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 12 of 32 FirstFirst ... 2891011121314151622 ... LastLast
Results 441 to 480 of 1272

Thread: Jordan Peterson

  1. #441

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    I don't really care about that and it wasn't the main drift of the original line of thought.

    PS you should be sorry, everything under the sun earth and moon is about socionics.
    OK then I don't know what you were reacting to with the shrug emoticon.

    PS: I wasn't genuinely sorry about that

  2. #442

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    OK then I don't know what you were reacting to with the shrug emoticon.
    Just not much more to say to what you said. You find it trivial and then it probably is, to you. I'm not here to convince so shrug. AS far as negative things go, not letting them overcome you is the way to go, still there is a complex thing in place that makes people stuck and its not so simple. Simple for you, maybe because of your make-up and up bringing so congrats on that without any sarcasm. Still this plays back into my original thought process about you not being able to fully appreciate/understand the challenges that people like Petterson are trying to help people overcome. I admire your simplicity though, it is invigorating to me.


    ( Lol btw at people thinking I'm literally like Jordan, him and I are nothing alike, hes a book worm dork and I like spending my time outside in the sun.)

    PS: I wasn't genuinely sorry about that
    No kidding, I had not figured that.

    So I shrugged. It's basically like I feel around people like yourself, trying to educate is a kinda long process that takes months and months of separate micro-conversations and scenarios to get onto the same page. Not that its negative to begin with, just the groundfloor isn't built.

  3. #443

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    Just not much more to say to what you said. You find it trivial and then it probably is, to you. I'm not here to convince so shrug. AS far as negative things go, not letting them overcome you is the way to go, still there is a complex thing in place that makes people stuck and its not so simple. Simple for you, maybe because of your make-up and up bringing so congrats on that without any sarcasm. Still this plays back into my original thought process about you not being able to fully appreciate/understand the challenges that people like Petterson are trying to help people overcome. I admire your simplicity though, it is invigorating to me.
    OK, I see what you mean


    ( Lol btw at people thinking I'm literally like Jordan, him and I are nothing alike, hes a book worm dork and I like spending my time outside in the sun.)
    Oh, no, I see no real similarity between you and him. Your reasoning style is very different.


    No kidding, I had not figured that.

    So I shrugged. It's basically like I feel around people like yourself, trying to educate is a kinda long process that takes months and months of separate micro-conversations and scenarios to get onto the same page. Not that its negative to begin with, just the groundfloor isn't built.
    Well, in return for the invigorating simplicity...?

    Anyway, no worries, thanks for the discussion.

  4. #444

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post




    Well, in return for the invigorating simplicity...?
    Sure, fair trade then

  5. #445
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    uh-oh, you got PETTERSONED.

    don't worry man it happens to everyone.
    yeah, he seems pretty intelligent. I've been watching some other videos and he's really good at extemporaneously explaining issues in great detail and with very vivid imagery. I'm kind of jealous how easy it seems for him to articulate big issues without getting his words mixed up. I have a harder time saying what I'm seeing/thinking and keeping my thoughts so collected. He's like a fuckin' Jedi master, lol.
    good bye

  6. #446
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    He's completely misrepresented bill C-16. The Canadian Bar Association (an actual authority on legal matters, unlike Peterson) has come out with a strongly worded statement RE: why C-16 does NOT legislate compelled speech.

    https://www.cba.org/News-Media/News/...n-on-Bill-C-16

    Quote Originally Posted by CBA
    Recently, the debate has turned to whether the amendments will force individuals to embrace concepts, even use pronouns, which they find objectionable. This is a misunderstanding of human rights and hate crimes legislation.
    Quote Originally Posted by CBA
    The distinction between the expression of repugnant ideas and expression which exposes groups to hatred is crucial to understanding the proper application of hate speech prohibitions. Hate speech legislation is not aimed at discouraging repugnant or offensive ideas. It does not, for example, prohibit expression which debates the merits of reducing the rights of vulnerable groups in society. It only restricts the use of expression exposing them to hatred as a part of that debate. It does not target the ideas, but their mode of expression in public and the effect that this mode of expression may have.
    tl;dr version:

    - nobody is going to force you to use pronouns you don't approve of.

    - nobody cares if you publicly call into question the use of pronouns or the morality of being transgender. Those are ideas, and ideas aren't affected by the legislation.


    The only way to get charged under C-16 is to wilfully promote hatred with the likelihood of breaching the peace (e.g. promoting genocide and/or ethnic cleansing). Having a bigoted opinion doesn't necessarily make it hate speech. Hate speech in Canada is defined by the manner in which it is articulated, not the ideas it attempts to convey, and is reserved solely for expressions of the utmost opprobrium (CBA's choice of word).


    All C-16 does is give transgender people the exact same protections other minorities already have under the criminal code. Hate crimes against race are already legislated against in the same way-- they have been for decades-- and no one goes to jail just for using racial slurs or refusing to use politically correct designations. Moreover, laws very similar to C-16 already exist on the provincial level, including Peterson's home province, and he hasn't been shipped off to the Feminist Gulag yet.


    But hyperbole sells books, I guess.
    Last edited by xerx; 05-25-2018 at 04:27 AM. Reason: slight wording tweak.

  7. #447
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Oh, I just looked up his thoughts on gender.

    He seems to think gender is a social contract, more akin to a performance that people agree on. He focuses on gender expression and temperament to explain gender differences. And thinks you can have feminine men and masculine women and that gender is created and molded on a social level. So he uses that reasoning to imply gender dysphoria and gender identity don't really exist. It just sounds like another person that doesn't understand the severe dysphoria trans people feel. And yeah, that sounds very "Fe".

    And I honestly don't get it. Why do people like him feel so offended by other people wanting to live authentically? I mean, they will go through each and every way to reason against gender dysphoria being a real thing. I mean wow; it's so bizarre. I guess that's how homosexuals must have felt in like the 60s or something.
    good bye

  8. #448

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strangeling View Post
    Oh, I just looked up his thoughts on gender.

    He seems to think gender is a social contract, more akin to a performance that people agree on. He focuses on gender expression and temperament to explain gender differences. And thinks you can have feminine men and masculine women and that gender is created and molded on a social level. So he uses that reasoning to imply gender dysphoria and gender identity don't really exist. It just sounds like another person that doesn't understand the severe dysphoria trans people feel. And yeah, that sounds very "Fe".

    And I honestly don't get it. Why do people like him feel so offended by other people wanting to live authentically? I mean, they will go through each and every way to reason against gender dysphoria being a real thing. I mean wow; it's so bizarre. I guess that's how homosexuals must have felt in like the 60s or something.
    I don't know what exactly gender dysphoria feels like... but I'm also not seeing why gender being a social construct (a social construct does exist for it beyond the biology) would preclude gender dysphoria from existing.

