Society/Culture Jordan B Peterson

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Groin guru

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 21, 2017
Posts
7,375
Likes
23,491
Location
Destination Club
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Unfortunately, while there are good chunks of his thinking in 12 rules, its not fully developed, he is a much better lecturer then he is a writer.
The lecture series is where he shines - suggest the later 2017 maps of meaning series.
Claude Balls - I second this. 12 rules has good pockets mixed with knowledge translation to the lay audience. I prefer his lecture series.
 

Chief

110% sass!
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Posts
71,549
Likes
41,817
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Admin #2,828
If he's just another Anthony Robbins, then he decided to take a bizarre twisting arse about pathway to get there.
I didn't say he was a genius at it.

Is there any chance that you could stop obsessing with the mans marketing strategy and address the actual content of his work?
Can't believe I am falling for this. Such a waste of time.

Here's what it looks like to me, in case you missed the various bits and pieces across this thread.

His early claims about his possible arrest were totally unfounded. His own little "**** you" to anyone he didn't consider to be anything other than cisgender was just dumb bigotry, not a crime. He was never going to be arrested for anything. He made it up, or didn't know what he was talking about. Great for marketing though. "I am prepared to go to prison for this! Click my Patreon link! Watch my monetised YouTube channel!"

He seems to claim individualism is primary, despite the known benefits of community and regard for the common good. Limitations on speech and actions can of course be justified. He just doesn't like where the line is drawn. So be it, but at least have a good argument and know the actual limits being imposed before you bleat on YouTube about your impending arrest.

His 12 Rules are an entertainment device, along the lines of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, not truly original insights.

Questionable claims are made as if they are objective, proven truth. His own, disappointed mentor made that comment.

"Order is where the people around you act according to well-understood social norms, and remain predictable and cooperative."

But be suspicious of anyone who tries to change the world by changing others.

Order is masculine? Chaos is feminine? Total fruit loop. See Gray. If he ever actually proves anything let me know. He probably won't, because apparently faith trumps evidence. If you believe it, you will Become.

He puts Christianity up as the only moral guide without any real evidence: religion is supposedly The Path, and without it we are doomed to be nothing, or be controlled by the worst of us. Non-religious ethics apparently don't exist. They just vanish under the incredible weight of his enormous brain, apparently.

Apparently Christ sprung out of human imagination of the perfect being, so he must be the best model. WTF? Like bronze age shepherds and squabbling warlords had reached the pinnacle of human imagination. They didn't even have nugs.

But it gives Peterson an excuse to act like an ignorant dirt farmer.

Rather than poetry and the Bible springing out of people's filtered experience of the objective, real world, they become objectivity. He's got an extensive line in god-of-gaps arguments, and they are marked down for the new year! Check out the savings!

This biological basis for all dominance and hierarchy is pretty much bullshit he pulled out of his arse. His serotonin stuff is bunkum. Our brains are being shown, more and more, to be plastic. We have much more than just serotonin levels governing our emotions. We can adjust to realities and experiences. We're not slaves to a rigid brain structure.

I just wish he'd chosen a stronger analogy than lobsters, because the lobster thing gives his cultists an out. "He didn't really mean that! Stop focusing on the lobster! It's obviously a metaphor!" Then why put any focus on serotonin and link it back to humans? Why not choose bees instead of lobsters?

I'll tell you why: because he made a weak argument. He spent a weekend copying and pasting from Quora to get his 12 rules book out to catch the cultist wave and screwed up big time.

etc etc etc

You can read all of this in any good critique of his work. I don't want to go over all the bits and pieces I read and heard from him, it gets boring. I am not the originator of these ideas - far brighter people have far deeper things to say about his "work".

He's not the messiah - he just plays one on YouTube.

I am not the messiah either. I just read some of the work by people who are more profound and objective than Peterson is, and mash it up with my own dull life experiences. It's all any of us can do.

Now:

Did you take advantage of the bargains he is offering?
 

yebiga

Anglo Guilt - suck it up
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
10,388
Likes
10,742
Location
Mens Gallery
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I didn't say he was a genius at it.


