Jordan Peterson

[Singu]

It's no use talking to Bertrand, he's acting as just one of the "loyal defenders of Jordan Peterson". He will keep defending and protecting and justifying and "reinterpreting" JP ad infinitum. It's clearly just a cult. But what these cult followers don't realize, is that outside of their own bubble and echo chamber where all they do is praise and worship JP, JP and his ideas are not actually taken very seriously.

[Bertrand]

actually, he says explicitly that it's related to IQ and that IQ is extremely heritable.

how do you think this relates? that IQ is a thing doesn't determine competence except in the sense that having no legs means you'll never be the best at soccer

competence is primarily determined by work and in any case the product is evaluated by definition on its own merits, not based on the attributes of the person who created it. if you think denying IQ is the answer you've misidentified the problem and your solution is willfull blindness to boot. peterson never says we should turn IQ into a class rank, because we don't have to, it will naturally sort itself out. this is the difference between him and eugenics. charity and humanitarian work is necessary because of this fact, not pretense to deny this fact. in fact if IQ is not a thing then the conclusion is to deny extension of charity to people since they simply failed at what they were perfectly capable of (i.e.: competent to accomplish), or to simply reward lack of effort for being lack of effort. to fail to cognize inequity in distribution of ability and to make a system where merit is leveled at the point of outcome with incompetence is to destroy the productive and creative capacity of civilization. it creates utopia by stopping all progress and declaring the goal met artificially. its precisely what he's talking about with how communism and other schemes of that nature are illusory attempts to create heaven on earth and only result in hell. its like sure one way to reach "the endstate" is to induce apocalypse, but its declaring the patient cured by killing them (i.e.: destroying its future)

in general the problem seems to be you call competent people you like, without realizing for much of the world it is reversed, people like people who are actually competent. in other words, competence is not a manufactured standard its the ability to do whatever the particular aim is well by objective standards. competence is not some gerrymandered thing where its like the bureaucracy declares people as competent as if it were an honorific (reminds me of kim jong un being the best at golf and so forth) , its a label that flows from actual work output judged impartially. of course this presupposes the ability to evaluate work, without which a bureaucratic substitute is perhaps necessary, but also completely meaningless except as a reflection of group reverence--this is of course why you assume I worship peterson, because you would if you were saying the things I am... but I'm not you

[Bertrand]

yeah because when I think of pseuds I think of Jesus

this neatly comports with "when I think of right wingers I think of Peterson"

there is a consistency here, but its the set point is wacky, which I think was Raver's point

[FDG]

Basic rule of thumb to follow: If JBP appears like a right winger to you then you are likely an extreme leftist. If JBP appears like a moderate or a left winger with some right wing views then there is hope for you after all.



Just like how the right is moving farther to the right, the left is moving farther to the left. Instead of following the crowd, which will shift you to either or, stick to your values and what makes sense rationally instead. You will still likely end up on the left or the right rather than the middle.

Doesnt even find the time to shave before an interviene, cannot close his shit properly, never worked in business and never earned a cent in the real economy, still preaches perfect order and super hard work.

[Bertrand]

lol I love it. jordan has been a clinical psychologist for like 30 years now, as well as a professor, author, and consultant. all of that is the "real economy", and the shaving thing...

S L E
L
E

jelly of LIE, grasping at straws trying to define his accomplishments away. the dude is probably a millionaire because of his book sales, is the money fake too? let me guess it was all a scam like a preacher taking in tithes. where do you think that mental image originates from. the funny thing is if he weren't rich it would be grounds for criticism on the same jelly basis (i.e.: wheres the money), and since he is its also grounds for supporting the notion it must be a scam. it all originates in a beta mindset about how the world works and wherein sophistry rules the day. its all the same tools of the same masters house, you use the tools you assume he uses the tools

not only that but he's put a bunch of stuff up for free, since of course the retort will be something about his shameless profiteering, but he's got that angle covered too. the bottom line is he's not out for money but he managed to generate a bunch anyway, and this bothers people. its almost like you can make money and do good things at the same time, but this is such a "conservative" notion people hate it

[Bertrand]

he generated this thread

[FDG]

lol I love it. jordan has been a clinical psychologist for like 30 years now, as well as a professor, author, and consultant. all of that is the "real economy", and the shaving thing...

