View Poll Results: type of Jordan Peterson?

Voters
127. You may not vote on this poll
  • ILE (ENTp)

    4 3.15%
  • SEI (ISFp)

    0 0%
  • ESE (ESFj)

    2 1.57%
  • LII (INTj)

    22 17.32%
  • SLE (ESTp)

    0 0%
  • IEI (INFp)

    9 7.09%
  • EIE (ENFj)

    45 35.43%
  • LSI (ISTj)

    8 6.30%
  • SEE (ESFp)

    1 0.79%
  • ILI (INTp)

    10 7.87%
  • LIE (ENTj)

    21 16.54%
  • ESI (ISFj)

    5 3.94%
  • IEE (ENFp)

    1 0.79%
  • SLI (ISTp)

    1 0.79%
  • LSE (ESTj)

    4 3.15%
  • EII (INFj)

    3 2.36%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 26 of 32 FirstFirst ... 16222324252627282930 ... LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,040 of 1271

Thread: Jordan Peterson

  1. #1001
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    You need to see it in the context of Type 1 as well.

    The idea of "Sexual" is mostly Sx/Sp 2/3/4, 7, 8, and often Se ego ("sensual", "physical", etc) Very different from Type 1.

    Sexual 1 is about "zeal", the passion for your moral causes. Jordan Peterson is known for shouting and even crying during his talks or interviews. He loses composure too often for someone who is supposedly So/Sp 1.

    Arguably, alongside 5, the Sexual 1 is one of the least outwardly "sexual" subtypes, for the 1 has strong ideas about what is appropriate or not, they are going to be self restraining and put their Sx energy into something they deem morally righteous.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  2. #1002
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    When it comes to the argument that he spends too much time focusing on SO not to be SO lead: There are several So/Sx Youtubers who primarily focus on relationships, dating, or gender/sexuality issues. The second instinct is said to be "exhibitionistic" because often, it's more "free" (less neurotic) and a strength.
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  3. #1003
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Here is the interview by the way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZYQpge1W5s

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalek Caan View Post
    Perhaps. But I just get a strange sense that social issues are super important to him and that he really values his interpretation of them and seems to think it's super important to influence them as well. Is it normal for Gamma to put so much effort into doing that, investing their lives into interpreting and manipulating the social sphere?
    It may not be super stereotypical but I wouldn't count it as evidence against Gamma.

    Well I'd agree that he does try to take the social critic approach. But he does often make arguments where he does stand for something, such as there being natural hierarchies that form in society or his belief in social contracts and such. A lot of his conclusions about his social critiques are in response to liberal ideas that he doesn't like or agree with.

    I mean didn't he become well-known because he didn't like the possibility of having to call transgenders by certain pronouns? Because he believes it goes against his idea of society or something... He very much seems to value this idea of a social organism over an individual one. It's probably a central theme to all his arguments. It seems like that is Fi devaluing or at least Gamma-Fi devaluing.
    Not wanting to be controlled by others is very Gamma I'd say. This was his objection to the law - that it's something that should be decided on a case-by-case basis, not required (Te > Ti).

    I guess I just don't see how this couldn't apply to all the quadras though. Taking personal responsibility for the things that happen to you is part of growing up and being mature and responsible. Having hierarchies based on power-seeking would just lead to all sorts of problems. I don't actually believe betas, for example, are against those ideas.
    I'm not saying that those things are exclusive to certain types, I'm just looking at what is most salient in a person's values and worldview, what they focus on and talk about the most.

    For example, I (and hopefully any other reasonable human being) would absolutely agree that taking personal responsibility is important. But am I going to write a whole book telling people to go clean their room and "get their life together"? No, because I don't use Se like that. The valued functions are what you tend to verbalize and criticize others for.

    Beta types do emphasize responsibility, but are more likely to emphasize structural problems in society, and de-emphasize the individual, though this isn't a hard rule.

    Actually I usually hear from LIEs that they have no problem taking a job they might not be competent in because it's a way to learn and grow from mistakes or become competent at it over time. Most companies operate this way where once you become competent in a job, you move on to something else you aren't good at and have to become competent at it. It requires a lot of extemporaneous thinking. And it's not uncommon for old problems to resurface when somebody takes a new job then. But now that I recall I think Peterson said he was against that because it's a bit dysfunctional or something (I could be wrong though, I only followed him for a little while out of curiosity). And he's right then, but part of growing and learning is being incompetent and making mistakes and fixing them and doing better on the next try.
    I'd have to hear the quote to see what you mean, it doesn't sound congruent with what I know about him.

    I think some LIEs might not appreciate the whole competence thing keeping them from getting and succeeding in more rewarding or lucrative jobs (or even being able to try for that matter).
    Less ethically aware Gammas might define competence as "the ability to get what you want" (e.g., money). But as always you have to go based on what is there, not what isn't.

