Jordan Peterson

[ouronis]

This guy is really interesting. What's his type? It is kind of a long lecture.





EII is tempting, but there's too much Result thinking going on with him.

He acts as a mediator of people, most of his lectures seem to be focused on drawing out the potential of his students by making them more categorically aware of how they relate to the world through psychology and philosophy, using the theory as his medium.

[Sol]

ENFP(?)

[April]

I really love this guy and his lectures, and I'm glad you have found him interesting as well.

I have a hard time seeing him as a rational type, and I think he is clearly intuitive. He jumps around a lot between seemingly disparate concepts and draws compelling connections and analogies. While you may call this "Result" thinking, I am ultimately not convinced by a single Reinin dichotomy.

His lectures focus a large deal on archetypal ideas or symbols (e.g., feminine and masculine) that are prevalent throughout history, literature, politics, religion, and art, and his understanding of these archetypes serve as the framework for his course material. The forms are incredibly well-embodied to him: "People don't have ideas. Ideas have people." This feels like an dominant experience to me. I think he may be ILI.

Moreover, the conclusions he draws are often cynical or dark, focused on nihilism, genocidal ideologies, totalitarianism, or the idea that "there's a monster in everyone" or "if you're not a monster, it's pretty hard to stay alive." Delta NFs are typically not as focused on these concepts, but prefer to stress the importance of the inherent good in people, so that they can build up the individual. I don't see him as a mediator of his students on a really complex, individual-focused level. Rather, he reminds his students throughout his lectures that, objectively and more times than not due to our evolution, it will serve them well to find a place within a dominance hierarchy. That said, he does often underscore the significance of transformation as a part of defining our identities, but this gives further credence an ILI typing.

[ouronis]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MCOw0eJ84d8

Another interesting one.

[Jake]

LSI maybe

[ouronis]

He's gotten a lot more famous since last October because of his stand against attempts to codify tenuous realities into law and (distasteful) willingness to be associated with the alt right.

It can be hard to keep track of everything he thinks; he is academically prolific.

On the one hand his message is almost the poster child for the clipped wings complex. The gamma one is not far off either.

On the other hand he seems stereotypically EIE-like, giving fiery speeches about potential, morality, and meaning.

[Syynth]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE

His speech is dripping with Ni. Definitely Ni ego, or Ni demonstrative.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeL-Fn0V8iU&t=13s

He is farther right than what I typically associate with Delta NFs.

He most likely Ti valuing. I'd say he is a beta NF. Though LII or ILI are also possible.

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

isn't this very Te? 3:37

[The Reality Denialist]

I thought he is delta because he emphasized being a human and does not really care about abstract. Ethical type or not alpha/beta. Alpha is very unlikely (=humans are just part of something greater, and in essence we are just meaningless).

Overall I think lot's of starts to come out.
But after reading some delta heavy stuff ( to get my credentials up to par for teaching) it is not like that. I think mid quadra.

[Adam Strange]

isn't this very Te? 3:37

Based on viewing this video alone, this guy thinks almost exactly like I do. I've never heard a Delta either express these ideas or express themselves in this way.
He's talking about how your actions today will lead inevitably to one particular future. He's tying together snippets of ideas from what seem like random sources. He's talking about wasted time in terms of lost money. He's talking about the efficient use of human beings.

He seems very LIE to me.

[wacey]

There is a lot of loneliness there, not solvable though, due to the existentialism. Men of this character are true lone wolfs.

[The Reality Denialist]

Yep LIE just look at this cute duality

[silke]

LII sx/sp 1w2 (NA)

[Chae]

sx/sp 1w2 (NA)

That's probably it^^^
From the videos I got EIE. He uses potential and time and the way he speaks is all ethical: "intentions" + very extroverted approach close to the people
LIE maybe the PoLR is there, this stuff could make people uncomfortable with all the violence talk.

[darya]

LII?

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

Yep LIE just look at this cute duality

i think the interviewer looks SLI>ESI

[The Reality Denialist]

i think the interviewer looks SLI>ESI

You should check out more Sargon of Akkad videos.
http://socionbyexample.blogspot.fi/2...-of-akkad.html
ESI/LSI?

[The Reality Denialist]

In terms of mass vs individual, I think he values individualism over social systems (social aspects of masses is essential concept in LSI-EIE duality)

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

@unsuccessfull Alphamale well his repertoire/vigor reminds me of Tree of Logic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoY7EQSpIsQ

do you think she is also ESI/LSI?

[Adam Strange]

@unsuccessfull Alphamale well his repertoire/vigor reminds me of Tree of Logic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoY7EQSpIsQ

do you think she is also ESI/LSI?

Nice coconuts.