S L E
L
E

jelly of LIE, grasping at straws trying to define his accomplishments away. the dude is probably a millionaire because of his book sales, is the money fake too? let me guess it was all a scam like a preacher taking in tithes. where do you think that mental image originates from. the funny thing is if he weren't rich it would be grounds for criticism on the same jelly basis (i.e.: wheres the money), and since he is its also grounds for supporting the notion it must be a scam. it all originates in a beta mindset about how the world works and wherein sophistry rules the day. its all the same tools of the same masters house, you use the tools you assume he uses the tools

not only that but he's put a bunch of stuff up for free, since of course the retort will be something about his shameless profiteering, but he's got that angle covered too. the bottom line is he's not out for money but he managed to generate a bunch anyway, and this bothers people. its almost like you can make money and do good things at the same time, but this is such a "conservative" notion people hate it

you can´t even tell that i am being tongue in cheek...

Anyway, J-P seems to be an IJ type to me in terms of general outlook. Many of his recommendations are related to finding balance in ourselves before going out and doing stuff in the world. This is typically a weak point in EJ types who have fairly weak Fi / Ti.

[Bertrand]

I was tongue in cheek too

[FDG]

jokes on you I was tongue in cheek too

You´re welcome, I wish you a good start in the day.

[ashlesha]

I'm grateful there's someone like JP in the mainstream to argue over. Instead of like, lena dunham and kanye west

[ooo]

someone should make a thread with some famous american philosophers~
(even not famous)

[Adam Strange]

someone should make a thread with some famous american philosophers~
(even not famous)

How about Yogi Berra? He, at least, had a sense of humor.

[ooo]

@Adam
why isn't this philosopher a national hero?


I just fell a bit in love *-*

[Singu]

This is kind of interesting:

https://www.twitter.com/HeerJeet/sta...91996477476864



https://newrepublic.com/article/1484...ired-old-myths

[Adam Strange]

He was wearing a cape? What an ass.

How apropos of an Authoritarian, to look down on prisoners from an imagined and asserted moral high ground.

I've got to say, @Singu, in that last picture, he looks pretty smug and critical. Sort of like a school teacher who is going to take a switch to your butt behind the building for getting your declensions wrong.

I don't think I need advice on how to live my life from a guy like this. Nor would I let my kid anywhere near him. I prefer people who have a bit of flexibility and depth to their morals.

[xerx]

how do you think this relates? that IQ is a thing doesn't determine competence except in the sense that having no legs means you'll never be the best at soccer

competence is primarily determined by work and in any case the product is evaluated by definition on its own merits, not based on the attributes of the person who created it. if you think denying IQ is the answer you've misidentified the problem and your solution is willfull blindness to boot. peterson never says we should turn IQ into a class rank, because we don't have to, it will naturally sort itself out. this is the difference between him and eugenics. charity and humanitarian work is necessary because of this fact, not pretense to deny this fact. in fact if IQ is not a thing then the conclusion is to deny extension of charity to people since they simply failed at what they were perfectly capable of (i.e.: competent to accomplish), or to simply reward lack of effort for being lack of effort. to fail to cognize inequity in distribution of ability and to make a system where merit is leveled at the point of outcome with incompetence is to destroy the productive and creative capacity of civilization. it creates utopia by stopping all progress and declaring the goal met artificially. its precisely what he's talking about with how communism and other schemes of that nature are illusory attempts to create heaven on earth and only result in hell. its like sure one way to reach "the endstate" is to induce apocalypse, but its declaring the patient cured by killing them (i.e.: destroying its future)

in general the problem seems to be you call competent people you like, without realizing for much of the world it is reversed, people like people who are actually competent. in other words, competence is not a manufactured standard its the ability to do whatever the particular aim is well by objective standards. competence is not some gerrymandered thing where its like the bureaucracy declares people as competent as if it were an honorific (reminds me of kim jong un being the best at golf and so forth) , its a label that flows from actual work output judged impartially. of course this presupposes the ability to evaluate work, without which a bureaucratic substitute is perhaps necessary, but also completely meaningless except as a reflection of group reverence--this is of course why you assume I worship peterson, because you would if you were saying the things I am... but I'm not you

Competence is important: aircraft mechanics should be selected on the basis of competence; so should brain surgeons; so should climate scientists-- sceptic bloggers & conservative think tanks don't understand the climate better than actual scientists. Where JP goes off the rails is when "clean your room" starts to mean STFU and don't protest against political & commercial hierarchies. If you think politicians & bankers are kept there necessarily because of their competence, then I don't know what to tell you.

Incidentally, it's JP who violates his competence hierarchy maxim when he endorses climate change denialism. Maybe JP should go clean his room instead of trying to delve into topics way above his own competence.

> https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/...574144?lang=en
> https://twitter.com/aaronhuertas/sta...81749837475840 (he links to some pseudoscience-y think tank)

Could it be that someone has a political bias that he's not telling us about..?