    I do think gender identity exists with several components to it. The abstract feeling (emotionally, sortof... Fe?) of being one gender isn't the same as the sensation of one's own body (including its sex), let alone the same as the body image one has of one's own body (including its sex). I can imagine how that can create distress if there is mismatch between any of those components. I can imagine it being upsetting, not feeling good in one's own body. Maybe this isn't what gender dysphoria is about though, I don't know about its exact mechanisms.

    Now if the dysphoria is simply about feeling like one isn't treated "well" according to their real gender identity that has no physical proof, I will be just as non-understanding of it as Peterson lol sorry I just do find it stupid. If one does care to the point of getting their body changed, okay, then fine, they'll be easily treated accordingly to the new physical appearance, but if they don't bother doing that, then shut up and don't cry. It just seems like roleplaying to me at that point. Can't expect others to accommodate that if the person isn't bothered to do anything themselves to change their appearance accordingly. Feel free to correct me on any of the concepts though, like I said, I have not read up enough on the topic.
    Last edited by Myst; 05-02-2018 at 09:52 AM.

  9. #449
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    I don't know what exactly gender dysphoria feels like... but I'm also not seeing why gender being a social construct (which it is) would preclude gender dysphoria from existing.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1bgcK1UK38&t=1s

    "the idea that gender identity is independent of biological sex is insane" - Jordan Peterson
    And he talks about gender being a social construct of roles and little more than a "performance".

    So I don't know. But that's what he thinks.


    I do think gender identity exists with several components to it. The abstract feeling (emotionally, sortof... Fe?) of being one gender isn't the same as the sensation of one's own body (including its sex), let alone the same as the body image one has of one's own body (including its sex). I can imagine how that can create distress if there is mismatch between any of those components. Maybe this isn't what gender dysphoria is about though, I don't know about its exact mechanisms.
    Yes, "mismatch" - emotionally, physically, and sexually. It doesn't ever go away, until transition. Actually I wouldn't even say it's even about identity really. That's a misleading term because anyone can "identify" as anything, but it's much more about wanting to be "authentic".

    Now if the dysphoria is simply about feeling like one isn't treated "well" according to their real gender identity that has no physical proof, I will be just as non-understanding of it as Peterson lol sorry I just do find it stupid. If one does care to the point of getting their body changed, okay, then fine, they'll be easily treated accordingly to the new physical appearance, but if they don't bother doing that, then shut up and don't cry. It just seems like roleplaying to me at that point. Can't expect others to accommodate that if the person isn't bothered to do anything themselves to change their appearance accordingly. Feel free to correct me on any of the concepts though, like I said, I have not read up enough on the topic.
    Maybe he mixes up identity with being trans.
    good bye

  10. #450

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strangeling View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1bgcK1UK38&t=1s

    "the idea that gender identity is independent of biological sex is insane" - Jordan Peterson
    And he talks about gender being a social construct of roles and little more than a "performance".

    So I don't know. But that's what he thinks.
    Lol why is it insane. (Rhetorical question. If I have time I'll watch the video later.) I can see them being fully independent just fine... that is, at least certain components of gender identity can be fully independent which is the same result. To me actually the insane idea is to assume that they must always go together since it's not the exact same brain areas that account for each.


    Yes, "mismatch" - emotionally, physically, and sexually. It doesn't ever go away, until transition. Actually I wouldn't even say it's even about identity really. That's a misleading term because anyone can "identify" as anything, but it's much more about wanting to be "authentic".
    OK so I imagined that right. I can imagine it being very bad, actually. Even without "authenticity" issues


    Maybe he mixes up identity with being trans.

  11. #451

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    He has good and bad ideas. Not everything he says is gospel and some I categorically disagree with. But Im not American so Im not brainwashed into thinking like a polarized zombie.

  12. #452
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by timber View Post
    He has good and bad ideas. Not everything he says is gospel and some I categorically disagree with. But Im not American so Im not brainwashed into thinking like a polarized zombie.
    Yeah, it's totally not polarized to believe all Americans think like that.

  13. #453
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Peterson likes to emphasise his own victimhood in a dramatic (some might say melodramatic) fashion.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ-M5MgqVOo

    Quote Originally Posted by Peterson
    I think the Ontario human rights tribunal is obligated to bring me in front of it. If they fine me, I won't pay it. If they put me in jail, I'll go on a hunger strike.

    It's not the straightforward victim-ness of SJWs, but it is very much the martyr-complex of a lone man standing up against a powerful & terrible adversary-- the old David vs. Goliath trope. I like the guy's input on Jungian psychology, but I do wish he took the time to be less hyperbolic & more factual when representing the views he doesn't like.

  14. #454

    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    2,018
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
    Yeah, it's totally not polarized to believe all Americans think like that.
    Simmer down. Lol. Its not what you think its how and that wouldn’t be a stretch to say at all, even if its not universally true all the time everywhere.

    Ps its a joke ermmmm

  15. #455
    bye now
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    You sound Mystified.
    good bye

  16. #456
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm very ambivalent about Jordan Peterson.

    On the one hand, he's correct that liberal parties have abandoned the traditional working class across the developed world. His psychological insights are also certainly worthwhile and interesting.

    On the other hand, while dishing out extreme vitriol against the left's identity politics, he'll often pass over the identity politics of the right. I don't think he's a racist or anything, and he'll pay lip service to problems with the right-wing, but the vitriol of his rhetoric is reserved for the left and is clearly supportive of conservative (centre-right) political parties while he attempts to give the impression of a neutral arbiter.

    On a segment with Bill Maher, he suggested that the left should try to give more respect to Trump voters instead of constantly slandering them as idiots. I actually agree with that, seeing that many probably voted for Trump out of economic desperation and don't appear to be racist. But then again, why isn't he advocating equal respect for SJWs and the so-called "postmodernists"-- why does respect only run in one direction?

  17. #457
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    in peterson's eyes the post modernists are special because their approach is fundamentally different than the trump supporters. trump supporters may be dumb but they're not advancing a radical epistemological ideology, their position is more one of ignorance. peterson would say post modernists aren't the same as trump supporters just on the other side of the political divide, he would say they occupy a special position of ideological possession that rises above the merely political left/right but functions as a threat to discourse itself, which is necessary for the left/right to work out their differences. in other words left/right is dichotomy that can be dialectically mediated but the post modern position is not "left" within that dichotomy but rather a new dimension that threatens to subsume the left/right dichotomy in a flood of nihilistic totalitarianism.. in other words, it is a mistake to consider post-modernism left, rather what post modernism stands for is a threat to that which the left and right work out solutions to their problems, which is rational discourse, which post-modernism would explode (in peterson's eyes) in favor of pure power dynamics

  18. #458
    Moderator xerx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Miniluv
    Posts
    8,044
    Mentioned
    217 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If grownup Trump supporters can be ignorant, then college-aged SJWs can be ignorant.

