dholliday
deconstructed rep
Or rather, refusing to acknowledge that repeated good stuff may somewhat offset his repeated failings. Making him on balance a flawed but interesting individual.
He's human, after all.
Jordan Peterson Thread.
- Thread starter mezzrow
- Start date
- Status
Or rather, refusing to acknowledge that repeated good stuff may somewhat offset his repeated failings. Making him on balance a flawed but interesting individual.
He's human, after all.
Would you consider a faith healer of an extremely successful mega church business any less of a fraud, despite him giving people hope and contentment in their religion?
I mean, I'm glad people are seemingly improving themselves. They claim it's Jordan Peterson's lectures and writings, but I'm not sure I believe that. I'd be more inclined to believe it's his calming voice and mannerisms than his 'teachings'. I mean, he doesn't say anything particularly new or enlightening. Have you seen his 12 rules for life? They're pretty basic, like some amateur self-help life coach made them up. Yeah, I'd wager he's more of a human placebo effect than anythig else. lol
Steve0
Player Valuation: £35m
- the denial of white privilege thing
He didn't deny it, you admitted this yourself only a page ago. But now you've reverted to your original incorrect statement. Weird.
----- Well i actually pointed out his 'take' on it was a fudge. It amounted to a denial.
- using lobsters to justify unfair hierarchies thing
How is that racist or how does that relate to hating women? Do you disagree we're evolved from lobsters?
------- This is just a list to illustrate why he's not taken seriously by most intelligent people....buuuuutt you could easily use the lobster hierarchy to justify other hierarchies, couldn't you? You see where I'm going.
- the making a fake profile bigging up his credentials thing
Not heard this one. Link?
--------------- His profile on research gate is believed to be inflated.
- his problematic faith in IQ scores thing
He's hardly the only one. Heard of Mensa? Are they bad racists?
------- Mensa make money from it.
- his constant whiney victimhood thing
Non-specific. You'll have to say something concrete here.
----- I dont have to do anything actually.
- his constant whining about others whining about their victimhood thing
see above, or rather how does this make him a racist or hater of women? It may make him tiresome or annoying, but racist?
- his labelling of literally everything he disapproves of as 'cultural neo-marxism' thing.
see above
Like i said this was a more a list to demonstrate that he's just not a credible thinker rather than proof he's racist or anything. I think the problem is that he's a touch odd and limited in his thinking so just doesn;t have the capability to realise what he says can be seen as sexist, racist, transphobic etc. He lacks the ability to see the others perspective like the best thinkers can.
He's just an average Joe, elevated way above his level and, quite frankly, it shows time and time again.
He didn't deny it, you admitted this yourself only a page ago. But now you've reverted to your original incorrect statement. Weird.
----- Well i actually pointed out his 'take' on it was a fudge. It amounted to a denial.
- using lobsters to justify unfair hierarchies thing
How is that racist or how does that relate to hating women? Do you disagree we're evolved from lobsters?
------- This is just a list to illustrate why he's not taken seriously by most intelligent people....buuuuutt you could easily use the lobster hierarchy to justify other hierarchies, couldn't you? You see where I'm going.
- the making a fake profile bigging up his credentials thing
Not heard this one. Link?
--------------- His profile on research gate is believed to be inflated.
- his problematic faith in IQ scores thing
He's hardly the only one. Heard of Mensa? Are they bad racists?
------- Mensa make money from it.
- his constant whiney victimhood thing
Non-specific. You'll have to say something concrete here.
----- I dont have to do anything actually.
- his constant whining about others whining about their victimhood thing
see above, or rather how does this make him a racist or hater of women? It may make him tiresome or annoying, but racist?
- his labelling of literally everything he disapproves of as 'cultural neo-marxism' thing.
see above
Like i said this was a more a list to demonstrate that he's just not a credible thinker rather than proof he's racist or anything. I think the problem is that he's a touch odd and limited in his thinking so just doesn;t have the capability to realise what he says can be seen as sexist, racist, transphobic etc. He lacks the ability to see the others perspective like the best thinkers can.