Can't believe I am falling for this. Such a waste of time.

Here's what it looks like to me, in case you missed the various bits and pieces across this thread.

His early claims about his possible arrest were totally unfounded. His own little "**** you" to anyone he didn't consider to be anything other than cisgender was just dumb bigotry, not a crime. He was never going to be arrested for anything. He made it up, or didn't know what he was talking about. Great for marketing though. "I am prepared to go to prison for this! Click my Patreon link! Watch my monetised YouTube channel!"

He seems to claim individualism is primary, despite the known benefits of community and regard for the common good. Limitations on speech and actions can of course be justified. He just doesn't like where the line is drawn. So be it, but at least have a good argument and know the actual limits being imposed before you bleat on YouTube about your impending arrest.

His 12 Rules are an entertainment device, along the lines of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, not truly original insights.

Questionable claims are made as if they are objective, proven truth. His own, disappointed mentor made that comment.

"Order is where the people around you act according to well-understood social norms, and remain predictable and cooperative."

But be suspicious of anyone who tries to change the world by changing others.

Order is masculine? Chaos is feminine? Total fruit loop. See Gray. If he ever actually proves anything let me know. He probably won't, because apparently faith trumps evidence. If you believe it, you will Become.

He puts Christianity up as the only moral guide without any real evidence: religion is supposedly The Path, and without it we are doomed to be nothing, or be controlled by the worst of us. Non-religious ethics apparently don't exist. They just vanish under the incredible weight of his enormous brain, apparently.

Apparently Christ sprung out of human imagination of the perfect being, so he must be the best model. WTF? Like bronze age shepherds and squabbling warlords had reached the pinnacle of human imagination. They didn't even have nugs.

But it gives Peterson an excuse to act like an ignorant dirt farmer.

Rather than poetry and the Bible springing out of people's filtered experience of the objective, real world, they become objectivity. He's got an extensive line in god-of-gaps arguments, and they are marked down for the new year! Check out the savings!

This biological basis for all dominance and hierarchy is pretty much bullshit he pulled out of his arse. His serotonin stuff is bunkum. Our brains are being shown, more and more, to be plastic. We have much more than just serotonin levels governing our emotions. We can adjust to realities and experiences. We're not slaves to a rigid brain structure.

I just wish he'd chosen a stronger analogy than lobsters, because the lobster thing gives his cultists an out. "He didn't really mean that! Stop focusing on the lobster! It's obviously a metaphor!" Then why put any focus on serotonin and link it back to humans? Why not choose bees instead of lobsters?

I'll tell you why: because he made a weak argument. He spent a weekend copying and pasting from Quora to get his 12 rules book out to catch the cultist wave and screwed up big time.

etc etc etc

You can read all of this in any good critique of his work. I don't want to go over all the bits and pieces I read and heard from him, it gets boring. I am not the originator of these ideas - far brighter people have far deeper things to say about his "work".

He's not the messiah - he just plays one on YouTube.

I am not the messiah either. I just read some of the work by people who are more profound and objective than Peterson is, and mash it up with my own dull life experiences. It's all any of us can do.

Now:

Did you take advantage of the bargains he is offering?
Tell me - if you dare - of at least one of these more profound people?

Chief - nice
You’ve proven how profoundly dopey an otherwise smart person can become.

That was an truly amazing triple somersault dismissal with a perfectly executed post modern conniption.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,530
Likes
4,114
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
It needs to be done expertly, but there's a marketing strategy called 'Repel to attract.'

This is the best explanation I've seen:

"He does not rely on the gatekeepers of the progressive consensus for his livelihood; indeed he prospers precisely by flouting it. It was his very success in managing this feat at the outset that made it urgent to target him, thereby ramping up the cycle of escalation that has made his platform as enormous as it has become."

Reminds me of that joke:

On Monday morning, the teacher walked to the blackboard and noticed someone had written the word "penis" in tiny letters.

She turned around, but couldn't find the guilty face. She quickly erased it and began her class.

Tuesday, she was again greeted with "penis" on the blackboard, written in larger letters. She looked around in vain for the culprit, and then proceeded with the day's lesson.