    Moreover, the idea that the left is somehow unique in monopolising discourse is ridiculous. If leftist faculties act in a reactionary manner towards right-wing ideas, what are we to make of right-wing faculties that don't have the time for left-wing ideas. Should economics departments give equal time to Marxist economics now? And what about business schools, which are some of the largest faculties and arguably even more influential on society.

    I'm not saying that SJWs are right, but why does the left always have to be the one to bend over.

  19. #459
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    if you think peterson is attacking college aged SJWs when he criticizes post modernism you've got him wrong. he thinks of college students as at best the marionettes of the intellectuals who run the universities. you could say its out of concern for those kids hes going after the post modernists; think of them as unfortunate collateral damage like civilians caught up in the matrix, when they conflict with peterson

  20. #460

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    3,605
    Mentioned
    264 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Peterson attacks the post-modernists, because he's stuck in the past and a little late. Post-modernism is an intellectual movement that arose in the 60's and 70's, and culminated in the 80's and 90's which ended up with the "Science Wars", which I think pretty much settled that post-modernism is a sham and has no substance.

    I guess it's only timely with the rise of Trump and things like "fake news", but that could also be because Trump is also a guy who's stuck in the 80's and 90's.

    Quote Originally Posted by xerx View Post
    Should economics departments give equal time to Marxist economics now? And what about business schools, which are some of the largest faculties and arguably even more influential on society.
    Teach the Controversy.

  21. #461
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Observations by various people in the thread, things that I think say something, have some truth in them:


    Quote Originally Posted by April
    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."

    . . .

    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."
    Quote Originally Posted by 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.
    Quote Originally Posted by ouronis
    ust wanted to post some more impressions...

    His professed hate for postmodernism seems to ironically be quite clearly the rejection of the same shadow he advocates others to know. His views are practically all postmodern except for in name.

    He works like a dog. He advocates basically that people live up to the self-actualization that lives up to their core (big 5) personality traits. Someone like him that's conscientious should work work work and that'll make them happy. Someone who's egocentric should delight in fighting. Someone who's extraverted can't live in an introvert's world, etc.

    While working like a dog, he almost (not quite) presents himself as the soft sciences' Elon Musk. He wants to singlehandedly change education and the way people think about myths. He wants to elevate rationality (in the form of studies) to a highest good. He is leading a witchhunt against accused postmodernists to erase their wishy-washiness from the discourse.
    Quote Originally Posted by anndelise
    He seems genuinely upset at being misunderstood and mischaracterized. Misunderstanding and mischaracterizing is the kind of a thing that people typing someone else tend to do. The majority don't double check their typings, don't try to prove it wrong, don't expand their understanding of the person, and often only use minimal information for typing them. They also rarely, if ever, check with the person they are typing to see how well that person identifies with the typing, and what the typer could have done for better accuracy. Basically, the only feedback usually sought is how much group consensus there might be, regardless of the actual accuracy of the group's members.

    It's also possible that I completely misread his body language and some of his voice tones.
    But even then, his letters showed a persistence in something...maybe making a point, maybe clearing up the mischaracterization, maybe genuine astonishment that he could ever have been considered as part of the alt-right, or other possibilities.

    . . .
    One thing I've noticed about him is that there's a clear differences between when he's reading from his papers vs when he's in a more natural element. He's quite animated when he's in a more relaxed setting, but then, most people are.

    . . .
    The jumping between A to E thing is a sign of an Xe base type. Xe isn't social extroversion, it's object oriented. It's easier to think of it as nodes vs connections between nodes. An Xe type's thoughts jump around between the nodes, while an Xi's thoughts attend more to how those nodes are connected.

    The video I just posted also shows, however, that he does have an awareness of his audience and ways of making them laugh and feel comfortable in these types of classes he provides. And that that comes easily enough to him that he stutters and pauses less often while grouping his thoughts.
    . . .
    Firstly, many people have some weird interpretations of what socionics' Fe means. I've also noticed that when it comes to typing or interacting with high intelligence F types, that the high intelligence can often seem to mask the F, and people interpret the info as coming from T. This man is highly intelligent. He's also highly conscientious (of the hardworking, dedicated sort rather than the orderly sort) and an e1 to boot. That tells us that he was driven to get his understandings of what he's talking about near perfect (as he could at the time). We're not seeing him as he's learning the axioms, nor as he's synthesizing his axioms. We're seeing him after years of discussing, describing, and using his lens and refining his presentations of them. We don't know which information elements were utilized during all that, and which, if any, difficulties he had during the process. That kind of info would give us a far clearer demonstration of his ego elements than his presentations could.

    HP cogstyle is the easiest for me to recognize, probably because it's my style as well. It makes it easier for me to follow along what a person's saying, or at least feel more assured that the jumps between lenses will eventually more fully describe the idea/phenomena that they are describing.

    And on that last note, something else came to mind. Static types focus on the "What" pathway. What something is, what are it's attributes, etc. Dynamic types focus on "Where/How" pathway. The direction something's going in, how to best utilize the levers for changing the system, etc. In every single video I've seen of this guy, his focus is like, 75%, or more, on the where/how pathway and definitely not on the what pathway.

    So again, another thing that drops LII lower on the possibility scale, imo.


    I think my own posts show a clear HP cogstyle. I use a variety of lenses to observe this guy, and from the observations and interpretations through each of these lenses I create a clearer understanding of the guy (assuming my lenses, observations, and interpretations are somewhat accurate, and that he's not wearing masks). Through some lenses I can see LII, LSI, EIE, ILI, and LIE as maybe describing what I've seen of him. But when the hologram is put together, the type that seems to fit the most, imo, is EIE, followed by ILI.

    Can I give you a CD cogstyle answer/reasoning? No. And I don't feel a need to, though I can understand that CD types might feel inclined to dismiss the HP approach.
    Quote Originally Posted by Milo
    This quote in particular reads a lot like Ti (coherence, consistency, sense of structure) and introversion:

    J.Peterson.
    "I always feel when I talk whether or not the words I'm saying are either making me aligned or making me come apart. I really do think alignment - I think alignment is the right way of coceptualizing it, if you say things as true as you can say them - then they come up, they come out of the depths inside of you."
    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
    If I go by cognition style it is dialectical-algorithmic. Strong . ILI vs EIE...
    I think he makeshift some errors regarding source material.
    For example
    https://youtu.be/hDmPZj6ym9U
    If you search material when it comes to this then you will notice lack of cross referencing regarding certain kinds of information (as it is now reduced to trash bin diagnosis where there is a lot wiggle room ie opposite cases. For example too abstract and unable to be abstract).
    Quote Originally Posted by silke
    SX-1 is a very fitting enneagram approximation for this guy. He exemplifies Naranjo's description of SX-1s as having "zeal". There is just so much zeal infusing everything Peterson has to say, or as Naranjo puts it: "The intensity of the desire itself makes rationalization almost imperative."