She might be LSI. Her speech is very logical and clear and well-defined. Also, she is talking about how she tried to fit into a system, which is very LSI. Yes (I'm watching this as I type), she seems LSI to me. I'm hearing some cadences which sound like my IEI cousin, but aside from similarities between Beta Introverts, she does not seem IEI at all.
Nor does she seem like any ESI's I've known.

[squark]

Jordan Peterson is Ti, either LII or LSI, though I do think Ne polr makes more sense than Se polr. Compare him to Ben Shapiro on topics they share views on and how they go about it. Ben is all "facts facts, statistics, facts" to back up what he's saying, very Te, and Jordan is all "this is the only thing that makes sense. Just think about it" which is Ti. The stuff people are commenting on Ni related kinds of themes points more LSI than LII as well - hidden agenda.

[ouronis]

[ashlesha]

I'm developing sort of a fascination with this guy and I haven't had time to watch any of his lectures for more than five minutes, so I'm scrolling through quotes.

I think that people come to the conclusion that life is meaningless because that’s a better conclusion to come to than the reverse. Because if life is meaningless, well then, who cares what you do. But if life is meaningful, if what you do really matters, everything you do matters. And that puts a terrible responsibility on people. And I think that people are generally unwilling to bear that.

The central reason society has to protect free discourse is because it is the fundamental problem-solving mechanism. A by-product [of free discourse] is the necessity to allow people to say offensive things, stupid things, foolish things. Partly because they’re malevolent at times, but also because it’s very frequently the case that when you initially attempt to formulate an argument, you do a very bad job of it. [This is because] you haven’t formulated the argument yet. You have to be allowed to stumble around like a moron, because it’s the only way you’re going to trip over the truth.

If you’re harmless you’re not virtuous, you’re just harmless, you’re like a rabbit; a rabbit isn’t virtuous, it just can’t do anything except get eaten! That’s not virtuous. If you’re a monster, and you don’t act monstrously, then you’re virtuous.

It is said, it is more difficult to rule oneself, than a city – and this is no metaphor. This is truth, as literal as it can be made. It is precisely for this reason that we are always trying to rule the city. It is a perversion of pride to cease praying in public, and to clean up the dust under our feet, instead; seems too mundane to treat those we actually face with respect and dignity, when we could be active, against, in the street. Maybe it is more important to strengthen our characters, than to repair the world. So much of that reparation seems selfish, anyway; is selfishness and intellectual pride masquerading as love, creating a world polluted with good works, that don’t work.

A real relationship is a wrestling match - it’s a grappling - it’s a grappling phenomena that you both emerge transformed from, and that’s what people want.

Nietzsche was certainly very useful to me, and I know that he was extraordinarily useful to Carl Jung, who was a real student of Nietzsche and was really devoting himself to solving the problem that Nietzsche posed, which is, ‘What do we do in the aftermath of the death of God?’ And Jung’s answer was, ‘We rescue our father from the depths.’ And that’s the right answer. That’s what the university should be doing with young people. It’s like, your dead father is in the library, go out there and ferret him out and unite with him and become the thing that keeps chaos at bay.

The truth is something that burns. It burns off deadwood, and people don’t like having their deadwood burnt off; often because they’re like 95% deadwood. Believe me, I’m not being snide about that. It’s no joke. When you start to realize how much of what you’ve constructed of yourself is based on deception and lies, that is a horrifying realization, and it can easily be 95% of you.

[ashlesha]

This is a little off topic, but the thread seems kind of dead anyway. He fascinates me because he challenges my ego in a way that I don't find overly threatening. I'm reading about the shadow atm and I think that maybe exposing myself to his material prompts kind of a confrontation with my own. I feel that my reaction to him would fall in line with like, some sort of jungian concept of duality but I have no idea how much that coincides with the socionics concept of the term. I also think I wouldn't have this reaction if he had the same personality but a different worldview so maybe it's not a matter of personality at all (though I certainly am less sympathetic, normally, to people who argue in favor of the values he shares). I'm just experiencing a very distinct reaction that has repeated itself a handful of times in a way that feels meaningful and I'm wondering if it IS meaningful in a socionics context or otherwise. Blah blah me me me.

[ashlesha]

I mean, whatever, maybe it's just because he's kind of hot.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Eh he sounds too much like a straight man to me. We seem to be inspired by the opposite types of people lol.

[ashlesha]

When I say he's challenging I mean when I look him up on YouTube and find the "Jordan Peterson DESTROYS Gender Bending SJW!" stuff lol, which is the part of his shtick I've gotten around to watching but I'm aware there's much more substantial stuff out there, like in this thread (I should have come here first).

[Bertrand]

When I say he's challenging I mean when I look him up on YouTube and find the "Jordan Peterson DESTROYS Gender Bending SJW!" stuff lol, which is the part of his shtick I've gotten around to watching but I'm aware there's much more substantial stuff out there, like in this thread (I should have come here first).

what really makes me think hes gamma is he opposes delta and beta alike which is really rare to see these days in one person

the good news is if everyone wants to claim him, i.e.: making him the anti-trump, it bodes well for his ideas and his future

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I agree , he's very very gamma-y.