Every morning for the rest of the week, "penis" was written on the board in larger and larger letters, and each time, the teacher furiously erased it.

By Friday, she'd had enough. "That's enough," she sputtered. "I can't believe this! Monday morning, I expect an explanation for this behavior!"

On Monday morning, the teacher entered the classroom and found on the board:

"The more you rub it, the bigger it gets"
 

blackcat

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Posts
24,867
Likes
11,950
Location
melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
It needs to be done expertly, but there's a marketing strategy called 'Repel to attract.'

This is the best explanation I've seen:

"He does not rely on the gatekeepers of the progressive consensus for his livelihood; indeed he prospers precisely by flouting it. It was his very success in managing this feat at the outset that made it urgent to target him, thereby ramping up the cycle of escalation that has made his platform as enormous as it has become."

Reminds me of that joke:

On Monday morning, the teacher walked to the blackboard and noticed someone had written the word "penis" in tiny letters.

She turned around, but couldn't find the guilty face. She quickly erased it and began her class.

Tuesday, she was again greeted with "penis" on the blackboard, written in larger letters. She looked around in vain for the culprit, and then proceeded with the day's lesson.

Every morning for the rest of the week, "penis" was written on the board in larger and larger letters, and each time, the teacher furiously erased it.

By Friday, she'd had enough. "That's enough," she sputtered. "I can't believe this! Monday morning, I expect an explanation for this behavior!"

On Monday morning, the teacher entered the classroom and found on the board:

"The more you rub it, the bigger it gets"
escalation/ratchet.

Youtube as media for video content is in infancy unlike NBC television.

that said, if you can achieve a critical mass, like Facebook, then you can defend your turf and barbariansatgate... blockbloc of followers begets growing your consituents. It is about critical mass.

This is the key to the popular sport(s) of the developed international economies. forget the infrastructure (playing fields, media, tv content), what the gestalt or synergy is, is the critical mass. This is the sport that children play in recess in their first years of school. Andrew Demetriou, Colin Carter, Gillon McLachlan, their Boston Consulting boffins, they dont appreciate that this is the key trade-secret that is anything but a secret. It is a axiom that the draw of the game is the critical mass and pedagogical development.

Peterson is the Zuckerberg of this turf he has staked out, he can mine his current demographic which indeed may be temporal in their age dem, and in the current zeitgeist which has looked to cleave the traditional sex roles and leave some to bleed when those traditions are severed.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Chief

110% sass!
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Posts
71,549
Likes
41,817
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Admin #2,837
It needs to be done expertly, but there's a marketing strategy called 'Repel to attract.'

This is the best explanation I've seen:

"He does not rely on the gatekeepers of the progressive consensus for his livelihood; indeed he prospers precisely by flouting it. It was his very success in managing this feat at the outset that made it urgent to target him, thereby ramping up the cycle of escalation that has made his platform as enormous as it has become."
He had a silly story about a lobster - it was so absurd that it attracted attention. Like "You're kidding. This is it?" attention.
 

Chief

110% sass!
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Posts
71,549
Likes
41,817
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Admin #2,838
escalation/ratchet.

Youtube as media for video content is in infancy unlike NBC television.

that said, if you can achieve a critical mass, like Facebook, then you can defend your turf and barbariansatgate... block of followers begets growing your consituents. It is about critical mass.

This is the key to the popular sport(s) of the developed international economies. forget the infrastructure (playing fields, media, tv content), what the gestalt or synergy is, is the critical mass. This is the sport that children play in recess in their first years of school. Andrew Demetriou, Colin Carter, Gillon McLachlan, their Boston Consulting boffins, they dont appreciate that this is the key trade-secret that is anything but a secret. It is a axiom that the draw of the game is the critical mass and pedagogical development.

Peterson is the Zuckerberg of this turf he has staked out, he can mine his current demographic which indeed may be temporal in their age dem, and in the current zeitgeist which has looked to cleave the traditional sex roles and leave some to bleed when those traditions are severed.
Content/outrage
 

ShanDog

Moderator
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Posts
17,127
Likes
30,976
Location
sv_cheats 1
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers
Moderator #2,839
Can't believe I am falling for this. Such a waste of time.
Same, but here we go.

His early claims about his possible arrest were totally unfounded. His own little "**** you" to anyone he didn't consider to be anything other than cisgender was just dumb bigotry, not a crime. He was never going to be arrested for anything. He made it up, or didn't know what he was talking about. Great for marketing though. "I am prepared to go to prison for this! Click my Patreon link! Watch my monetised YouTube channel!"
His claims were that should he refuse to abide by any human rights court ruling against him in Canada that he would be jailed. This is true, as it would move from a civil to a criminal matter.

Your implied accusation of bigotry against non 'cisgendered' people is a crock of shit. He has repeatedly stated he would call anyone by the gender they asked if he thought it was genuine. Something I think we would all agree with.

He seems to claim individualism is primary, despite the known benefits of community and regard for the common good.
Considering the individual as primary over all other things does not mean you ignore the known benefits of community and regard for common good. His whole point has been that through improving the individual you then produce even better outcomes for the community and common good. You've missed his point entirely.

Limitations on speech and actions can of course be justified. He just doesn't like where the line is drawn. So be it, but at least have a good argument and know the actual limits being imposed before you bleat on YouTube about your impending arrest.
Limitations on free speech can be argued; justified is another far more concrete thing. He does have a good argument. Several, in face. Here's one of my favourite videos on it:

His 12 Rules are an entertainment device, along the lines of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, not truly original insights.
The only things worth paying attention to must be original? Right. The insights are in his arguments about why these quite well-known axioms are applicable. Never has Peterson claimed they were his own invention, and in fact has stated numerous times that he is just bringing new life to old ideas.

Questionable claims are made as if they are objective, proven truth. His own, disappointed mentor made that comment.
I agree - there are times when I am not fully sold on something he argues but he comes across as if it's the God-spoken truth. I don't like that. But then again, we all do it (case in point with your responses) so it's a bit hard to be too critical about that.
"Order is where the people around you act according to well-understood social norms, and remain predictable and cooperative."

But be suspicious of anyone who tries to change the world by changing others.
Sounds like damn good advice. Of course we should be suspicious about people trying to change the way you behave or - even more importantly - societal norms and traditions. You seriously have an issue with this? Why?

Order is masculine? Chaos is feminine? Total fruit loop. See Gray. If he ever actually proves anything let me know. He probably won't, because apparently faith trumps evidence. If you believe it, you will Become.
Order and chaos have been traditionally represented as the masculine and feminine for thousands of years, and Peterson is someone who loves to draw on mythology and symbology of ancient civilisations to give weight to the arguments he makes as being older that the Western tradition. If you had actually read or engaged with any of what he has said about it, order and chaos are not inherently good and bad respectively. I am assuming your pushback on this is largely rooted in the false belief that he is therefore denigrating women as bad. If that's the case, you have no idea what these concepts actually mean.

He puts Christianity up as the only moral guide without any real evidence: religion is supposedly The Path, and without it we are doomed to be nothing, or be controlled by the worst of us. Non-religious ethics apparently don't exist. They just vanish under the incredible weight of his enormous brain, apparently.
No, no he does not. At all. Peterson draws on all manner of religion and myth, from the Mesopotamian creation stories and legends to the ancient Egyptian gods, the Jewish tradition, Taoism and of course Christianity. The point is that these stories contribute to the shared narratives we have that ground our value systems and societies. Not that any one of them is 'the only moral guide'. You've - again - comprehensively missed the point. He's also not the first person to argue that a lack of any religious influence on ethics and morality could be an issue. For one example, there's a guy named Friedrich Nietzsche that you may have heard of?

Apparently Christ sprung out of human imagination of the perfect being, so he must be the best model. WTF? Like bronze age shepherds and squabbling warlords had reached the pinnacle of human imagination. They didn't even have nugs.
Christ as a distillation of all the previous stories and myths that we used to guide morality - yes. If you know anything about storytelling you would know about the concept of archetypes and how meta-narratives work.