[The Reality Denialist]

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/...574144?lang=en

Writes CO₂ as C02 (yes, with zero).

That is a crime against science.

I must admit that news about dicarbon emissions are new to me.

[ouronis]

@Adam
why isn't this philosopher a national hero?


I just fell a bit in love *-*

He isn't?

[Raver]

He's too traditionalist on social issues. "We need strong hierarchies and order, men need to be men, women are chaos (and chaos/change is bad), traditional values like monogamy should be protected, etc".

I'm not extreme leftist but this guy is definitely a right winger, and in a lot of ways a really OG conversative e.g. religion.

Out of curiosity, I looked up the general consensus online on JBP and classical liberalism and it seems to be that generally speaking aside from a few outliers that think he is a left or right winger that both classical liberalism and JBP are centrist nowadays.

So I will concede that he is possibly not a left winger, but a centrist instead. However, to say he is a right winger, far right or even centre right is certainly a stretch. I might even possibly be a centrist myself despite having an ample amount of leftist views.

Regardless, it displays the level of subjectivity and the arbitrary nature of the left wing - right wing dichotomy based on the differing viewpoints from a variety of political stances.

[Raver]

If you are going around talking about how bad the left is and promoting religion then you are right-wing and OG at that. Even the alt-right does not promote religion.

Well, he is talking about the extreme left specifically and as for being pro religion, I agree that it is generally associated with conservative values and merging the state and religion.

However, I don't see how even leftists are exempt being pro-religion so it is not a stretch for a centrist to be as well.

Classical liberalism was merely a response to the issues of their day. No one follows 19th century ideology anymore because we have 21st century issues.

That is why I can buy classical liberalism as being centrist today as modern liberalism has shifted more to the left.

However, to say classical liberalism is akin to conservatism is inaccurate as they are different.

[niffer]

Writes CO₂ as C02 (yes, with zero).

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

amazing! nice catch!!!!!!

[Raver]

I would love to continue this conversation but I cannot talk to intuitive types that have not developed their sensation.
By focusing on theory instead of reality, this conversation will not go anywhere.

Well, my sensing used to be even worse in the past, lol. Anyways, this kind of topic is bound to develop into a theoretical circle jerk of one's own beliefs anyways so I agree that it is a fruitless endeavor for that reason. Almost everyone is guilty of that in some form.

[Bertrand]

he's pro religion in the same way Jung is, which is to say the religious establishment looks at him like a gnostic heretic. but he promotes the good side of religion which is to say to find the meaning in mythological interpretations and use it to better the self and the world

[Raver]

Again more out of control intuition. There is nothing inherently bad about intuition but you have to be sure that the assumptions you are making at valid, which you are not.

Even if what you are saying is true, I don't see how that makes you more right than me in this argument. All it means is that you are a better debater, but regardless in the end this is a classic ad hominem distracting from the main point, which is the argument itself.

[Bertrand]

I mean the entire premise is that religion isn't bad, and if that appeals to conservatives that's not bad either, because his mode of interpreting religion and explaining why it isn't bad is itself a "liberal" i.e.: higher in openness version of religion, i.e.: a psychological approach to myth. in that way he stands to push religion in a progressive direction, so to characterize him as somehow capitulating or serving "conservative" religious agenda is not accurate. he is in fact planting the seeds for their annihilation inasmuch as the "conservative" agenda is a power structure rooted in the status quo. he doesn't need to "oppose" himself to religion per se, he's simply trying to capture what is good about it and cleave off the rest. this is far better than trying to simply deny the legitimacy of all religious thinking because it alienates a massive swath of people for no good reason (and abandons any accumulated wisdom in the tradition). this goes back to my thing about conflict for its own sake, and not being about that. you don't need to destroy religion when you can take whats good about it and bring it into the 21st century. that's only an "appeal" to conservatives on the most shallow level. its really an appeal to them not in their political capacity but as humans. there's an intersection of mindsets here, but the kill all religion way of thinking is just as conservative inasmuch as its rooted in an essentially 19th century mindset. true that mindset is opposed to a 14th century mindset so superficially appears more progressive, but what peterson stands for is an actual 21st century mindset. this is what people who assume he's just another televangelist get wrong about him

[Singu]

Out of curiosity, I looked up the general consensus online on JBP and classical liberalism and it seems to be that generally speaking aside from a few outliers that think he is a left or right winger that both classical liberalism and JBP are centrist nowadays.

