoscience and social theory you were indoctrinated into and it threatens your narrative.

No, I've already stated why I don't like him, he peddles jungian psychoanalytic theory and evo psych under the guise of authority. He makes psychology look bad as a discipline.

Right. I know why you don't like him. Your authority means zero on the matter, and people are listening to him so you are spiteful. I would say he makes psychology look good as a discipline...but we both know you have no authority and no one will hear or care about your opinion of him so it's not even worth rebuffing. These JP topics make your blood boil, don't they?
---

HippopotamusRex posted...

COVxy posted...

HippopotamusRex posted...

You've rallied against him because he challenges all of the pseudoscience and social theory you were indoctrinated into and it threatens your narrative.

No, I've already stated why I don't like him, he peddles jungian psychoanalytic theory and evo psych under the guise of authority. He makes psychology look bad as a discipline.

Right. I know why you don't like him. Your authority means zero on the matter, and people are listening to him so you are spiteful. I would say he makes psychology look good as a discipline...but we both know you have no authority and no one will hear or care about your opinion of him so it's not even worth rebuffing. These JP topics make your blood boil, don't they?

damn.
---

COVxy posted...

HippopotamusRex posted...

You've rallied against him because he challenges all of the pseudoscience and social theory you were indoctrinated into and it threatens your narrative.

No, I've already stated why I don't like him, he peddles jungian psychoanalytic theory and evo psych under the guise of authority. He makes psychology look bad as a discipline.

Im really intrigued by your point. I have only surface level knowledge of psychology... when ive googled Jung vs Freud, ive been on the "Freud" side, because it just makes sense to me that you just need "sexual-evolution" to make sense of the world (not even sure if that is correct and even some biologists on joe rogans podcasts have some good counter points to that)

I didnt want to give fuel to the statement that started this. Labels like that is like words like racist and terrorist - it simplifies stuff and it ends with people who are not interested, having opinions based on "stupid" reasons, because expressions like that tries to box you in.

What makes the peddling by JP on Jungian psychology seem authorian? I must admit i dont get that feeling. Though i cant remember him even mentioning Freud in what ive seen, but it doesnt mean he dismisses his thoughts?

Im really glad i made this topic. It really fuels my interest. Even though i know im at fault at liking to read someones opinion of peoples work, than reading the work itself -.-
If anything, im happy that a psychologist gets screen time in mainstream media. It will probably give rise to better arguments that isnt based on simple lables - i hope :P
---

Right, you just spent an entire post trying to insult me in a topic in which i've been fairly passive and it's my blood that's boiling. Lol.
---

Proud, you are also silentwing, right?

HippopotamusRex posted...

I mean just take a nice, good look at the people who have something against him in this very topic and you'll know exactly why.

I mean if you compare "sides", most of the people on CE with advanced degrees have neutral to negative opinions of Peterson and the people who support him tend to be "anti-academia" but respect that academic cred long enough to say that it gives power to what Peterson says.

You even have people admitting in this topic that Peterson advocating that they live their lives in the same way that they already do empowers them because they're hearing it from a "smart person" which makes them feel smart as well.

But this is the young conservative nobody's approach to life. Keep finding youtube channels with "smart" and "logical" people who agree with them, because then you get to feel like you're smarter and more logical than your mutual enemies. Forget about all of the nonsense that is motivated purely by their emotional or moral positions, like Ben Shapiro arguing for why we should look up to him for being chaste until marriage or Peterson saying that "Sex outside of marriage is the source of our societal woes". Focus on how Peterson drops names of philosophers you've heard of so you can get that Pavlovian response to recognizing a reference, while still feeling smart because it's not a pop culture reference.
---