[ashlesha]

what really makes me think hes gamma is he opposes delta and beta alike which is really rare to see these days in one person

Would you mind expanding on this? I don't know if you're referring to the anti SJW stuff (arguably aristocracy related tho I think it's a bit more complex) or something broader.

[Bertrand]

Would you mind expanding on this? I don't know if you're referring to the anti SJW stuff (arguably aristocracy related tho I think it's a bit more complex) or something broader.

he spends a lot of time describing the evils of beta soviet society and then also opposes a lot of contemporary Canadian values (EII) on a lot of the same grounds Strat describes. Basically he roots out the flaws in the extreme left in both its beta modes (totalitarian communism) and delta (post modernism). Really, watch his entire series on Maps of Meaning and Personality and its Transformations (start here). You will recognize so much

He is by no means right wing, but since he opposes the left the more shallow elements of the reactionary right have adopted a caricature of him. he's more like a radical moderate, so of course neither side can understand him

the flaws of Trump and the right, etc are so obvious he doesn't really even go into it but not because he at all supports them. mainly because he's looking ahead to a lot of the potential problems in Canada with the left. of course Trump actually set him back some because it makes it seem like maybe the right isn't as irrelevant as he thought they were. of course in Canada that is still true, but in America we still struggle with stuff he figured was mostly not worth his direct attention

I feel like you will absolutely "get him" in a way most people don't

[esq]

This amount of adulation starts to nauseate me.

We should certainly criticize this person.

[Jeremy8419]

Dudes talking puts me to sleep. EIE.

[rat200Turbo]

This guy is awesome, I've watched his lectures for the past month or so. Really a top notch teacher, used to teach at Harvard ... came out of nowhere via a viral youtube video of him yelling at some protesters over fascism which he's been studying for 20 years. Pretty hilarious
He reduces everything to abstraction a little too far, but that's alright.

[squark]

I feel like in general he speaks to a gamma mindset and gamma finds it very refreshing when it feels like much of the world doesn't get it or is hostile to said values (not just the money based stereotype [LIE], but the real underlying spirit of gamma as a whole... the soul of gamma)

Except he's Ti ego, and not even gamma at all. I think you have too much of a tendency to type by how you feel about someone rather than by looking at what functions they use.

[ashlesha]

This amount of adulation starts to nauseate me.

We should certainly criticize this person.

He links articles from the Daily Mail and blog posts from A Voice For Men on his social media. Not very fitting for a distinguished academic if you ask me.

[squark]

He links articles from the Daily Mail and blog posts from A Voice For Men on his social media. Not very fitting for a distinguished academic if you ask me.

lol, and not very Te.

I haven't decided yet if he's LII or LSI. A friend of mine was watching a lot of his videos and he wanted me to watch them. First, he'd ask me my thoughts on an issue, and then he'd laugh and say, "Yeah, that's what Jordan said too" and we'd watch it, and he was saying what I had said. For multiple issues. For that reason, I don't find the issue related videos all that interesting - though the way people react to him is - as people react irl to me the same way, and it's interesting to see it from an outside perspective. (Edit to add: I don't think a person's stance on any issue says what their type is, as even conflictors can agree on some issues and points. It's more with the approach someone takes to it, how they go about explaining their pov and why they came to the conclusions they did that speaks to type)

I do find some of the ones about meaning and so on interesting, but I don't like watching videos in general so I haven't seen many of those.

[Bertrand]

I think he knows he needs to be able to put things into Ti terms, especially as an academic, to effectively get his message across

but like I said, his near universal appeal and promotion of what I see as gamma values, is the most important thing, not in typing, but in general

his Ti is a real testament to his ability to "reach across the aisle" and I really respect that, whether he's gamma reaching beta or beta reaching gamma, etc. Its cool

[Jeremy8419]

Based on viewing this video alone, this guy thinks almost exactly like I do. I've never heard a Delta either express these ideas or express themselves in this way.
He's talking about how your actions today will lead inevitably to one particular future. He's tying together snippets of ideas from what seem like random sources. He's talking about wasted time in terms of lost money. He's talking about the efficient use of human beings.

He seems very LIE to me.

He speaks like you think. But, do you speak like he thinks? Does he speak like you speak? And does he think like you think? Nope. That's why its Business. He's Contacting Socially with the elements in your ego.

[Jeremy8419]

Dude talks like every stereotypical professor and catholic priest I've ever known. Voice patterns really don't ever shift at all, which is inert Fe. Content of his speaking is inconsequential, as an EIE can speak regularly and be employed on any subject. I said he puts me to sleep for a reason. Extinguishment. Dudes EIE, and the "LIE" is mistake of Business.