  4. #1004
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrickyDlck View Post
    He's such a lying, piece of shit grifter that I don't even give a fuck about his type anymore.
    Lying? How so? I don't agree with everything he says, but he at least seems sincere about what he believes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dalek Caan View Post
    Okay, so honest question,

    Do most people really fall into camps of thinking men are responsible for all the wrongs in the world or that feminists want to dominate and put down men or that men just need to stand up for themselves and be men or something?
    The problem is that most of the initial goals of feminism have already been met (voting rights, equal pay for equal work), yet there is a growing faction whose complaints only increase in loudness as they get more of what they want. Moreover this has come at the expense of traditional values which IMO has hurt both men and women alike. (Not to mention the disadvantages that men have which aren't even allowed to enter the conversation.) It's a bit funny to see how Peterson has become popular for the most part for not being a crazy extremist, and yet also having some interesting things to say about the world. It just goes to show how low the bar for public discourse is right now - most people only get heard if they shout something incendiary at the top of their lungs.

  5. #1005
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,806
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    So, Jordan Peterson is LIE and Elon Musk is LSI according to a number of people from this forum.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  6. #1006
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,806
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    For example, I (and hopefully any other reasonable human being) would absolutely agree that taking personal responsibility is important. But am I going to write a whole book telling people to go clean their room and "get their life together"? No, because I don't use Se like that. The valued functions are what you tend to verbalize and criticize others for.
    And do you think LIEs are especially interested in that kind of approach, getting your life together by cleaning your room (the answer is no, it´s even written in numerous descriptions)? Or are you typing him ESI?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  7. #1007
    Olimpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Europe
    TIM
    So/Sx Introvert
    Posts
    7,961
    Mentioned
    717 Post(s)
    Tagged
    8 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    So, Jordan Peterson is LIE and Elon Musk is LSI according to a number of people from this forum.
    They think LSI for Musk mostly because supposedly Gulenko said so
    New Youtube [x] Get Typed! [x]
    Celebs [x] Theory [x] Tumblr [x]

    *********** 21-04-19:
    "Looks like a mystic that just arrived to battle and staring out at the battle, ready to unleash"



  8. #1008
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    And do you think LIEs are especially interested in that kind of approach, getting your life together by cleaning your room (the answer is no, it´s even written in numerous descriptions)? Or are you typing him ESI?
    LIEs are one of the more likely types to emphasize taking personal responsibility for your life and success, yes. The details of what they view as success and how to best accomplish that will differ. What's your typing of him?

  9. #1009
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,806
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    LIEs are one of the more likely types to emphasize taking personal responsibility for your life and success, yes. The details of what they view as success and how to best accomplish that will differ. What's your typing of him?
    So you really think a LIE will say such things as "cleaning your room is the first step to success"? How does that fit into the typical characteristics that socionics attributes to this type?

    Wouldn´t their advice be more likely such things as "pack your stuff and move to somewhere with more opportunities" or "call the owner of your dream company, maybe he´s got a place for you?".

    Anyway, I think he´s an ethical type, mostly because everything he talks about is about ethics - that´s where the focus of his life and work is centered on. Perhaps EII or EIE, Enneagramm 1.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  10. #1010
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,235
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sbbds View Post
    There is nothing sexual about Jordan Peterson.
    Ehem

    [are they super-egos?]

    He has high Ne, alright. I really think EIE but EII could be remote possibility.
    MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type
    Life is a joke but do you have a life?

    Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org

  11. #1011
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by Gulenko
    Posts
    4,671
    Mentioned
    339 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    Ehem

    [are they super-egos?]

    He has high Ne, alright. I really think EIE but EII could be remote possibility.
    I wanted to click like but I’m afraid of more

  12. #1012
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    So you really think a LIE will say such things as "cleaning your room is the first step to success"? How does that fit into the typical characteristics that socionics attributes to this type?
    In my opinion focusing on this kind of thing completely misses the general message of his work. Cleaning your room isn't the point, self-discipline and taking personal responsibility is.

    Wouldn´t their advice be more likely such things as "pack your stuff and move to somewhere with more opportunities" or "call the owner of your dream company, maybe he´s got a place for you?".
    LIEs have demonstrative Ne so they could say that. But they also have mobilizing Se.

    (Actually, those quotes sound a bit too "inspirational" and pie-in-the-sky for LIE in my experience. What the heck is a "dream company" anyways? Sounds like Fe. An LIE is going to advise whatever course of action is likely to lead to success in their estimation.)

  13. #1013
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,806
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    In my opinion focusing on this kind of thing completely misses the general message of his work. Cleaning your room isn't the point, self-discipline and taking personal responsibility is.



    LIEs have demonstrative Ne so they could say that. But they also have mobilizing Se.

    (Actually, those quotes sound a bit too "inspirational" and pie-in-the-sky for LIE in my experience. What the heck is a "dream company" anyways? Sounds like Fe. An LIE is going to advise whatever course of action is likely to lead to success in their estimation.)
    I don´t think we can reach agreement on this point, you are now nitpicking.

    What is your opinion about his type then? LIE-Ni E-6, or something like that?
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  14. #1014
    fka mrrrmaid SaveYourself's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    Lake Lachrymose
    Posts
    354
    Mentioned
    61 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Venus Rose View Post
    He is pretty securely part of the group though. I actually don't feel like he is as divisive as an Sx/So would be. It's pretty easy to like him as a person, even if you don't agree with him. I could be wrong perhaps - but I personally don't have a strong feeling about him. This is antithetical to the reaction Sx/So often fosters in those around him or her, given sufficient time. He, on the other hand, is not really having as strong of an effect as Sx/So does.
    What group is he part of?