So I will concede that he is possibly not a left winger, but a centrist instead. However, to say he is a right winger, far right or even centre right is certainly a stretch. I might even possibly be a centrist myself despite having an ample amount of leftist views.

Regardless, it displays the level of subjectivity and the arbitrary nature of the left wing - right wing dichotomy based on the differing viewpoints from a variety of political stances.

There's no way that this kind of thing is "centrist". He wants to go back to the good ol' days of 50's traditional gender roles, where men were men and women were women, although he does it in a way to pretend that this is all "objective" and "academic" - such as that these traditional gender roles are based on timeless mythologies. Or worse, it somehow has to do with lobsters.



Bertrand is an extremely confused individual, and that's why he continuously rambles about Socionics and Jordan Peterson on a forum such as this one.

[Bertrand]

worrying that he appeals to conservatives is itself a conservative viewpoint in light of peterson's actual message which is to rise above that way of thinking about the issue

and yeah a 7 year old video of a intuitive thinking type is unhip, news at 11. if people want to disregard the insights he does have because of some corny video that's fine but lets not pretend they're meeting him on the field of ideas. if you watch his actual classroom lectures then you start to get an idea where all this is coming from

[ouronis]

yeah he's totally a (center) right winger

Who gives a shit what he is, I was clarifying for Raver since he seemed not to know JP was a racist bible-thumper.

[Bertrand]

yeah I personally don't care that he's racist or a bible thumper, the important thing is to accurately state where he lies on the right-left spectrum vis-a-vis "classic liberalism"

[ouronis]

yeah I personally don't care that he's racist or a bible thumper, the important thing is to accurately state where he lies on the right-left spectrum vis-a-vis "classic liberalism"

Gotcha. I don't get it, but there ya go, I suppose.

[niffer]

Hm. I just voted LII for him earlier but I'm changing my typing of him to EII.

I find it highly unlikely that an LII would write "C02" with a zero and consistently use data so poorly as squark pointed out earlier on in the thread. Fail Ti role IMO. EII final and confirm.

[Singu]

I think the more you look into Jordan Peterson, the more you'll find that he's a typical chauvinist, a nationalist, a radical right-winger.

Jordan Peterson quotes:

“Men have to toughen up,” “Men demand it, and women want it.”

“consciousness is symbolically masculine and has been since the beginning of time.”

“the soul of the individual eternally hungers for the heroism of genuine Being.”

“In the West, we have been withdrawing from our tradition-, religion- and even nation-centred cultures.”

“Culture, is symbolically, archetypally, mythically male” “Chaos—the unknown—is symbolically associated with the feminine.”

“feminists avoid criticizing Islam because they unconsciously long for masculine dominance.”

“Maybe it’s not the world that’s at fault. Maybe it’s you. You’ve failed to make the mark.”

“Compassion as a vice” “Toughen up, you weasel.”

“@GreggHurwitz it’s good that you consumed the liquor this time instead of letting some Indian steal it . . .”

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/03...ist-mysticism/

[ooo]

He isn't?

I mean... HE MAKES MUSIC TOO *_* how cool is this!

[ashlesha]

I had a couple videos sitting on my youtube front page for awhile with titles like "Peterson DESTROYS hysterical feminists!" that I was quickly scrolling past in disgust for weeks, and last night I finally watched them and wasn't really surprised to find that I didn't feel slapped by ideological bullshit by what he has to say in them, its just that his fanboys frame them in this annoying way and title the videos like that because they're just as assured about his right wing ideology matching theirs as lefties are. Not that there was nothing in those videos I disagreed with. Maybe I'm just so used to triggered and sandwich jokes that being able to mentally engage actual ideas makes me roll over lol.

Probably where there's smoke there's fire but even if that's the case i don't even see what there is to gain by labeling him as an argument in and of itself.

[timber]

Doesnt even find the time to shave before an interviene, cannot close his shit properly, never worked in business and never earned a cent in the real economy, still preaches perfect order and super hard work.

facical stubble is extremely common in Canada and his facial hair is no-where near out of the common ordinary. so try again, bucko.

[timber]

bertrand, clean your room, bud.

[FDG]

facical stubble is extremely common in Canada and his facial hair is no-where near out of the common ordinary. so try again, bucko.

r u trying to justify your and peeperson´s laziness?

[timber]

r u trying to justify your and peeperson´s laziness?

haha! nooooooooo

actually i clip my scruff with clippers as close to skin as possible these days.

[ouronis]

Here's comments from his ama on Reddit https://www.reddit.com/user/drjordanbpeterson/comments

[Adam Strange]

Here's an article on Peterson in today's Toronto Star: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/2018...dangerous.html