    In Jordan Peterson's own words, he has fully rejected the social realm at a very early age in favor of individual and personal approach, much like C. G. Jung whose works he commonly references, and who is also typed as SX/SP in the enneagram communities.

    Jordan Peterson: "You know I’ve thought for a long time about a political career, really forever, since I was like twelve, really for a long time. And I’ve always decided against it because it seemed to me that the proper level of analysis, with regards to the solution of the problem that we’re facing, isn’t political. And that’s why I think it’s a mistake when what I’m doing gets politicized, even by me or other. I think that the way that you deal with this is to put yourself together, I really believe that, because I think that individual people are far more powerful, they’re certainly far more evil than their willing to consider. That’s also a sign of their unbelievable power. So, I think what you do is, aim high and put yourself together and stay the hell away from the ideologues. Because they’re hiding behind a wall and not able to come out and fight on their own behalf. And so, the way forward through the ideological mess, and that’s the lesson of Western culture, is place the individual at the place of paramount importance and to make the group identity emergent only when necessary, and secondarily if ever."
    Quote Originally Posted by wacey
    Hmm see I get a opposite impression. His voice is so squeezed so that tells me his nerves are closing his voicebox frequently, which says he is nervous - maybe even out of touch with the physical manifestations of his nerves. He makes no attempt to correct his voice by relaxing, as though he in unaware of how it feels.

    His physical body looks slightly emaciated. Not to say that you cant look this way as a thin, older gentleman, still impression wise he seems out of touch with his body, or at the very least unconcerned with it to be in ego block. Does he bother feeding himself? Sorry im not being insulting when I say that.

    His eyes look very tired most of the time, which is fine dont we all look a bit bagged from life. Still, some sensing disconnect there. He has pale skin, and doesnt appear to me to be a man who bothers worry about sensing concerns himself - although I am speculating.

    Overall I see a man who is constantly in his head thinking about life, appearing to lack that kind of physical rootedness I associate with sensing in ego.

    That he gesticulates is not a factor in this equation. That could simply be he is a hand talker. I'm a little bit dismayed that alpha NTs are not given due credit for how fervent and passionately they can discuss ideas on any number of topics. They are extremely idealistic and diplomatic, far more than gammas who focus on personal convictions (Fi) as juxtaposed to universal diplomatics ( for lack of a better term) in alpha, which is the inclusiveness of Fe with system thinking.

    For instance, "why should some people need billions of dollars if they cannot possibly spend that entire amount in a single lifetime" -ESE

    Further, is anyone aware of who Robespierre was? LIIs namesake? One of the leaders of the french "Reign of Terror", whose ideas was responsible for the motivation to behead thousands of people.
    Quote Originally Posted by CrossRoads
    I think he resonates with a lot of people because the subjects he brings to light are universal in the sense that they touch upon terrifying existential aspects of the human condition that manifest in everyone's life in some form or other. This is why modern counselling and psychotherapy incorporate central ideas taken from the humanist and existential psychotherapy schools (i.e. finding meaning in a "meaningless world", confronting existential anxiety, living congruently and strengthening the internal locus of control). For this reason, I don't see why his ideas would be more or less relevant to certain types/quadras.

    Now, with regard typing him....I have no clue where to start! Although, I am very interested in this question. My husband, whose type I have not confidently determined (other than he is most certainly some kind of logical intuitive type), finds his lectures and talks to be overly emotional, and I think this puts him off somewhat. The subject interests him, but there is something in the delivery that sits uncomfortably with him. Whether this is related to Sociotype or not is not clear, but it's something I was thinking about recently.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seraph
    I've been watching his lectures for over a year and all I see is IEI. He has Beta values with very strong Ni and fairly good Ti. I'm currently reading his book and it's the most Beta thing I've ever read. The focus is symbolism, hierarchy, social order and human nature. He is really big on hierarchy being a good thing and he wrote an entire chapter about it. He has a dark, pessimistic view that "life is suffering", far from the rosy, carefree Alpha life outlook. He says in his book and many videos that according to him living a meaningful life is far better than trying to live a happy life.

    . . .
    In his quote I don't think he meant be passive. I think he meant speak truth to power and accept the consequences honorably.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seraph
    But volitional strength is about having strength of character not just physical strength. Being strong enough to withstand the blows of life is how he describes strength in his book. Sounds pretty Se to me.
    I think Se and Beta values in general are misunderstood and viewed so negatively to the point that people have a hard time seeing a good person or whatever as a Beta. Beta doesn’t always mean tyrannical fascist. (Not saying you said that though.)
    Also, harmlessness = virtuousness is something that Deltas tend to believe. I always felt like he was talking directly to the Delta rationals with that quote.

    I don’t think that simply being concerned with humanity’s capacity for evil/ destruction is inherently a gamma thing. It depends what exactly a person’s views are on that topic. JP believes that we all have the capacity for evil within us. This is different than Fi which makes a clear distinction between “good people” and “bad people” and seeks to condemn and punish the “bad people”. He is concerned with a universal human nature which in my experience gamma’s don’t really believe in. They see each person as an individual with their own individual nature. When JP talks about moral behaviour it’s always qualified by it’s external validity ie. how it affects society/ humanity, not how he feels about it as an individual. This is how Fe types conceptualise morality. When he talks about speaking the truth (logic) it’s always in terms of it’s internal validity ie. what aligns with your soul, something that comes from within. This seems clearly to be objective ethics and subjective logic.

    He is going over history and mapping the patterns throughout time into archetypal overarching concepts. If that’s not Ni I don’t know what is. Neither psychology nor religion requires doing that. What he’s doing is actually quite atypical for traditional psychology and is something closer to philosophy.

    When Ni perceives the physical world they don’t see the objective sensory aspects, they see things as physical representations of a static concept. (Ne sees the dynamic associations and possibilities for what things could be.) If the person also values Ti they will be attuned to metaphor/ analogy because Ti notes logical consistency between things and makes analogies. How seemingly unrelated things work the same way and follow the same underlying logic. This is how symbols and metaphors work. Hence why IEIs (as well as EIE and to some extent LSI) pay attention to symbolism.

    Feeling disgusted by mass murderers and psychopaths is a common reaction and not indicative of Fi. Simply having ethical standards in general is not Fi. What matters is whether those standards are internally or externally derived. The Fe types usually dislike antisocial behaviour (lack of empathy, disregard for others, especially those within the same group as you).
    Anyways whenever he mentions these people it’s so that he can analyze them and understand why they did what they did (Ni/Ti), not to condemn or judge them in a moral way (Fi).
    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    kip to around 3:00, it's entirely about Se (the concept of play fighting).
    It would contradict the idea that he is unaware of real-world political relations, he spends quite a bit of time dissecting them.


    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha[/quote
    would an si valuer talk about this in a different way, or would they avoid this altogether?
    An Se Vulnerable type would probably not be comfortable talking about an Se topic directly for so long.
    But most Si valuers would tend to find the kind of information he is presenting to be a somewhat distasteful subject, at least not one they would bring up themselves.


    This: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...=1#post1251624
    "You don't know what you want" and "accept the outcome" doesn't imply passivity at all to me (in fact it sounds rather forceful). I'd like to see the quote in context.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seraph
    “Life without depth is by definition shallow and meaningless”.
    I don’t know any Alpha who would honestly care about their life being shallow. Sometimes I feel like they almost prefer it that way because they want everything light and positive and carefree. They just want to relax with some good food and make jokes and pleasant conversation.

    “Life is not that simple, life is complex and tragic and difficult” <— this is the antithesis of everything Alpha

    Things he is emphasizing in the video:
    The quality of your life depends on how meaningful it is (Ni)
    You need to have a wide range of emotions to deal with life, not just happiness (Fe, the Beta kind)
    He dislikes the fact that people don’t feel comfortable expressing their true feelings of suffering because of the demands for a happy atmosphere all the time. (Betas value real/ intense emotional expression over constant positivity which is Alpha)
    All of this is clear valuing of Ni/Fe over Si/Fe

    . . .
    The possibilities themselves don’t always have to be positive but there does need to be open possibilities. An ILE who doesn’t create open discussions with room for various possibilities or who doesn't want to explore different ideas at all isn’t an ILE.

    In this video Peterson makes closed off, single line of thinking statements. It’s like he’s saying this is how it is and this is the only way it is. He doesn’t leave room for discussion or any other options. It's very Ne ignoring.

    . . .
    @ 3:00: "Your pointing your eyes at it, your pointing your whole damn soul at it. Your aiming at something and you're trying to get your behaviours and perceptions in line and organized so that you can attain that aim. That's what people do: we throw rocks at things, we fire arrows at things, we shoot guns at things. We AIM at things. Our whole body is that platform for for aiming." <-- doesn't get anymore Ni/Se than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen
    Jordan Peterson strikes me as a man who has felt powerless for most of his life in relation to others and is working on regaining his sense of personal power. This video specifically changed my perception of him and I kept thinking what a victimy guy (not romance style victim).
    Quote Originally Posted by Kill4Me
    I'm sick of seeing socionic functions conflated to belief systems. Morality is a value judgment. Socionic functions are information processors. Fi is an information processor. Information processing is value-neutral.
    Quote Originally Posted by Aylen
    If fb is a good gauge of social trends then I am seeing way more people who like him than those who don't. The appeal is not quadra related. He is appealing to the masses. No surprise there considering Trump is president. Seems humanity is desperately seeking change and/or something to fill their empty spaces ... to find some meaning in their lives.
    Quote Originally Posted by ashlesha
    I think part of the reason his type isn't conclusively agreed on (and he's so popular) is that a lot of what he says is pretty universal...people just interpret it through their own filters
    Quote Originally Posted by thehotelambush
    I changed my mind, I think he is EIE now. He actually is very open-minded and an "idea guy", yet displays clear Se values IMO.


    Quote Originally Posted by falsehope
    Let me bring some of his quotes:


    Pain is the only thing that people will never deny.
    Everybody acts out a myth,
    but very few people know what their myth is.
    And you should know what your myth is,
    because it might be a tragedy.
    And maybe you don't want it to be.
    Weak and miserable as I am, I can still stand up to the terrible tragedy of life and prevail!
    The truth is something that burns, it burns off deadwood and people don't like having their deadwood burnt off often because they're 95% deadwood
    Love is something like the notion that despite its suffering Being is good and you should serve Being.
    There is nothing more useful in combating the tragedy of life than to struggle with all your soul on behalf of the good.
    The human capacity for eternal transformation is the antidote to unbearable suffering and tragedy.
    Life is suffering, and suffering can make you resentful, murderous, and then genocidal if you take it far enough
    And this very much does support Ni/Fe ego.
    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007
    It is fairly easy to look for plot holes in his message just by doing some research. Wild speculation when little bit more cross referencing shows other kinds of results. It appears stronger than it really is.
    Quote Originally Posted by Gjjbftufufufjj
    edit: logic trumps facts for him, I suspect. Notice his “gotcha” moment with Cathy Newman. A statement is laid out where the logic is very hard to refute. It is put forth in a “fuck your feelings” manner, though his intent doesn’t seem to be making her feel crappy about herself. Nonetheless, it grinds the discussion to a halt as she is left trying to work out and counter his point. It’s like a Star Trek moment with Kirk using logic to cause a malevolent supercomputer to overload.

    on the other hand, when he makes factual arguments, they sometimes come across as the kooky ramblings of a misunderstood holy man.
    Quote Originally Posted by Viktor
    although he has a very crirical mind, I think he is more focused on having an emotional impact on people, rather than just making logical statements. Because he is very logical, he has an image of being a spokesperson of reason and truth, but often he makes statements that are more dramatic than true, which isn't necessarily bad, he has a positive effect on people, but sometimes he sacrifices simplicity for the sake of making a point or to make an impact on people.

    . . .
    I'm rambling, but hopefully you get the point, he's dramatic, talks about the world as if it's a magical heroes journey etc etc, it's -Fe, ladies and gentlemen.

    . . .
    Another interesting point is that EIE has -Ni, which is to be oriented go the past. And what does he keep talkibg about? He keeps talking about western culture, and how we need to stay in touch with it, and that we need to "rescue our father from the whale" or something.

    . . .
    Also, he's Ti seeking, he wants to bring order back to the world, but jordan is not the order, jordan is a poetic mess that rambles about frogs and lobsters for hours

    . . .
    Ti+ is about keeping the existing system instead of making new ones, and that's jordan, he has his lectures on the psychological significance of the bible so he can bribg fresh air ibto christianity, he's trying to make it meaningful again. And sometimes it feels like he's really stretching to justify christianity, imo he twists the bible to make it more digestible for young people, he gives meaning to things that may or may not have been originally intended, but he defends the existing system nontheless, it's Ti+ seeking


    Overall, it's pretty clear that Te is nowhere to be found, but that doesn't mean that he won't appeal to many people in Te quadras as well, as some people pointed out that he speaks of things that are often universally relatable. The Ni/Se discussion was interesting, especially in that the assumption that alphas would support his perspective was shown to be false by alphas who did not at all agree with his perspective, and who thought it was Ni/Se as well, rather than Ne/Si in any way. And no good demonstration of any kind of Ne/Si was shown, even though he "comes across" like an LII in many ways. I do wonder whether sometimes an se vs si comparison is actually an sx vs sp comparison. . . but Ni was shown repeatedly, and no Ne, so I think that probably settles it in this case. I think those making the case for beta NF actually had the best points with the most realistic picture of him overall.

  22. #462
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,051
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    great work@squark, thanks for the sum up

    I agree with the tons of Ni which I think are the most obvious things popping out just everywhere from his works, probably true that his focus is definitely more the one of a F over T, after all he works in the fields of psychology... hmm

    I grew up a sort of gut disgust for this guy, I mean he talks too much and I can't follow most of his reasonings, as if they're going in circles just to make himself talk and talk, and I don't understand the need to make himself such an authority of everything, as if he knows better than anyone how people gotta live, what's right what's wrong and whatever...

    ashlesha's quotes are seriously the stereotyped features of socionics' beta quadra.

  23. #463
    Seed my wickedness The Reality Denialist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Spontaneous Human Combustion
    TIM
    EIE-C-Ni ™
    Posts
    8,207
    Mentioned
    335 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    EIE's are known rebels.

    Puffing up himself.

    Makes me actually think that all this counter stuff is something that enables EIE's to transform themselves when something get them going. I'm actually starting to think that Nietzsche among many other stormers are just EIE's with serious need to prove themselves.
    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

  24. #464

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    I agree with the tons of Ni which I think are the most obvious things popping out just everywhere from his works
    He has Ni but he also has Ne... and it gets to hurt my head nicely when it goes too Ne. Just my own mental experience, sure, but clearly things don't 100% line up.


    probably true that his focus is definitely more the one of a F over T, after all he works in the fields of psychology... hmm
    Actually lots of Logical people are in the field of psychology, especially in the research field like Peterson is. A lot of LIIs and other Logical types do research but they can even try and do therapy etc. I worked with an LII and an ILE consultant for my thesis in cognitive psychology, I worked with an LSI girl too a bit who already wrote hers in the same topic before, and I myself am a Logical type.


    I grew up a sort of gut disgust for this guy, I mean he talks too much and I can't follow most of his reasonings, as if they're going in circles just to make himself talk and talk, and I don't understand the need to make himself such an authority of everything, as if he knows better than anyone how people gotta live, what's right what's wrong and whatever...
    That's actually an LII thing, what you describe: they analyze a lot like that and their Ne creative tries to see what's a good improvement for the external wholeness (Ne), how people should live satisfying such ideas, and their Ti tries to control the chaos with seeing what's right and wrong. It's also the E1 along with it but cognitively it's an LII thing.

    He has this Ne creative as described by Golihov: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Dmitry-Golihov


    ashlesha's quotes are seriously the stereotyped features of socionics' beta quadra.
    The meaninglessness thing made no sense to me personally. I've heard depressed people say it before tho'. Ne also deals with meaning btw, not just Ni.

    Obsession with free discourse is an Alpha thing, not Beta, see quadral complexes and also the difference between Ne and Se besides the Ti ego view.

    Freedom to formulate arguments and whatnot: LxI and more Alpha than Beta, see quadral complexes again.

    The idea on virtues was some Intuitive thing. I've seen all kinds of Intuitive types bring it up before.

    The next quote is on self-control instead of controlling things in the world: LIIs are the most obsessed with that topic.

    The idea on relationships being a wrestling match for transformation is an Intuitive pov. It brings up the Ni theme of transformation, but to me personally it was giving nothing. The Se theme of the wrestling match is as much Se valuing as @thehotelambush 's nick (an ambush i.e. attacking something: Se!! right?!?!). He's self-typing LII and he's pretty much LII.

    The nonsense of the dead father in the library just hurt my head. It's Ne to me. Could also be some Ni in there too but it to me was not leading anywhere like Ni does, I don't see the same consistent internal thread in the reasoning. The reference to chaos is a Ti-lead thing and especially LII here because it's in an Intuitive context.

    The deadwood thing just made no sense so much that I don't care to think about it further. I've seen more than one Intuitive type say this sort of thing though and even non-intuitive types like it sometimes. I personally don't, it's too biased towards negativity. I see zero constructive approach in it. Same as the first quote that I've heard from depressed people.

    OK, that was all of ashlesha's Peterson quotes.

  25. #465

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll Nr 007 View Post
    Makes me actually think that all this counter stuff is something that enables EIE's to transform themselves when something get them going. I'm actually starting to think that Nietzsche among many other stormers are just EIE's with serious need to prove themselves.
    I see no real transformation here. Just talk talk talk. EIEs do actually build emotional relationships with others.

  26. #466
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktor View Post
    @squark ["... but Ni was shown repeatedly, and no Ne, so I think that probably settles it in this case."]

    I think he shows Ne more than any other IE actually, but EIE has 4D Ne. According to Gulenko EIE is basically Fe Ne, he argues that the 4D IE's is what a person uses the most. However, I also have good reasons to believe that he isn't Ne valuing. He often talks about post modernists, and how they claim that there's an infinite number of interpretations of things, which is something that he strongly opposes. Because he argues that, even though that's technically true, there's only a finite number of viable ways to interpret things. I'm paraphrasing, but you get the point. This, among other similar arguments that he makes, shows that he doesn't value Ne imo. He sees all these posibilities, but he wants things to be more single targeted and deeply meaningful
    I hadn't personally noticed any Ne use in particular, and didn't see anyone else pointing it out either, but yes, I do agree that what you're saying is an accurate representation of him. Iow, Ni/Se rather than Ne/Si values.

    As a side note: I know that's Model G's approach, but I think it's kind of weird to look at the demonstrative as the strongest, because you don't actually care about it, so when contrasted with someone who does care about it the usage is very different. It's like a background noise that you don't give much thought to, while they're very tuned-in to it, singing along. It's a little easier to see imo what people consciously focus on.

  27. #467

    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    LIE
    Posts
    722
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Come on! Obviously ESI, even his mimics and facial expressions shout ESI

  28. #468
    Exodus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    8,472
    Mentioned
    332 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Singu View Post
    Peterson attacks the post-modernists, because he's stuck in the past and a little late. Post-modernism is an intellectual movement that arose in the 60's and 70's, and culminated in the 80's and 90's which ended up with the "Science Wars", which I think pretty much settled that post-modernism is a sham and has no substance.

    I guess it's only timely with the rise of Trump and things like "fake news", but that could also be because Trump is also a guy who's stuck in the 80's and 90's.



    Teach the Controversy.
    It's timely because postmodernist ideas are currently leaking into the mainstream political and cultural environment out of academia (to the point where people actually believe the lie that racism means only institutional racism, for example). Even though it is a sham it is currently being aggressively marketed to the public.

  29. #469
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,804
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post

    Overall, it's pretty clear that Te is nowhere to be found, but that doesn't mean that he won't appeal to many people in Te quadras as well,
    For me, there is very little appeal. What he often says, I have self-reflected about when I was 12-13-14. Sorry to be so blunt but it's just the way it is.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  30. #470
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    dude you totally misssed an opportunity to sell a million copy best seller if you had just written down those thoughts at age 12, is this the amazing commercial productivity of LIEs I've heard so much about

  31. #471
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    For me, there is very little appeal. What he often says, I have self-reflected about when I was 12-13-14. Sorry to be so blunt but it's just the way it is.
    I personally appreciate bluntness. And it's interesting because it suggests that maybe there isn't a "universal appeal" after all. For me, I find his psychology talks informative and educational, but don't get much out of the other stuff. Those however can be interesting in that I will hear things that I have previously said repeated in his words. It's kind of weird, but I don't exactly want to listen to things I already know. I do learn things from the actual psychology lectures however.

  32. #472
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,804
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    dude you totally misssed an opportunity to sell a million copy best seller if you had just written down those thoughts at age 12, is this the amazing commercial productivity of LIEs I've heard so much about
    I honestly don't get these posts of yours.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  33. #473
    Bertrand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5,896
    Mentioned
    486 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Peterson's entire point is not that "clean your room" is a new idea, its that its such an old idea that people have lost sight of why its a good idea. If you take it to be a good idea because you never questioned it in the first place, you're just living in a prior psychological epoch that hasn't even begun to experience the problems he's talking about. To flip that around and say he's the dinosaur is kind of amusing. Now if you operate within a framework the reinserts conventional wisdom into popular and academic discourse by way of a scientific approach, this goes to why you didn't cash in/revolutionize the world sooner. Nested in Peterson is an entire history of philosophy and psychology that you're obviously ignorant to, but take that to be some kind of triumph. In a certain sense it is, but its the triumph of the bush man living a life that precludes the possibility of depression. What I'm saying is you entirely miss the point of Peterson, because your existence is apparently disconnected from the problems facing people today. Not because you're some kind of ubermensch but because you lack the capacity to perceive the difficulties. If you were the ubermensch you'd have the answer, but you don't. If you did, you could have cashed in, but you didn't

  34. #474
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,804
    Mentioned
    245 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertrand View Post
    Peterson's entire point is not that "clean your room" is a new idea, its that its such an old idea that people have lost sight of why its a good idea. If you take it to be a good idea because you never questioned it in the first place, you're just living in a prior psychological epoch that hasn't even begun to experience the problems he's talking about.
    Yes ok I actually think I am, fine, then perhaps other people can fin Pet's advice useful.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  35. #475
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,814
    Mentioned
    287 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktor View Post
    Both the leading and the demonstrative are the strongest, just to clarify, because some people have been talking about the demo being stronger than the leading recently. Those are the dimensionally strongest, that's just a fact, both in model G and A.But maybe you see function "strength" as something different than dimensionally.
    I'm aware of functional strength, could have chosen better wording there. And yeah, it's the ideas brought up in niffer's thread that were floating around in my head when I said that, I still need to go back and put my ideas down on that. Until I write out my thoughts on it, it will probably be sitting in the back of my mind.
    But whether or not the demo is used more than the creative is up for debate. I think that it makes sense that, me as an SLE for example, would end up in situations where I use Te, considering that I'm an extrovert and a thinker. But I personally don't like doing Te, I think it's boring, and yeah maybe I do use Ti more often, but still I end up in situations where there are other ExTx's, so what they do rubs off on me. I've never cared about fixing cars, but I've been around Te people so much that I learned some things anyways. I keep imagining that that's why it's called "demonstrative", because it's something you're exposed to so often that you can demonstrate how you do it. I mean, if I'm extroverted, and I'm focused on some objective situation, I'm gonna need both a rational and an irrational IE to deal with it, right? I feel like I can't do Se things without using Te at the same time
    It just seems more or less incidental use to me. It's not where you're focusing, and if you take an ILE and an LIE for example, they would both have Ne and Te as the strongest, and yes they have similarities, but their focus is on different things. The ILE may be an idea-generating machine who knows multiple ways that something could work in a situation, with all kinds of suggestions - while the LIE is projecting the most promising of those ideas as to which ones would be most beneficial long-term, right? So, right there you see that even though the LIE technically has strong Ne, it's Ni where his focus is . . . which is much like your explanation of JP's use of Ne with Ni. It's not the Ne that stands out imo, it's the Ni. IMO.

  36. #476

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktor View Post
    @squark ["... but Ni was shown repeatedly, and no Ne, so I think that probably settles it in this case."]

    I think he shows Ne more than any other IE actually, but EIE has 4D Ne. According to Gulenko EIE is basically Fe Ne, he argues that the 4D IE's is what a person uses the most. However, I also have good reasons to believe that he isn't Ne valuing. He often talks about post modernists, and how they claim that there's an infinite number of interpretations of things, which is something that he strongly opposes. Because he argues that, even though that's technically true, there's only a finite number of viable ways to interpret things. I'm paraphrasing, but you get the point. This, among other similar arguments that he makes, shows that he doesn't value Ne imo. He sees all these posibilities, but he wants things to be more single targeted and deeply meaningful
    That's just Ti > Fi valuing

    And if he argues it's technically true then that's really Ne valuing to me lol

    My EIE friend also hates the post modernist stuff along with me but her actual thinking is very different, mine is also different. She thinks it's all confusing bs and I simply think it's all bs. While Peterson sees the idea behind the Ne crap and doesn't find it confusing, and finds it even technically true, he simply argues that logic is needed to filter the interpretations.

    PS: My Fe DS also still thinks Peterson is too dry to be emotional enough for EIE.

  37. #477
    ooo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    the bootie
    Posts
    4,051
    Mentioned
    300 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Myst

    Well I guess each type, each person, deals with their own meanings, but when they take your entire focus that to me is a hint of Ni; I think Fi brings 'meaning' too, expressed by values, whatever they might be, anyway all the functions bring an implicit meaning of what is in their nature; but Ni-essence of time- can just be interpreted like "meaning" in itself, if you consider that 'to asset the quality of time' consists in making the best out of time... the proper time to do something hints at the fact that each time has meaning. Obviously, Ni pairs with Se, Se is action, but even space, and so time-Ni should conclude in an action in time/space.

    I'm not an expert of the American contemporary philosophies, but freedom of speech is something that, from my European perspective, is completely integrated in the DNA of most Americans, which is considered like the greatest conquest that North America achieved. Which American would want to get rid of it? It would be like getting rid of a piece of themselves. This is to say that I don't really consider his position about freedom of speech any more Alpha than Beta. The aristocratic tendencies of Beta could explain his sticking with what is the state of things (in this case, of a freedom that not rarely verges on the border of incivility and vulgarity), just because of their sense of superiority, around this matter, with what is the rest of the world.
    I want to note that the reasons he gives for excusing freedom of speech, in that quote, are non-sequiturs, not really logical. He says "we need to say a lot of bullshit to create a worthy statement!" (lol), and this doesn't look logical to me, nor a complex of open mouth, where open mouth would want to say things as a democratic right, but in Peterson's case it looks like a simple excuse to explain a right already established and working better than everywhere else= aristocratic right. And both quadras are said to be revolutionary.
    (Anyway this goes hand in hand with the fact that he's a psychologist, that you've pointed out: being a psychologist doesn't imply that one's an NF, as freedom of speech doesn't imply that one belongs to Alpha quadra.)

    The quote about "no virtue in being harmless" is the only thing I had in mind when I made my first comment, lol sorry. I think this really gives it away in Se terms. "If you're a monster and don't act monstrously, then you're virtuous" is the further establishing of Fe values (all these labellings are just established inside of a group that cares of these power dynamics), therefore Se+ Fe = Beta quadra.

    The quote of the city is ok, I mean, true, although in the same quote he gives hints of the Beta attitude that we should work on, and in the same tone of the quote it might make sense to think that those attitudes are actually features of Peterson's persona he wants to get better in, lol.

    The quote about how relationships are wrestling matches seems a further stereotyped Beta quadra thing. But sure, everyone could think similarly, I don't disagree either. Violence is a fundamental component of life.

    etc etc. I'm getting a headache too.

    Ultimately I don't want to advocate for Peterson as Beta, but since squark brought that up I can definitely see a sense in it... he always stroke me as Ni over Ti, which would be structured, as you do with Ti, rather than spiralling in long... talks.

    (omg i made too many typos )
    Last edited by ooo; 05-06-2018 at 03:38 PM.

  38. #478
    WinnieW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    TIM
    alpha NT
    Posts
    1,695
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Myst View Post
    PS: My Fe DS also still thinks Peterson is too dry to be emotional enough for EIE.
    Honestly. I can't see him having as ego function, either.

  39. #479

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    TIM
    LSI-Se sx
    Posts
    4,697
    Mentioned
    510 Post(s)
    Tagged
    25 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ooo View Post
    @Myst

    Well I guess each type, each person, deals with their own meanings, but when they take your entire focus that to me is a hint of Ni; I think Fi brings 'meaning' too, expressed by values, whatever they might be, anyway all the functions bring an implicit meaning of what is in their nature; but Ni-essence of time- can just be interpreted like "meaning" in itself, if you consider that 'to asset the quality of time' consists in making the best out of time... the proper time to do something hints at the fact that each time has meaning. Obviously, Ni pairs with Se, Se is action, but even space, and so time-Ni should conclude in an action in time/space.
    I see, I just think Peterson's version of meaning is Ne>Ni. There IS some Ni, I'm not debating that. But overall it seems a bit too out of sync with Se from my pov if that makes sense. For example his approach to Big 5 is really LII over any kind of Beta NF.


    I'm not an expert of the American contemporary philosophies, but freedom of speech is something that, from my European perspective, is completely integrated in the DNA of most Americans, which is considered like the greatest conquest that North America achieved. Which American would want to get rid of it? It would be like getting rid of a piece of themselves. This is to say that I don't really consider his position about freedom of speech any more Alpha than Beta. The aristocratic tendencies of Beta could explain his sticking with what is the state of things (in this case, of a freedom that not rarely verges on the border of incivility and vulgarity), just because of their sense of superiority, around this matter, with what is the rest of the world.
    I want to note that the reasons he gives for excusing freedom of speech, in that quote, are non-sequiturs, not really logical. He says "we need to say a lot of bullshit to create a worthy statement!" (lol), and this doesn't look logical to me, nor a complex of open mouth, where open mouth would want to say things as a democratic right, but in Peterson's case it looks like a simple excuse to explain a right already established and working better than everywhere else= aristocratic right. And both quadras are said to be revolutionary.
    (Anyway this goes hand in hand with the fact that he's a psychologist, that you've pointed out: being a psychologist doesn't imply that one's an NF, as freedom of speech doesn't imply that one belongs to Alpha quadra.)
    Sure freedom of speech is important but he's obsessed about this topic.

    Where he says "we need to say a lot of bullshit to create a worthy statement!" it was logical to me if it's about having consider things and finding all the errors before getting to a good conclusion. Though his approach is foreign to me, maybe that's again the Ne. I'm way more a convergent thinker than to use his more divergent approach of trying out options.

    I see his brand of revolutionary approach as revolution in the sphere of ideas so it's again very Ne to me.


    The quote about "no virtue in being harmless" is the only thing I had in mind when I made my first comment, lol sorry. I think this really gives it away in Se terms. "If you're a monster and don't act monstrously, then you're virtuous" is the further establishing of Fe values (all these labellings are just established inside of a group that cares of these power dynamics), therefore Se+ Fe = Beta quadra.
    All that to me is just Intuitive, operating with N concepts and it's all really so abstract I really can't see it as any kind of Se.


    The quote of the city is ok, I mean, true, although in the same quote he gives hints of the Beta attitude that we should work on, and in the same tone of the quote it might make sense to think that those attitudes are actually features of Peterson's persona he wants to get better in, lol.

    The quote about how relationships are wrestling matches seems a further stereotyped Beta quadra thing. But sure, everyone could think similarly, I don't disagree either. Violence is a fundamental component of life.

    etc etc. I'm getting a headache too.
    Ok lol, I'm getting one too


    Ultimately I don't want to advocate for Peterson as Beta, but since squark brought that up I can definitely see a sense in it... he always stroke me as Ni over Ti, which would be structured, as you do with Ti, rather than spiralling in long... talks.
    I see the Ti actually but it's so wrapped in a lot of N that it just... gives me even more headache Though I can agree with some of the logic, the rest is just too abstract to me.

  40. #480
    it's ok, everything will be fine totalize's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Great Britain
    TIM
    NAPOLEON
    Posts
    662
    Mentioned
    98 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Kings are not merely typefied.
    CETERUM AUTEM CENSEO WASHINGTON D.C. ESSE DELENDAM

Posting Permissions

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