Jordan Peterson Thread.

Status
Not open for further replies.
dholliday said:
there was a time he was seen as a national treasure...haven't kept track of him since, has his rep taken a beating?
Click to expand...

He has said some pretty odd stuff, including how women don't enjoy sex and they have it to keep men happy and this stops straight men from being free from freely enjoying sex
 
coollino said:
He has said some pretty odd stuff, including how women don't enjoy sex and they have it to keep men happy and this stops straight men from being free from freely enjoying sex
Click to expand...

oh dear, i guess i'd need a link to see what he said in full, but generally I wouldn't think a gay man can have much of an opinion on how women may view sex.
 
dholliday said:
there was a time he was seen as a national treasure...haven't kept track of him since, has his rep taken a beating?
Click to expand...
He means he (Fry) has been described as a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like. Which he is, really.

Fry's obv a very bright person - not a serious thinker but then that's clearly not his game. But because he's witty and articulate and on the telly a lot, he passes as an intellectual colossus to the dim of bulb.
From what I can gather Peterson is not a serious thinker either [although it should be his game], so it's a somewhat reasonable equivalence.
 
Black Belt Jones said:
He means he (Fry) has been described as a stupid person's idea of what an intelligent person looks like. Which he is, really.

Fry's obv a very bright person - not a serious thinker but then that's clearly not his game. But because he's witty and articulate and on the telly a lot, he passes as an intellectual colossus to the dim of bulb.
From what I can gather Peterson is not a serious thinker either [although it should be his game], so it's a somewhat reasonable equivalence.
Click to expand...

Who is a (living) serious thinker then in your book? Apart from everyone's go-to answer: Chomsky.
 
Black Belt Jones said:
Fry's obv a very bright person - not a serious thinker but then that's clearly not his game
Click to expand...



He's defo smarter than the lot of us by most metrics. Always found the "thinker" classification a weird one, so vague. Peterson's work is widetly cited and used in modern psychology, he's considered an expert in his field. Does that not count now that he said some poss creepy stuff about women?
 
dholliday said:
Who is a (living) serious thinker then in your book? Apart from everyone's go-to answer: Chomsky.
Click to expand...
I don't think we share a common book, dholliday - most serious thinkers to me are scientists and mathematicians. So the people who I admire as really thinking very deeply about things that shape society are largely unknown to the public - like the person in my avatar, or Sir John Sulston who sadly died earlier this year. Received prob one thousandth of the coverage of Stephen Hawkings passing, and was 1000 times more influential.

I wouldn't say Chomsky was a serious thinker, either, seen as you mention him. He was once, but starting from a premise - 'It's America's fault' and working backwards isn't serious truth-seeking. He's more a Christopher Hitchens figure, an entertaining polemicist.
 
Black Belt Jones said:
I don't think we share a common book, dholliday - most serious thinkers to me are scientists and mathematicians. So the people who I admire as really thinking very deeply about things that shape society are largely unknown to the public - like the person in my avatar, or Sir John Sulston who sadly died earlier this year. Received prob one thousandth of the coverage of Stephen Hawkings passing, and was 1000 times more influential.

I wouldn't say Chomsky was a serious thinker, either, seen as you mention him. He was once, but starting from a premise - 'It's America's fault' and working backwards isn't serious truth-seeking. He's more a Christopher Hitchens figure, an entertaining polemicist.
Click to expand...

Berlin-born Grothendieck? Sulston also a good man, like Sean Carroll nowadays he wanted the public to become more interested.

I'm not sure if I have favourite thinkers myself. I have phases where I discover someone, but the only figures I go back to are Orwell, Adenauer & Malcolm X. So I'd say those 3 are my favourite historical thinkers. Living, well he's not high-brow but I've got a lot of time for Joe Rogan because his thinking is openly flawed, but he tries. It's an important quality.
 