    Many adopt him as leader of their group, but afaik he's spoken out against academia, SJWs, the left in general, the right, the alt-right, the media, atheists and men's rights activists - pretty much all the major political / social groups in the current mainstream. I think he's likeable in a charismatic way - lot's of passion and energy - more Sx dom than So.

    He's very divisive, happily takes contrarian positions and seems to enjoy riling people up (i.e. the interview where he outwitted the presenter and laughed at her, saying "gotcha!"). He's an individualist and let's groups adopt him rather than the other way around, and is very clear to distance himself from them if he doesn't feel like he should be their posterboy. All seems very contraflow to me, and I agree with @Olimpia on him being Type 1, and thus being superficially social, focused on civic duty etc.

    He also regularly makes social 'blunders' like saying controversial things in short-form mediums like twitter or interviews where he can't explain himself properly so he has to go back and clarify stuff he's said. That to me is either social last (in that he doesn't know how to present himself) or contraflow (in that he doesn't mind shaking people up by saying controversial things). Given his general interests I'd guess the latter and so Type 1 Sx/So would be my guess.
    "I take back like half of the exclamation points.....they make me look....eager to please. Which I AM....but I don't want anyone to KNOW that"
    - Carrie Fisher

  15. #1015
    Spiritual Advisor Hope's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    Celestial Sli
    Posts
    3,448
    Mentioned
    415 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Idk but ppl typing him LII makes me laugh.

  16. #1016
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    What is your opinion about his type then? LIE-Ni E-6, or something like that?
    Gamma NT

  17. #1017
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    15,766
    Mentioned
    1404 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Venus Rose View Post
    I dunno about the phrasing for the first one, but perhaps it is in line with what I mentioned earlier, it is done in a "provocative" manner. I am not and Se user so I don't try to get a rise out of people in that way
    The mentioned more relates to emotional influence, but not to Se.

  18. #1018
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EII typed by Gulenko
    Posts
    4,671
    Mentioned
    339 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I’d type him EII E1 So/Sp

  19. #1019
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Lying? How so? I don't agree with everything he says, but he at least seems sincere about what he believes.
    The reason he got famous in the first place: claiming that Bill C16 would shut down freedom of speech, even after the Canadian Bar Association (an actual authority on legal matters) came out with a statement explicitly stating the opposite. Either he's knowingly a liar by this point or a complete idiot.

    He would have earned my respect if he were opposed to transgenderism as a matter of principle. I have a lot of time for people who wish to express sincere beliefs, however unpopular they may be. I don't have time for people who spread farfetched conspiracy theories, brazenly ignore the opinion of competent experts, and create (whether intentionally or unintentionally) a climate of mistrust against democratic institutions.

    [EDIT]: I don't want to live in a country where a charismatic individual can sway the public's opinion that the legal system has been hijacked by a cabal of ideologically driven extremists.
    Last edited by xerx; 12-12-2018 at 03:03 AM.

  20. #1020

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    220
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A transgender man is always going to be a woman in a nice custome. Its a kind of mental illness, every cell in that body has distinct sex chromosome amoung the other 23.

    Having said that, let em do what they want fuck we are just smart meat bags and if it makes these minds happy, content, stable, whatever, then by all means.

  21. #1021

    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    220
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post
    They think LSI for Musk mostly because supposedly Gulenko said so
    I typed Musk a couple years ago as LSI. Still do. Found ILE intriguing.

  22. #1022
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrickyDlck View Post
    The reason he got famous in the first place: claiming that Bill C16 would shut down freedom of speech, even after the Canadian Bar Association (an actual authority on legal matters) came out with a statement explicitly stating the opposite. Either he's knowingly a liar by this point or a complete idiot.
    So it wouldn't have required people to use preferred pronouns? I think that was his reading of it.

    He would have earned my respect if he were opposed to transgenderism as a matter of principle.
    Same

  23. #1023

    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    EIE-Ni
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post
    He has sparked controversy in a way that is unusual for So/Sp 1.
    Why exactly is it unusual?

    So/Sp 1 is more often found in Law and similar pursuits. They are more stable and less "impassionate" or socially disruptive, due to the desire to be part of the group.
    For most of his life, Peterson has been an academic professor/clinical psychologist, even worked as an advisor in a law firm, relatively unknown to anyone until the YouTube video surfaced.

    He’s taught mythology to physicians, lawyers, and businessmen; worked with Jim Balsillie, former CEO of Blackberry’s Research in Motion, on Resilient People, Resilient Planet, the report of the UN Secretary General’s High Level Panel on Global Sustainability; helped his clinical clients manage the triumphs and catastrophes of life; served as an advisor to senior partners of major Canadian law firms;
    https://jordanbpeterson.com/about/

    Type 1 is inherently "social" in its focus on morality, just like Type 3 is inherently "social" with its obsession of achieving what is deemed as successful in their society. Type 2 is also inherently "social", in the way they are focused on giving to others. All these types will seem more "social" than they really are, even when SO last.
    This is completely arbitrary. You could easily say Type 2 is also inherently "sexual" or Type 3 is inherently "self-preservation" and you couldn't argue otherwise. A Social last 1, 2 or 3 won't care about Social in the way a Social 1, 2, or 3 will.