That's also arguably quite a racist thing you have said there. Or at the very least, quite bigoted. Nice.

This biological basis for all dominance and hierarchy is pretty much bullshit he pulled out of his arse. His serotonin stuff is bunkum. Our brains are being shown, more and more, to be plastic. We have much more than just serotonin levels governing our emotions. We can adjust to realities and experiences. We're not slaves to a rigid brain structure.

I just wish he'd chosen a stronger analogy than lobsters, because the lobster thing gives his cultists an out. "He didn't really mean that! Stop focusing on the lobster! It's obviously a metaphor!" Then why put any focus on serotonin and link it back to humans? Why not choose bees instead of lobsters?

I'll tell you why: because he made a weak argument. He spent a weekend copying and pasting from Quora to get his 12 rules book out to catch the cultist wave and screwed up big time.
Holy crap you have missed the mark on this one so far it's funny.

The use of lobster social behaviour and their reaction to serotonin (which is completely accurate) and comparison to human serotonin effects is to demonstrate that hierarchical social structures have existed for hundreds of millions of years, at least as early as the crustaceans. This is to counter the arguments made that the west has imposed hierarchical structure on us, because it quite obviously hasn't.

It's not that there is a 'biological basis for all dominance and hierarchy' at all. Where the hell did you get this from?
You can read all of this in any good critique of his work. I don't want to go over all the bits and pieces I read and heard from him, it gets boring. I am not the originator of these ideas - far brighter people have far deeper things to say about his "work".

He's not the messiah - he just plays one on YouTube.

I am not the messiah either. I just read some of the work by people who are more profound and objective than Peterson is, and mash it up with my own dull life experiences. It's all any of us can do.

Now:

Did you take advantage of the bargains he is offering?
It appears that what you think you can do is just read critiques of him and never actually engage with his work yourself, then think you have a handle on what's actually being said. Either that or you did read/listen to Peterson and it just went straight over your head.

Thanks to people like you who fuel the discussions online, he continues to grow in popularity. So, thanks for that I guess. Because what he actually has done - regardless of how right or wrong he is on certain things - is encourage people to engage with big ideas and take an introspective look at themselves to see what they can improve on. That's not snake oil; it's actually doing some good in the world, and that what shits me most about the way some people go after Peterson and anyone who thinks he his interesting. It's so petty, yet they so often try to come off with a sense of intellectual and moral superiority when they jump in to try and snipe. But they aren't at all.

Alright, rant over. Everyone clean your rooms.
 

EasternTiger

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Posts
4,530
Likes
4,114
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Jordan's PC list has held me in good stead.

1. Identify an area of human activity.

2. Note a distribution of success.

3. Identify winners and losers.

4. Claim that the losers are losing because they are oppressed by the winners.

5. Claim allegiance with the losers.

6. Feel secure in your comprehensive explanation of the world.

7. Revel in your moral superiority.

8. Target your resentment towards your newly found enemies.

9. Repeat. Forever. Everywhere.
 

ShanDog

Moderator
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Posts
17,127
Likes
30,976
Location
sv_cheats 1
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers
Moderator #2,843
You'd have to mount one hell of an argument to misconstrue that as racist or bigoted.
Statement came across with an air of superiority and condescension toward middle eastern people of a couple thousand years ago. If you know your history, you know they were not stupid by any means. Maybe ignorant condescension is a better descriptor then, since I don't like throwing the R-word around wily-nily.
 

herculez09

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Posts
7,722
Likes
9,250
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
West Coast
Statement came across with an air of superiority and condescension toward middle eastern people of a couple thousand years ago. If you know your history, you know they were not stupid by any means. Maybe ignorant condescension is a better descriptor then, since I don't like throwing the R-word around wily-nily.
I find it very hard to believe that a poster who regularly defends middle easterners (and other Muslims by extension) decided to turn around and accuse middle easterners of being stupid.

Rightly or wrongly, it seemed pretty obvious it was a jibe directed at the time period itself. I mean, were shepherds and warlords a middle eastern thing?

I think you went a bit hard there.
 

stretcharmstrong

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Posts
6,773
Likes
4,666
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Melbourne
It's because what he says is heretical. If he was simply another Eckhart Tolle or Deepak Chopra no one would care. But because he calls out some of what is popularly believed as fashionable nonsense, he incites derangement in the believers.

Who is worse? Peterson, or the APA, who have recently announced that 'traditional masculinity is harmful'?

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2019/01/ce-corner.aspx

Pathologising what is thought of as normal behaviour is de rigeur for progressives. Someone who should be from inside the tent (a psychologist) protesting against it must be stopped. Every puritanical culture has its Guis, Torquemadas and Cromwells.
There is almost nothing negative or male bashing in that price and, more importantly to your point and the topic of this thread, a lot of the points made and issues highlighted are precisely aligned with ideas and issues Peterson preaches.

Why pick out one negative thing that suits your agenda, when literally the entirety of the rest of the piece describes an important, positive step towards helping men, inter alia, function better, achieve better mental health and, specifically, commit less crime and suicide?

Oh, that’s right, because bias.
 

CheapCharlie

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Posts
4,265
Likes
4,510
AFL Club
Sydney
There is almost nothing negative or male bashing in that price and, more importantly to your point and the topic of this thread, a lot of the points made and issues highlighted are precisely aligned with ideas and issues Peterson preaches.

Why pick out one negative thing that suits your agenda, when literally the entirety of the rest of the piece describes an important, positive step towards helping men, inter alia, function better, achieve better mental health and, specifically, commit less crime and suicide?

Oh, that’s right, because bias.
Seemed quite a negative article towards men and masculinity. Not the writers intention maybe but thats how it reads
 

ShanDog

Moderator
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Posts
17,127
Likes
30,976
Location
sv_cheats 1
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Edmonton Oilers
Moderator #2,847
I find it very hard to believe that a poster who regularly defends middle easterners (and other Muslims by extension) decided to turn around and accuse middle easterners of being stupid.

Rightly or wrongly, it seemed pretty obvious it was a jibe directed at the time period itself. I mean, were shepherds and warlords a middle eastern thing?

I think you went a bit hard there.
Chief also has a massive hard-on for being anti-theist. But maybe that is why I took it that way when unintended. Regardless, the comment is inaccurate anyway - he'd know more than many that texts like the Bible have been written and re-written over time by those who aren't 'warlords and shepherds' (which they weren't) with whom the stories arguably didn't even originate with.
 

herculez09

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Posts
7,722
Likes
9,250
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
West Coast
Chief also has a massive hard-on for being anti-theist. But maybe that is why I took it that way when unintended. Regardless, the comment is inaccurate anyway - he'd know more than many that texts like the Bible have been written and re-written over time by those who aren't 'warlords and shepherds' (which they weren't) with whom the stories arguably didn't even originate with.
I think the warlord part was most likely a direct reference to Muhammad (who was inarguably a warlord).
 

stretcharmstrong

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Posts
6,773
Likes
4,666
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Melbourne
Seemed quite a negative article towards men and masculinity. Not the writers intention maybe but thats how it reads
It did not read like that to me, at all.

It read like an explanation of the outcome of a very significant effort to understand why men suffer, and to then implement continued professional development/training within an industry that can actually make a difference to men’s mental health.

Besides the one line quoted previously by the other user, which parts did you interpret as ‘quite negative towards men and masculinity’?

It actually went out of its way to highlight explicitly a lot of positive outcomes associated with traditionally masculine traits.
 

Snake_Baker

Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
37,153
Likes
64,712
Location
Destination Club
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Pfffft, as if!
Can't believe I am falling for this. Such a waste of time.
I appreciate you descending from the mountain.

Here's what it looks like to me, in case you missed the various bits and pieces across this thread.
"Me" being a layperson with no relevant credentials in Peterson's field.

His early claims about his possible arrest were totally unfounded. His own little "**** you" to anyone he didn't consider to be anything other than cisgender was just dumb bigotry, not a crime. He was never going to be arrested for anything. He made it up, or didn't know what he was talking about. Great for marketing though. "I am prepared to go to prison for this! Click my Patreon link! Watch my monetised YouTube channel!"
This is a truly amazing extrapolation.

He seems to claim individualism is primary, despite the known benefits of community and regard for the common good. Limitations on speech and actions can of course be justified. He just doesn't like where the line is drawn. So be it, but at least have a good argument and know the actual limits being imposed before you bleat on YouTube about your impending arrest.
Please table an outline of these "known benefits" and how Peterson's musings are harmful to them.

His 12 Rules are an entertainment device, along the lines of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, not truly original insights.
Whoever claimed they were?! Peterson freely admits to drawing from a wide range of information related to his field.

Questionable claims are made as if they are objective, proven truth.
Which ones? Are you sure this isn't an ideological construction of your own doing?

His own, disappointed mentor made that comment.
One of his original mentors has been shown to be in ideological opposition to Peterson and as far as I know they have tabled no academically based rebuttal of Peterson's position.

"Order is where the people around you act according to well-understood social norms, and remain predictable and cooperative."

But be suspicious of anyone who tries to change the world by changing others.

Order is masculine? Chaos is feminine? Total fruit loop. See Gray. If he ever actually proves anything let me know. He probably won't, because apparently faith trumps evidence. If you believe it, you will Become.
Where is this?


He puts Christianity up as the only moral guide without any real evidence: religion is supposedly The Path, and without it we are doomed to be nothing, or be controlled by the worst of us. Non-religious ethics apparently don't exist. They just vanish under the incredible weight of his enormous brain, apparently.

Apparently Christ sprung out of human imagination of the perfect being, so he must be the best model. WTF? Like bronze age shepherds and squabbling warlords had reached the pinnacle of human imagination. They didn't even have nugs.

But it gives Peterson an excuse to act like an ignorant dirt farmer.
Where did he make ANY of those claims in that context?


Rather than poetry and the Bible springing out of people's filtered experience of the objective, real world, they become objectivity. He's got an extensive line in god-of-gaps arguments, and they are marked down for the new year! Check out the savings!
I can see where your dissonance arises now. You are looking at him as if he has THE answers, and if he can't provide THE answers then he must be a snake oil salesman..

This biological basis for all dominance and hierarchy is pretty much bullshit he pulled out of his arse. His serotonin stuff is bunkum. Our brains are being shown, more and more, to be plastic. We have much more than just serotonin levels governing our emotions. We can adjust to realities and experiences. We're not slaves to a rigid brain structure.

I just wish he'd chosen a stronger analogy than lobsters, because the lobster thing gives his cultists an out. "He didn't really mean that! Stop focusing on the lobster! It's obviously a metaphor!" Then why put any focus on serotonin and link it back to humans? Why not choose bees instead of lobsters?

I'll tell you why: because he made a weak argument. He spent a weekend copying and pasting from Quora to get his 12 rules book out to catch the cultist wave and screwed up big time.

etc etc etc
Show me where? Provide an academically supported rebuttal.


You can read all of this in any good critique of his work. I don't want to go over all the bits and pieces I read and heard from him, it gets boring. I am not the originator of these ideas - far brighter people have far deeper things to say about his "work".
I'm calling bullshit on this claim.

He's not the messiah - he just plays one on YouTube.

I am not the messiah either. I just read some of the work by people who are more profound and objective than Peterson is, and mash it up with my own dull life experiences. It's all any of us can do.
Refer back to my earlier comments in red.

Now:

Did you take advantage of the bargains he is offering?

I have never purchased a single Peterson related item, nor do I have any tickets for his upcoming tour. Apologies for disappointing your bite sized view of this issue.

All I can add is that this response is predictably vague and woefully inadequate, however this doesn't trouble me.

You have provided virtually no proper contextual examples, or any academically relevant rebuttals, however this doesn't trouble me.

The truly troubling issue for me is how you are prepared to generically criticise Peterson, yet remain completely and utterly mute on the obscene idiocy flowing from the well from which provides this so called "charlatan" with the ready made market for his "product". You claim to see blind ideological subjugation in his "followers", yet you appear to be completely blind about that same idea as it applies to the actual target of work.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom