Society/Culture Jordan B Peterson

[blackcat]

Factotums? Really?

I had to google definition literary every word in that post.

You Richmond supporters really think you're better than every else, arrogant campaigners.

#bukowski #postoffice

 

[EasternTiger]

#bukowski #postoffice

You're a wise son of a bitch Chinaski.

 

[Groin guru]

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]

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]

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.

 

[its free real estate]

I still can’t believe a term from tumblr like cisgender has been mainstreamed. Real live adults use it. Amazing.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

I still can’t believe a term from tumblr like cisgender has been mainstreamed. Real live adults use it. Amazing.

I dunno. Nothing surprises me anymore. We have adults repeatedly accusing each other being triggered, 'salty' and 'safe spaces'.

 

[CheapCharlie]

Now:

Did you take advantage of the bargains he is offering?

What bargains is he offering?

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

He was on Radio National this morning, anyone hear it? I just caught the end of it. Not sure if it was a replay or he is out here already.

 

[EasternTiger]

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]

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.

 

[Chief]

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.

Cultist in point.

 

[Chief]

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]

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]

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 s**t. 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.

 

[yebiga]

Cultist in point.

Oh god how pathetically craven
“I know all these really profound people but I’m too important to share their name for fear I will look like a fool’
“Why don’t I do something important like become a prefect god on an anonymous forum. “

 

[EasternTiger]

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.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

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

You'd have to mount one hell of an argument to misconstrue that as racist or bigoted.

 

[ShanDog]

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.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Brunswick Trap King]

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]

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.