    Obviously Jordan Peterson is "social" - he's a type 1, plus has a strong social instinct.
    Or he's obviously "social" because he is Social?

    However, how he has sparked controversy and a "movement"/following of some kind, with a fan base, is much more typical of Sx/So than So/Sp.
    Why are movements only the realm of sx/so? So/Sp can spark movements too. Barack Obama was one of them. Who again was a very charismatic figure to a lot of people. Being charismatic doesn't equal Sexual.

    The Social arena seems to be his area of confidence, which is more typical of a good second instinct. (There's always a bit of self-consciousness surrounding the first instinct.)
    I wouldn't be so sure of this. Peterson's main qualm is wanting to prevent a totalitarian state. He has paintings in his house of Communist Russia to remind him of this (go to 4:35). He talks about The Cold War giving him literal nightmares. He always cites the horrors of World War II. He seems quite neurotic about Social and its ramifications to me.



    There are many videos of his on attraction, relationships, and dynamics between the two sexes.
    Ok you may have a point, but in those videos when he does focus on sexuality or intimate relationships, it can often go back to the Social.

    1st 3 minutes is so SOCIAL, while he mentions sx pretty briefly:



    Can you give me an example where you see his sx in him so I know what you mean?

    Also, the focal point of his controversy - genders - ultimately is an SX subject after all.
    That's another reason why I think he's sx-last because he holds such a rigid view on traditional male/female norms. Yes, that can be influenced by being Type 1, but his reasons for doing so again went back to the Social. He thinks preserving this dichotomy of male/female is beneficial for society. He wouldn't use preferred pronouns because to him it is a form of compelled speech which will lead us to a totalitarian state enforced by cultural Marxists.

    By the way, I think you can still make a case for Peterson being a 6. He's a pretty paranoid guy.

    In contrast, So/Sp tends to be more concerned with issues like environmentalism/climate change, having their focus on SP.
    Why? I really don't think that has to be the case in all cases. Some so/sp probably don't care about climate change. They may focus more on money, health and well-being instead. And some sp-last may care about it if that's their chosen cause.

    You need to see it in the context of Type 1 as well.


    The idea of "Sexual" is mostly Sx/Sp 2/3/4, 7, 8, and often Se ego ("sensual", "physical", etc) Very different from Type 1
    That's a fair point that a Type 1 will be less overtly sexual, more repressive of those urges, but then what do you make of someone like Gandhi? Who to my mind is sx/so 1.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...e-1937411.html

    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...usoom-vadgama/

    That's what neurotic Sx in the 1 looks like to me.

    Sexual 1 is about "zeal", the passion for your moral causes.
    Why is this only the domain of Sexual 1 again? Any 1, or any type for that matter, can show passion for their cause.

    Jordan Peterson is known for shouting and even crying during his talks or interviews. He loses composure too often for someone who is supposedly So/Sp 1.
    That's Fe.
    Last edited by Blue; 12-13-2018 at 03:46 AM.

  24. #1024
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    So it wouldn't have required people to use preferred pronouns? I think that was his reading of it.
    Nothing in the text of the bill even mentions pronouns. All C16 does is add "gender expression" to the list of already protected groups, which includes race and religion. It gives to transgender people the exact same protections from hate crimes that other minorities already have.


    Here is the Canadian Bar Association's full statement.

    http://www.cba.org/CMSPages/GetFile....a-432eeb762d7f

    On page 3, under C-16 Will Not Impede Freedom of Speech, the purpose of hate crime legislation is spelled out. Canada has a very high threshold for language to be considered hate speech; e.g. if it's deliberately used to promote violence against a minority.

    There are no restrictions on casual use of "offensive" language. Moreover, any statement questioning the morality of the transgender lifestyle, even the discussion of curtailing their rights as a minority, is fully protected speech.

  25. #1025

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    TIM
    SLE.Wait...Shit, EII
    Posts
    329
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    LSE imo

    I was thinking I would be alone to vote this ^^

  26. #1026
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrickyDlck View Post
    Nothing in the text of the bill even mentions pronouns. All C16 does is add "gender expression" to the list of already protected groups, which includes race and religion.
    Yes I saw that.

    However, there is the problem that "feeling like the opposite gender" is not always verifiable and can actually be indicative of a mental disorder (much like homosexuality).

    Quote Originally Posted by TrickyDlck View Post
    http://www.cba.org/CMSPages/GetFile....a-432eeb762d7f

    On page 3, under C-16 Will Not Impede Freedom of Speech, the purpose of hate crime legislation is spelled out. Canada has a very high threshold for language to be considered hate speech; e.g. if it's deliberately used to promote violence against a minority.
    According to the document you linked it is actually somewhat more broad: it says to "wilfully promote hatred against them" (emphasis mine). Nothing about violence is required.

    What "hatred" means here is not clear and could easily be expanded.

    Their explanation that hate speech "opposes the targeted group's ability to find self-fulfillment by articulating their thoughts and ideas" is even more unclear.