www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-deserve

If you want to appear very profound and convince people to take you seriously, but have nothing of value to say, there is a tried and tested method. First, take some extremely obvious platitude or truism. Make sure it actually does contain some insight, though it can be rather vague. Something like if youre too conciliatory, you will sometimes get taken advantage of or many moral values are similar across human societies. Then, try to restate your platitude using as many words as possible, as unintelligibly as possible, while never repeating yourself exactly. Use highly technical language drawn from many different academic disciplines, so that no one person will ever have adequate training to fully evaluate your work. Construct elaborate theories with many parts. Draw diagrams. Use italics liberally to indicate that you are using words in a highly specific and idiosyncratic sense. Never say anything too specific, and if you do, qualify it heavily so that you can always insist you meant the opposite. Then evangelize: speak as confidently as possible, as if you are sharing Gods own truth. Accept no criticisms: insist that any skeptic has either misinterpreted you or has actually already admitted that you are correct. Talk as much as possible and listen as little as possible. Follow these steps, and your success will be assured.

---

Alkeez posted...

Im really intrigued by your point. I have only surface level knowledge of psychology... when ive googled Jung vs Freud,

I mean, neither are talked about or important for modern psychology. Go to any university website, go to their psychology department and look at what the professors study. You'll find that none of it resembles this stuff. Hell, even Peterson's actual academic work isn't even close to related to what he peddles to the public.

I mean, it makes sense that a personality psychologist has a positive view of psychoanalytic and psychodynamic psychology, because this is where the field started, but none of his actual work is even grounded in such theory. Probably not a good sign if the peddler doesn't seem to believe his own peddlings.
---

I like Jordan Peterson. Dont agree with everything he says but he's a very insightful guy. I just wish he would stop talking about Christianity so much. He apparently doesnt even take the Bible as literal truth, so I'd like to see him point out the negative aspects of religion from time to time.

Anteaterking posted...

Proud, you are also silentwing, right?

HippopotamusRex posted...

I mean just take a nice, good look at the people who have something against him in this very topic and you'll know exactly why.

I mean if you compare "sides", most of the people on CE with advanced degrees have neutral to negative opinions of Peterson and the people who support him tend to be "anti-academia" but respect that academic cred long enough to say that it gives power to what Peterson says.

You even have people admitting in this topic that Peterson advocating that they live their lives in the same way that they already do empowers them because they're hearing it from a "smart person" which makes them feel smart as well.

But this is the young conservative nobody's approach to life. Keep finding youtube channels with "smart" and "logical" people who agree with them, because then you get to feel like you're smarter and more logical than your mutual enemies. Forget about all of the nonsense that is motivated purely by their emotional or moral positions, like Ben Shapiro arguing for why we should look up to him for being chaste until marriage or Peterson saying that "Sex outside of marriage is the source of our societal woes". Focus on how Peterson drops names of philosophers you've heard of so you can get that Pavlovian response to recognizing a reference, while still feeling smart because it's not a pop culture reference.

As one of Jordan Petersons biggest fans I was a leftist until i started listening to JP. I have only ever voted democrat and will probably stop voting democrat after opening my eyes to the merits of conservatism. At the end of the day though i am a black man and i won't be voting Republican because of the racial aspects of their party...however more and more i think conservatives make more sense then liberals on a lot of subjects.
---

The left made Peterson...

The day they tried to drown out his speech with white noise.

The day smugglypuff made herself a meme.

The day that whatever the fuck it was, hit Lauren Southern.

By doing all of that silly bullshit in order to silence that man, all they did was give him a worldwide audience.
---

0TiamaT0 posted...

The left made Peterson...

The day they tried to drown out his speech with white noise.

The day smugglypuff made herself a meme.

The day that whatever the fuck it was, hit Lauren Southern.

By doing all of that silly bullshit in order to silence that man, all they did was give him a worldwide audience.

Smugglypuff was the person that hit Lauren, right?
---

Shadowplay posted...

0TiamaT0 posted...

The left made Peterson...

The day they tried to drown out his speech with white noise.

The day smugglypuff made herself a meme.

The day that whatever the fuck it was, hit Lauren Southern.

By doing all of that silly bullshit in order to silence that man, all they did was give him a worldwide audience.

Smugglypuff was the person that hit Lauren, right?

No. She witnessed the freak who did it, hitting her, and then lied to the cops - saying that it didnt happen.
---