He's just an average Joe, elevated way above his level and, quite frankly, it shows time and time again.
Last edited:
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Don't wanna tempt you to waste time, but can we sort of agree then that Durham Council's accusations were at least exaggerated & unfair, thus if not justifying at least making his petty email-publishing understandable?
- If JP is "probably not" racist, we should give him the benefit of the doubt and stick up for him if he's being labelled so. Racism is a horrible thing, to be accused of it is potentially career-destroying.
- If JP's words are empowering some racists, while those same words also empowering far more non-racists, then that doesn't make JP himself an empowerer of racism.
Maybe the above is something we can find common ground on?
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Fair responses, lads
Let's finally leave it there, I reckon. Was epic robust debate, cheers!
No I don't think so.
Interesting though which points you chose to focus on from my post.
For me the evidence is there for all to see. Choosing to not see it shows why the alt right has risen. It normalizes the marginalized bigots in this country and gives them a voice and safe space to be out and proud.
Charlottesville was the big coming out party...people like Peterson empower them by normalizing their thought bubbles.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
You didn't post anything else really relevant, just a comment about Mezz's video.
Agree to disagree then. All good. I'm done with subject:JP for a wee while, we all went a bit overkill maybe but it was fun.
Jordan Peterson empowers extremist beliefs.
I find it interesting that you chose not to address JP's minimalization of the female experience from that video.
You are willing to spend hours jumping through logic hoops to justify the man's comments yet when faced with hard evidence you chose to dismiss it or just say he's flawed as we all are as humans.
Sorry. That's disingenuous at best. You are apoplectic about the outrageous claims of the Durham city council. Yet you defend Peterson to the death. He has millions in his cult of personality and he needs to be even more careful with his words than the Mayor Pro Tem in a relatively small American city.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
ffs, cheese!
This is hard evidence for what?
There's nothing too interesting or heavy in that video. At the 8-minute mark he just briefly mentions women automatically have been assigned a role in life due to their biological-necessity of having children. That's it. His theme is what meaning should or could be for men.
I agree with you that he's minimalising the female experience. But what's your point? That this proves he hates women? That he's empowering violence against women?
No, of course not. That's an insane leap. It proves only that his focus is on more the male side, that he probably knows very little about the female experience (well, he is a man) and that at most he may be revealing some mild sexism when he minimises them in such ways. It proves that he is a flawed man, like we all are.
See my previous analogy of calling someone who criticises mass-immigration policies a "Nazi". Same thing happening here. It's then only a small step to "it's ok to punch a Nazi", then a little further until we again get to a point where we're rounding up people because we've deem them to belong to a certain undesirable group. It's ok to throw in jail a proven misogynist, he hates women!
Who controls language, controls people.
Language is important. We allow too much misuse over too long a time-period and we risk losing the liberal gains we've made these last few decades. Not just Orwell warned us of this.
We see its misuse even in your post:
"You are willing to spend hours jumping through logic hoops to justify the man's comments"
Which logic hoops? My logic has been consistent. And was I justifying or was I explaining his comments? There's a difference and it's significant.
"You are apoplectic about the outrageous claims of the Durham city council. "
apoplectic: overcome with anger; furious. I think you'll find my tone was reasonable throughout. But you're on-point at least with labelling Durham's claims as "outrageous".
"you defend Peterson to the death."
This implies I let no criticism of him through. But that's not accurate, is it?
"He has millions in his cult of personality"
A cult of personality is totally idealised...without fault. You'll find the vast majority of JP supporters have no problem to criticise him. We see it all the time in comment threads on Youtube, Twitter, news-sites, forums...he's not beyond criticism, ergo he's not a cult of personality by any stretch. He will have a small band of überfans who maybe see him as such, but these won't number millions. Thousands maybe, that's 0.1% of millions.
The (laboured) point is: you're using exaggerated language to artificially strengthen your position: so the focus is not your argument, but the righteousness of your language. We see this problem in Twitter-outrage-spats all the time. It's why they get so out of hand. People wilfully misuse language to score points instead of better framing their argument. Guardian opinion writers are a good (bad) example of this, whereas only 5-10 years ago their language was much more measured, and thus more focussed on whatever their argument was.