    There are no restrictions on casual use of "offensive" language. Moreover, any statement questioning the morality of the transgender lifestyle, even the discussion of curtailing their rights as a minority, is fully protected speech.
    Fair enough, but it leaves the question of what the law is actually meant to address in practice. When they do address this they say "In federally regulated workplaces, services, accommodation, and other areas covered by the CHRA, it will constrain unwanted, persistent behaviour (physical or verbal) that offends or humiliates individuals on the basis of their gender identity or expression."

    Which actually makes the pronoun thing plausible - if you're working at a publicly funded university, that is.

  27. #1027
    Feeling fucking fantastic golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Second story
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,724
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    However, there is the problem that "feeling like the opposite gender" is not always verifiable and can actually be indicative of a mental disorder (much like homosexuality).
    Except for among fundamentalists, the medical professions in the U.S. have moved on from framing homosexuality as a disorder.

    Generally, a client or patient can have an ego-syntonic or ego-dystonic mental disorder, ie, either their disorder distresses them, or it doesn’t. A typical ego-syntonic, non-self-distressing disorder might be narcissistic personality disorder. Pathological narcissists are usually pleased enough with how they are, yet they cause suffering to other people. By contrast, someone with major depressive disorder likely is suffering from it and wants the disorder to be mitigated.

    Homosexuality can cause distress to oneself or others, but that arises largely from social stigma. Take away the stigma, the distress resolves.

    Fair enough, but it leaves the question of what the law is actually meant to address in practice. When they do address this they say "In federally regulated workplaces, services, accommodation, and other areas covered by the CHRA, it will constrain unwanted, persistent behaviour (physical or verbal) that offends or humiliates individuals on the basis of their gender identity or expression."

    Which actually makes the pronoun thing plausible - if you're working at a publicly funded university, that is.
    Thank you. This is where I think either Peterson himself or his audience get into an area of dishonesty and/or confusion. A law like this would apply only in certain contexts, and it would be a basis for civil action, not criminal.
    LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”

    Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”

    LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”

  28. #1028
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Yes I saw that.

    However, there is the problem that "feeling like the opposite gender" is not always verifiable and can actually be indicative of a mental disorder (much like homosexuality).
    This question is above my pay grade, but according to https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/...ction-319.html, hate speech does not include truthful statements. If the idea that "gender expression" is fundamentally at odds with our scientific understanding of biological sex, then the matter could (and IMO should) be fought in court.


    According to the document you linked it is actually somewhat more broad: it says to "wilfully promote hatred against them" (emphasis mine). Nothing about violence is required.

    What "hatred" means here is not clear and could easily be expanded.

    Their explanation that hate speech "opposes the targeted group's ability to find self-fulfillment by articulating their thoughts and ideas" is even more unclear.

    Fair enough, but it leaves the question of what the law is actually meant to address in practice. When they do address this they say "In federally regulated workplaces, services, accommodation, and other areas covered by the CHRA, it will constrain unwanted, persistent behaviour (physical or verbal) that offends or humiliates individuals on the basis of their gender identity or expression."

    I was using violence as one example. Because of its origin as an Anglosaxon-ish country, Canadian law often uses precedent (judgments from previous trials) to define multifaceted terms like hatred. The document links to a landmark supreme court ruling R. v. Keegstra, wherein the Supreme Court ruled against an antisemitic teacher who taught his students that Jews were in control of socialism, capitalism, and communism, and intended to destroy the Christian way of life.

    Quote Originally Posted by R v. Keegstra
    The next feature of the provision that must be explored is the phrase "promotes hatred against any identifiable group". Given the purpose of the provision to criminalize the spreading of hatred in society, I find that the word "promotes" indicates active support or instigation. Indeed the French version of the offence uses the verb "fomenter", which in English means to foment or stir up. In "promotes" we thus have a word that indicates more than simple encouragement or advancement. The hate-monger must intend or foresee as substantially certain a direct and active stimulation of hatred against an identifiable group. As for the term "identifiable group", s. 318(4) states that an ""identifiable group" means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion or ethnic origin". The act to be targeted is therefore the intentional fostering of hatred against particular members of our society, as opposed to any individual.

    ...

    Hatred is not a word of casual connotation. To promote hatred is to instil detestation, enmity, ill-will and malevolence in another. Clearly an expression must go a long way before it qualifies within the definition in [s. 319(2)].

    ...

    Hatred is predicated on destruction, and hatred against identifiable groups therefore thrives on insensitivity, bigotry and destruction of both the target group and of the values of our society. Hatred in this sense is a most extreme emotion that belies reason; an emotion that, if exercised against members of an identifiable group, implies that those individuals are to be despised, scorned, denied respect and made subject to ill-treatment on the basis of group affiliation.
    There is a stringent requirement that the person initiates hatred (i) very willingly with an objective in mind, (ii) against an entire group as opposed to an individual person, (iii) by provoking intense feelings in order to paint that group as subhuman. (iii) doesn't appear to include raising objections to the protections given to any one group.