Prevenger17 said:
He's defo smarter than the lot of us by most metrics. Always found the "thinker" classification a weird one, so vague. Peterson's work is widetly cited and used in modern psychology, he's considered an expert in his field. Does that not count now that he said some poss creepy stuff about women?
Click to expand...
An expert in the field of modern psychology - you've a cruel turn of phrase, Prevenger17. It certainly counts for something I guess, but his recent switch of career path doesn't really seem like a man wrestling with weighty problems of the field, asking big questions and determined to get to the bottom of things.
I've no problem with the guy [and was looking forward to your rally report if you'd bothered your arse to go], academia can get stale so I'm impressed with his impetus in some ways - but he's clearly checking out and starting a new career.
 
Black Belt Jones said:
I don't think we share a common book, dholliday - most serious thinkers to me are scientists and mathematicians. So the people who I admire as really thinking very deeply about things that shape society are largely unknown to the public - like the person in my avatar, or Sir John Sulston who sadly died earlier this year. Received prob one thousandth of the coverage of Stephen Hawkings passing, and was 1000 times more influential.

I wouldn't say Chomsky was a serious thinker, either, seen as you mention him. He was once, but starting from a premise - 'It's America's fault' and working backwards isn't serious truth-seeking. He's more a Christopher Hitchens figure, an entertaining polemicist.
Click to expand...
dholliday said:
Berlin-born Grothendieck? Sulston also a good man, like Sean Carroll nowadays he wanted the public to become more interested.

I'm not sure if I have favourite thinkers myself. I have phases where I discover someone, but the only figures I go back to are Orwell, Adenauer & Malcolm X. So I'd say those 3 are my favourite historical thinkers. Living, well he's not high-brow but I've got a lot of time for Joe Rogan because his thinking is openly flawed, but he tries. It's an important quality.
Click to expand...

uff, forgot about Timothy Leary...big fan, his Design for Dying is a brilliant meditation on death, which hopefully I'll be fit enough to re-read when it's near my turn.
 
Aqui1a said:
Not specific to Jordan Peterson, per se, but I thought I'd post it anyway lol

Click to expand...


We can't generalise people that think being a traditional housewife has its upsides. It's a valid view to have, and indeed many modern women, even Left-leaning ones who support traditional feministic ideals, have zero issue with it. The article you link does indeed reveal a split in contemporary Left thinking (the patriarchy is at fault, misogyny is everywhere etc isn't a position which is universal). And this does partly-explain the popularity of JP.

Also, that tweet-comment you linked is very typical of Twitter: it provides no actual argument against whatever the article is saying, it's just making a facetious comment which is designed to gain likes/shares from like-minded (echo-chambery) people.

Where you could criticise Flanagan is that she has a predictable schtick: attacking other women for making independent lifestyle choices. That's why I personally would not seek out her views. But here she has, correctly, identified that progressive leftism is on the wane and JP is benefitting from that. So that's not really the best article to link if one's aim is to belittle her & by extension JP.
 
dholliday said:
We can't generalise people that think being a traditional housewife has its upsides. It's a valid view to have, and indeed many modern women, even Left-leaning ones who support traditional feministic ideals, have zero issue with it. The article you link does indeed reveal a split in contemporary Left thinking (the patriarchy is at fault, misogyny is everywhere etc isn't a position which is universal). And this does partly-explain the popularity of JP.

Also, that tweet-comment you linked is very typical of Twitter: it provides no actual argument against whatever the article is saying, it's just making a facetious comment which is designed to gain likes/shares from like-minded (echo-chambery) people.

Where you could criticise Flanagan is that she has a predictable schtick: attacking other women for making independent lifestyle choices. That's why I personally would not seek out her views. But here she has, correctly, identified that progressive leftism is on the wane and JP is benefitting from that. So that's not really the best article to link if one's aim is to belittle her & by extension JP.
Click to expand...
Progressive leftism is on the wane? Not with government-run universal healthcare, free or reduced-cost higher education, a national minimum income and many other progressive causes gaining in popularity. My goodness, conservative Missourians just voted down right-to-work laws in the state.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top