And again, it's why Brexit, Trump et al happened. A good (bad) example of Brexit is the criticism of the 350m red bus, with both sides misusing & exaggerating language to strengthen their position instead of their argument. No wonder so many voters didn't really understand what they were voting for, and by extension no wonder why Brexit is in such a mess.
If it carries on like this, we'll end up in an idiocracy. People won't even know what nuance means anymore.
ffs, cheese!
This is hard evidence for what?
There's nothing too interesting or heavy in that video. At the 8-minute mark he just briefly mentions women automatically have been assigned a role in life due to their biological-necessity of having children. That's it. His theme is what meaning should or could be for men.
I agree with you that he's minimalising the female experience. But what's your point? That this proves he hates women? That he's empowering violence against women?
No, of course not. That's an insane leap. It proves only that his focus is on more the male side, that he probably knows very little about the female experience (well, he is a man) and that at most he may be revealing some mild sexism when he minimises them in such ways. It proves that he is a flawed man, like we all are.
See my previous analogy of calling someone who criticises mass-immigration policies a "Nazi". Same thing happening here. It's then only a small step to "it's ok to punch a Nazi", then a little further until we again get to a point where we're rounding up people because we've deem them to belong to a certain undesirable group. It's ok to throw in jail a proven misogynist, he hates women!
Who controls language, controls people.
Language is important. We allow too much misuse over too long a time-period and we risk losing the liberal gains we've made these last few decades. Not just Orwell warned us of this.
We see its misuse even in your post:
"You are willing to spend hours jumping through logic hoops to justify the man's comments"
Which logic hoops? My logic has been consistent. And was I justifying or was I explaining his comments? There's a difference and it's significant.
"You are apoplectic about the outrageous claims of the Durham city council. "
apoplectic: overcome with anger; furious. I think you'll find my tone was reasonable throughout. But you're on-point at least with labelling Durham's claims as "outrageous".
"you defend Peterson to the death."
This implies I let no criticism of him through. But that's not accurate, is it?
"He has millions in his cult of personality"
A cult of personality is totally idealised...without fault. You'll find the vast majority of JP supporters have no problem to criticise him. We see it all the time in comment threads on Youtube, Twitter, news-sites, forums...he's not beyond criticism, ergo he's not a cult of personality by any stretch. He will have a small band of überfans who maybe see him as such, but these won't number millions. Thousands maybe, that's 0.1% of millions.
The (laboured) point is: you're using exaggerated language to artificially strengthen your position: so the focus is not your argument, but the righteousness of your language. We see this problem in Twitter-outrage-spats all the time. It's why they get so out of hand. People wilfully misuse language to score points instead of better framing their argument. Guardian opinion writers are a good (bad) example of this, whereas only 5-10 years ago their language was much more measured, and thus more focussed on whatever their argument was.
And again, it's why Brexit, Trump et al happened. A good (bad) example of Brexit is the criticism of the 350m red bus, with both sides misusing & exaggerating language to strengthen their position instead of their argument. No wonder so many voters didn't really understand what they were voting for, and by extension no wonder why Brexit is in such a mess.
If it carries on like this, we'll end up in an idiocracy. People won't even know what nuance means anymore.
Fascinating.
I hope that going forward you parse JP's words with the same fervor as you have with mine. I think if you do you will find strong evidence of why he empowers sexism and bigotry.
Don’t get drawn in. This thread embodies stupidity
bobbydigital
Player Valuation: £1.5m
You aren't missing anything. Bunch of white guys tying themselves in knots explaining that white privilege doesn't exist and the concept of white privilege is actually "abhorrent" real racism that exists.
Just take it for what it is and if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
dholliday
deconstructed rep
Well, it looks at least like our long debate has tamed the impression JP is a full-on racist & women-hater. You've downgraded to sexism & bigotry and that's only as an empowerment, not a direct accusation.
Small advances and all that.
^^^^^^^^^^^
When you debate with a guy who has to get the last word.
When you debate with a guy who has to get the last word.
- Status