    Was the ruling right or wrong, and should speech be policed at all?? I don't know. I can see the argument from both sides. But the law clearly sets out a more nuanced view than "leftists are going to send you to jail for not using a made-up word." This is why I dislike Peterson: his bombastic histrionics, his conspiratorial ramblings that malevolent leftists hold the levers of power, and the chilling way in which he paints people who want equality as genocidal. It isn't because I disagree with his political opinions, some of which are shared by Conservative commentators whose work I enjoy but with whom I can respectfully disagree.


    Which actually makes the pronoun thing plausible - if you're working at a publicly funded university, that is.
    If Universities decide to police pronoun usage, it will probably be on their own initiative as quasi-independent entities, not because of any federal rules.

  29. #1029
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by golden View Post
    Except for among fundamentalists, the medical professions in the U.S. have moved on from framing homosexuality as a disorder.
    Doesn't mean it isn't one...

    Generally, a client or patient can have an ego-syntonic or ego-dystonic mental disorder, ie, either their disorder distresses them, or it doesn’t. A typical ego-syntonic, non-self-distressing disorder might be narcissistic personality disorder. Pathological narcissists are usually pleased enough with how they are, yet they cause suffering to other people. By contrast, someone with major depressive disorder likely is suffering from it and wants the disorder to be mitigated.
    This goes back to our discussion in the other thread - i.e. psychologists don't yet have a way to actually define normal (or abnormal) psychological functioning. So I think I'll take their conclusions with a grain of salt for now.

  30. #1030

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    ILI - C
    Posts
    1,810
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    Doesn't mean it isn't one...
    You don't think ADD is real, yet you think homosexuality is "indicative of a mental disorder." Wow. No wonder you're stuck in Socionics voodoo land.

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post

    This goes back to our discussion in the other thread - i.e. psychologists don't yet have a way to actually define normal (or abnormal) psychological functioning. So I think I'll take their conclusions with a grain of salt for now.
    Is that so? Well, then you should take all your Jungian criteria for what's "normal" and "abnormal" out back and burn it.
    Last edited by Desert Financial; 12-14-2018 at 01:35 AM.

  31. #1031
    Feeling fucking fantastic golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Second story
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,724
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @thehotelambush, do you actually know any uncloseted homosexual people irl? Since I grew up as a theater nerd and moved to a liberal city after, queer folk have been some of the more important people in my life from an early age, and they have often been the kindest, most tolerant, and, when allowed to be themselves, most functional people I’ve known.

    Psychology and psychiatry start from pretty straightforward, obvious (to me) premises, having to do with whether people are able to function well cognitively and emotionally, and whether they are able to align their perceptions and actions with consensus reality. If they are having problems in these domains, the aim is to help them. Given the extraordinary complexity of the brain and human development and behavior, and social conditioning and expectations, it’s only reasonable that there is no single blanket definition for what is normal or abnormal. For example, normal for a 16-year-old Chinese boy is not normal for an 80-year-old Dutch woman. There will be overlap, but not absolute accord.

    And then there is the tidal wave of information streaming in based on neuro imaging and chemical and genetic and epidemiological studies, so much data it is quite clear there are all kinds of consistent, concrete differences between people who from a clinical and self-assessment pov are struggling with disorders, versus controls. The goal would be to find ways to use that information to create new treatments, but that obviously lags behind the accrual of basic knowledge.
    LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”

    Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”

    LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”

  32. #1032
    Adam Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Midwest, USA
    TIM
    ENTJ-1Te 8w7 sx/so
    Posts
    16,229
    Mentioned
    1553 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    I actually know both closeted and uncloseted homosexuals, and one of the guys is kind of a jerk. Actually, two of them are jerks. Others are fine. Some are left-handed.

    Gays are probably no different, intrinsically (except for the sexual preference difference), than anyone else.

  33. #1033
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,475
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karatos View Post
    Is that so? Well, then you should take all your Jungian criteria for what's "normal" and "abnormal" out back and burn it.
    I don't recall having proposed any general criteria as yet. But I do think socionics can help answer that question since it's essentially the only general model we have for normal psychological functioning (albeit very schematic in its current form).

    @golden I have known such people in the past. Being "kind" and "tolerant" is fine but it doesn't mean someone isn't psychologically abnormal.

    Functioning (Te) is dependent on purpose (Ni). For example we'd say an oven is malfunctioning if it's unable to heat food, or if it causes harmful side effects to the user. Its purpose differs from that of a knife, which is to cut food, etc. So, what's the purpose of a human being? If you think that it's to do something vaguely cognitive/emotional and to "align their perceptions and actions with consensus reality" then fine. But it goes quite a bit deeper than that.

    "normal for a 16-year-old Chinese boy is not normal for an 80-year-old Dutch woman"

    "it is quite clear there are all kinds of consistent, concrete differences between people who from a clinical and self-assessment pov are struggling with disorders, versus controls"

    ok, now you're just contradicting yourself. If these consistent differences can be objectively measured, then what makes them normal in one culture and not another? If you relied on self-assessment to decide whether someone was sick physically ("I feel bad so I must be sick") you'd get absurd results - hypochondriacs are now the sickest people in the world. Which is essentially what this transgender nonsense is about in the first place.

  34. #1034
    Feeling fucking fantastic golden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Second story
    TIM
    EIE
    Posts
    3,724
    Mentioned
    250 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    I don't recall having proposed any general criteria as yet. But I do think socionics can help answer that question since it's essentially the only general model we have for normal psychological functioning (albeit very schematic in its current form).

    @golden I have known such people in the past. Being "kind" and "tolerant" is fine but it doesn't mean someone isn't psychologically abnormal.

    Functioning (Te) is dependent on purpose (Ni). For example we'd say an oven is malfunctioning if it's unable to heat food, or if it causes harmful side effects to the user. Its purpose differs from that of a knife, which is to cut food, etc. So, what's the purpose of a human being? If you think that it's to do something vaguely cognitive/emotional and to "align their perceptions and actions with consensus reality" then fine. But it goes quite a bit deeper than that.

    "normal for a 16-year-old Chinese boy is not normal for an 80-year-old Dutch woman"

    "it is quite clear there are all kinds of consistent, concrete differences between people who from a clinical and self-assessment pov are struggling with disorders, versus controls"

    ok, now you're just contradicting yourself. If these consistent differences can be objectively measured, then what makes them normal in one culture and not another? If you relied on self-assessment to decide whether someone was sick physically ("I feel bad so I must be sick") you'd get absurd results - hypochondriacs are now the sickest people in the world. Which is essentially what this transgender nonsense is about in the first place.
    It sounds like we are pretty far apart and won’t come to much agreement on these topics. Patients in traditional medicine most often actually do say, “I feel bad, I am sick,” and go to the doctor and describe the symptoms, are asked to rate their pain, and their descriptions may be imperfect and the diagnosis and treatment complicated and likewise imperfect. Particularly when someone is suffering from a complex illness or syndrome that manifests in many different ways.

    Within psychiatry and psychology themselves, there is no real contradiction in what I said. People at different stages of life have different kinds of problems ... the issues of geriatric and adolescent patients are quite different, and medications even affect their bodies differently. And cultural differences are a factor in when someone does or doesn’t feel psychosocial distress. And despite these differences, there are a lot of commonalities that increasingly can be measured in increasingly objective ways.

    Human beings are complicated and contextualized.

    I find that something like socioncs is far too simple to account for most of what makes people tick. For me, it is only a set of ideas that can add another strand or layer to my views on how people behave. Perhaps you see it differently than that.

    ETA: Linking to an article I just happened to read today on research re genetic development and the timing of onset of certain psychiatric disorders: https://www.sciencenews.org/article/...rs-start-brain

    You can gain a sense of the broad, long-term scope of just this one limited area of research.
    Last edited by golden; 12-15-2018 at 06:49 PM.
    LSI: “I still can’t figure out Pinterest.”

    Me: “It’s just, like, idea boards.”

    LSI: “I don’t have ideas.”

  35. #1035
    Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    TIM
    Your daul
    Posts
    1,549
    Mentioned
    67 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    I don't recall having proposed any general criteria as yet. But I do think socionics can help answer that question since it's essentially the only general model we have for normal psychological functioning (albeit very schematic in its current form).

    @golden I have known such people in the past. Being "kind" and "tolerant" is fine but it doesn't mean someone isn't psychologically abnormal.

    Functioning (Te) is dependent on purpose (Ni). For example we'd say an oven is malfunctioning if it's unable to heat food, or if it causes harmful side effects to the user. Its purpose differs from that of a knife, which is to cut food, etc. So, what's the purpose of a human being? If you think that it's to do something vaguely cognitive/emotional and to "align their perceptions and actions with consensus reality" then fine. But it goes quite a bit deeper than that.

    "normal for a 16-year-old Chinese boy is not normal for an 80-year-old Dutch woman"

    "it is quite clear there are all kinds of consistent, concrete differences between people who from a clinical and self-assessment pov are struggling with disorders, versus controls"

    ok, now you're just contradicting yourself. If these consistent differences can be objectively measured, then what makes them normal in one culture and not another? If you relied on self-assessment to decide whether someone was sick physically ("I feel bad so I must be sick") you'd get absurd results - hypochondriacs are now the sickest people in the world. Which is essentially what this transgender nonsense is about in the first place.
    Yikes.

    This is extremely disappointing to read. Of all the possible positive things you can take from personality theories you chose to be close minded.

  36. #1036
    Dalek Caan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    196
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    I'd have to hear the quote to see what you mean, it doesn't sound congruent with what I know about him.
    I didn't really quote anything, but I looked back to see what he said (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NieOvfs1lu0) and it was that he thought the patriarchy wasn't really a thing because people keep jobs based on if they are competent or not. But he uses a doctor as an example of competence, saying you seek out the most competence doctor. But doctors are highly trained phsyicians with many years of school and experience, so naturally a doctor should be competent. Things get fuzzy when you talk about corporate culture and production; a company could say create a very cheap product that has poor quality and still makes money because people like cheap stuff, but at the same time introduces crappy products into the market that are hard to fix, costly to constantly replace, and don't last long (sometimes this is intentional). So essentially competence becomes what makes money, which is more about economic power, which makes his doctor argument now a bit fuzzy in my opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    The problem is that most of the initial goals of feminism have already been met (voting rights, equal pay for equal work), yet there is a growing faction whose complaints only increase in loudness as they get more of what they want. Moreover this has come at the expense of traditional values which IMO has hurt both men and women alike. (Not to mention the disadvantages that men have which aren't even allowed to enter the conversation.) It's a bit funny to see how Peterson has become popular for the most part for not being a crazy extremist, and yet also having some interesting things to say about the world. It just goes to show how low the bar for public discourse is right now - most people only get heard if they shout something incendiary at the top of their lungs.
    Yeah, there's a lot of social justice stuff now. And Donald Trump getting elected and all the political commentators on youtube are basically talking about all the social justice stuff. I find it a little strange when there's kind of an economic trade war going on with China and the US government is so out of control, we borrow money to keep it functioning, though admittedly most of that is military spending and really that's Bush got us in this mess to begin with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Olimpia View Post
    They think LSI for Musk mostly because supposedly Gulenko said so
    It does kind of seem like that influenced people's perception of him.

    Quote Originally Posted by waddup View Post
    A transgender man is always going to be a woman in a nice custome. Its a kind of mental illness, every cell in that body has distinct sex chromosome amoung the other 23.

    Having said that, let em do what they want fuck we are just smart meat bags and if it makes these minds happy, content, stable, whatever, then by all means.
    It really depends on how you define mental illness. I was reading an article on genome mapping and how there are certain genes that attribute more to feminine qualities that block certain masculine traits and I thought that was interesting because somebody could have all these traits that compile against their chromosomes and make living as their gender seem at odds with themselves. It's also believed that testosterone/estrogen effect gender characteristics of the brain in certain stages of a baby's development, so any genes or anything that effects that can theoretically change the brain. There's also testosterone insensitivity (which might be genetic), where an XY male develops as an XX female, except for not having ovaries, which is incredibly interesting to me. Or intersex people with XXY chromosomes that grow up and choose what gender they may identify with or simply not identify at all.

    It's just kind of stupid to call it a mental illness just because it's abnormal.

  37. #1037

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    ILI - C
    Posts
    1,810
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush View Post
    I don't recall having proposed any general criteria as yet. But I do think socionics can help answer that question since it's essentially the only general model we have for normal psychological functioning (albeit very schematic in its current form).
    Socionics was developed by psychologists. Augustina was a psychologist, Kepinski had a background in psychology, and Jung was essentially a psychologist. Gannushkin, Leonhard, and Lichko all had backgrounds in psychology as well.

    It's inconsistent of you to claim that modern research developed by psychologists should be taken with a grain of salt, while claiming the dated research done by these people who were also psychologists should practically amount to the gospel truth. Your viewpoint on the matter amounts to a rigid kind of fundamentalism that disregards empirical evidence and substantiated explanations for cognition and behavior. Even your definitions for functions amount to some of the most crude, reductionist, simple, and inaccurate shit I've ever seen uttered in typology circles. Functioning is not "Te." Purpose is not "Ni." That's fucking ludicrous.

  38. #1038

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    ILI - C
    Posts
    1,810
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by COOL AND MANLY View Post
    Yikes.

    This is extremely disappointing to read. Of all the possible positive things you can take from personality theories you chose to be close minded.
    It's pretty ironic, isn't it?

    I'm not a psychologist and this shit isn't even my strong suit. But if I took Socionics as seriously as hotelambush does, then I would aggregate as much updated psychological research as possible, because if you lack a broad variety of explanations for why events occur (whether the events involves human behavior, or otherwise), then you will lack a basis to parse out irrelevant data. And if you lack a basis to parse out irrelevant data, then your conclusions have a higher likelihood of being inaccurate.

  39. #1039
    Dalek Caan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    196
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh...BTW, JP does mention how he sees himself in BIG 5. I forgot about it, but here it is
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2jCv9A3AuA, which roughly and simply comes out to

    JP seeing himself as
    *high in extroversion
    *higher in neuroticism
    *relates a lot more to agreeable
    *conscientious
    *higher in openness

    And um, I recall a thread on typology central discussing what each MBTI dimension would correlate to for BIG 5. Being that - https://personalityjunkie.com/08/per...iggs-big-five/


    So roughly, that would make him out as ENFJ in MBTI. And I know there is disagreement about how Socionics and MBTI differ or are similar, but I'm from the point of view that the extroverted types correlate fairly well compared to the introverted types, mainly because of how MBTI describes the J/P dimension.

    So just an "analysis" or whatever, but I find that kind of interesting, given the argument that 4 out of the 5 dimensions of BIG 5 are actually Jungian dimensions, whether we are talking about Socionics or MBTI.

  40. #1040

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    TIM
    ILI - C
    Posts
    1,810
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, Socionics has some detrimental ramifications when you use it to explain all facets of human consciousness because you then run the risk of masking mental conditions. And if you mask your mental conditions with this shit, your chances of seeking legitimate treatment are slim-to-none, because as the adage goes "the first step is admitting you have a problem", and you can't admit you have a problem if you chalk it up to information elements that are considered a normal part of the Model A program. For example, if you think that your "Fi" accounts for chronic depression, then you'll essentially assume your "Fi is working just fine" and neglect to seek help for the underlying issue. If you think your intuition accounts for schizophrenia, etc....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •