+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

  1. Link to Post #1
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,884
    Thanked 94,606 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Jordan Peterson has been mischaracterized as alt-right

    Dan Sanchez Intellectual Takeout
    Wed, 24 Jan 2018 00:00 UTC



    Psychologist and scholar Jordan B. Peterson recently had another surge in media attention after his blockbuster interview with TV journalist Cathy Newman on Britain's Channel 4. It was actually more of an interrogation than an interview, but by most accounts, Peterson handled it with aplomb.

    His ideological critics have reacted defensively by, among other tactics, trying to cast Peterson as an "alt-right" figure. Having listened to all of the lectures and interviews included in his 37-episode podcast, I can attest that that is a gross mischaracterization.

    Don't Play Their Game
    For example, consider certain remarks he made during the Q&A period following one of his lectures (queued up in the YouTube embed below). An audience member asked a broad question about the recent racially-tinged conflicts that had then just reached a tragic culmination in Charlottesville. In response, Peterson noted that:
    "...the identity politics that has been practiced so assiduously and so devastatingly by the left has been co-opted by the right."
    He warns that "winning" the identity politics game is no victory at all:
    "That's not victory. You just become the most successful exponent of their pathology."
    Specifically, he warned against reacting to the identity politics of the left by descending into a white racial identity politics of the right. That, he said, would be just another instance of the recent broad trend...
    "...where we're making your group identity the most important thing about you. I think that's reprehensible. I think it's devastating. I think it's genocidal in its ultimate expression. I think it will bring down our civilization if we pursue it. We shouldn't be playing that game."
    Genocide is one of Peterson's many scholarly interests. He is fascinated with the problem of evil, which he sees as manifesting starkly in the totalitarian regimes of the 20th century. He has made a deep study of the pathologies that result in genocidal states like the Nazi regime. And he is keen on stressing the much-neglected fact the Soviet regime was quite as enslaving and murderous as the Nazis.

    As those regimes demonstrated, Peterson's claim that identity politics is "genocidal in its ultimate expression" is no exaggeration. Hitler's military invasions and death camps were the ultimate expression of the racialist and nationalist identity politics that spiritually drove Nazism. And Stalin's weaponized famines and "gulag archipelago" were the ultimate expression of the class warfare identity politics that spiritually drove Soviet communism.

    This is not to accuse every white racialist or nationalist of being a closet Nazi, just as it is not to contend that every campus leftist is a would-be Stalin. It is simply to understand that mass atrocity is the logical conclusion of identity politics pursued thoroughly to the bitter end.


    The Way Out of This Ideological Mess
    Not only is Peterson adamantly opposed to identity politics, but his project is decidedly non-political in nature in general. This may be surprising to people who have swallowed the media's attempt to paint him as a political firebrand. As Peterson said in his response:
    "You know, I've thought for a long time about a political career, really forever, since I was like 12, 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 either by me or others."
    Instead, Dr. Peterson's prescription for "how to change the world properly," as he says, is for each individual to focus on self-improvement: to concentrate, not on political crusades, but on his or her own Hero's Journey. (Peterson is also an expert exponent of the Jungian psychological interpretation of heroic mythology.) As he put it:
    "The way forward through the ideological mess... is to place the individual at the place of paramount importance."
    Note that he's not saying that we should politically clamor for more individualistic government policies. Rather, he is saying that the answer is for each person, in his or her own life, to "aim high and put yourself together." Peterson elaborated on this in an interview with Joe Rogan:
    "My sense is that if you want to change the world, you start from yourself and work outward, because you build your competence that way."
    As he has become famous for saying, it can all start with something as humble as cleaning your room:
    "Because the question is, how much are we contributing to the fact that life is an existential catastrophe and a tragedy? How much is our own corruption contributing to that? That's a really a worthwhile question." (...)
    "The things you leave undone. Because you're angry, you're resentful, or you're lazy. You have inertia. Well, you consult your conscience and it says, 'Well, you know, that place over there could use a little work.' It's the same as working on yourself. And so you clean that up, because you can. And then things are a little clearer around you. And you're a little better off, because you've practiced a bit. And so you're a little stronger. And then something else manifests itself and says, 'Well maybe you can take a crack at fixing me too.' So you decide to do that and that gets a little more pristine. And soon..."
    Peterson interrupted his own line of thought at this point, but he continued it in another talk:
    "...and then maybe you'll learn enough by doing that so that you can fix up your family a little bit. And then having done that, you'll have enough character so that when you try to operate in the world, at your job, or maybe in the broader social spheres, that you'll be a force for good instead of harm..."
    Going back to his Q&A comments, he enthused:
    "You can do that! You can do that now! You can do that tomorrow! You can put your life together... You pick up your goddamn responsibilities, sort yourself out, fix up your family right, and then you can be a force for good in the culture. And if enough people do that, the ideological mess will just evaporate. It'll just disappear."

    Do It By Example
    Alt-right commenters have accused Peterson of being naive about this. Self-improvement is all well and good, they say, but how is cleaning your room supposed to fend off the leftist barbarians at the gates?

    Such critics don't understand what Peterson is saying, because they are mired in the mindsets of politics and war. The way of politics and war is to confront an enemy horde by amassing your own horde: whether it be on the battlefield, in street demonstrations, or in voting booths. It is to fight tribal barbarism by tending toward the tribal and the barbaric yourself. But the way of the heroic, civilized individual is to lead by example and to lead by appealing to the interests of those whose behavior you want to influence.

    As opposed to purely political questions, with matters of what is necessary to personally thrive, individuals actually have skin in the game, and so are more open to challenging messages and less likely to cling rigidly to their dogmas. And individualism is not only good for society but for the individual soul, while collectivism leads not only to mass atrocity but personal stagnation. So many people are stuck in ruts in their lives, because they are preoccupied with politically-charged resentments and fears instead of fully tending to their own lives and relationships.

    Someone who embraces individualism, not merely as a political program, but as a way of life, can have tremendous power to persuade and inspire. When others see such model individuals sorting out their lives, living free of the life-debilitating resentments that haunt SJWs and alt-righters alike, and generally thriving, that is a much more powerful argument for individualism than a million sarcastic memes. That is why Peterson himself has changed so many lives for the better. As Peterson concluded his remarks:
    "I think that's the way you show people the right path forward, too. You say, well look, we would like it so much if you could thrive as an individual. Drop your cult-like affiliation. Step out of the shadows, the demonic shadows of your ideological possession, and step forward as a fully-developed person into the light. Do it by example. That's your best bet, man. That's what it looks like to me."
    I hope now you can see why painting an anti-Nazi individualist as "alt-right" is extremely inaccurate. The alt-right is mired in identity politics, is feverishly political, is driven by resentment, and adopts a war footing toward ideological opponents. Jordan Peterson, in contrast, is offering people a wholesome alternative to the alt-right: a humane, civilized, thoughtful, high-minded, empowering, and goodwill-driven philosophy of heroic individualism.

    Mark the difference.



    Related:
    Jordan Peterson: 'Postmodernism is destructive, and its origins are Marxist' (VIDEO)

    Jordan Peterson: YouTube's new father figure

    Inspired by Jordan Peterson: Insisting on truth in a time of chaos

    Jordan Peterson temporarily banned by Google and YouTube, no justification given

    Jordan Peterson Was Right About Universities and Bill C-16

    Christie Blatchford interviews 'warrior for common sense' Jordan Peterson
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  2. The Following 36 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Alan (19th September 2018), anandacate (1st April 2018), Antagenet (11th December 2018), Astute (16th December 2018), Bill Ryan (28th January 2018), Billy (25th January 2018), BMJ (28th January 2018), Chip (24th January 2019), damian (29th January 2018), DeDukshyn (19th September 2018), Denise/Dizi (2nd June 2019), Deux Corbeaux (19th September 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Ewan (25th January 2018), Foxie Loxie (25th January 2018), gaiagirl (17th September 2018), genevieve (10th February 2018), Islander12 (1st June 2019), Ivanhoe (1st June 2019), johnji (29th January 2018), Justplain (10th February 2018), NancyV (19th September 2018), Navigator (28th January 2018), onawah (28th January 2018), peterpam (11th December 2018), Rahkyt (23rd January 2019), Satori (28th January 2018), seko (28th January 2018), Sophocles (17th September 2018), Star Mariner (8th June 2019), T Smith (18th September 2018), Tintin (2nd June 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018), Wind (26th January 2018), wisky (1st June 2019), wondering (25th January 2018)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Australia Avalon Member BMJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th May 2010
    Posts
    1,269
    Thanks
    35,829
    Thanked 5,665 times in 1,114 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    I have to bump this thread.


    This is a great counter to the complete conformist ideas of tptw which they have been rolling out via media, technology, politics and social sites.


    The idea here as a counter , is at it's core embrace individualism and responsibility for your thoughts, actions, morality, creativity etc.


    A good example in our current sphere is this QAnon business unbeknown to most it is an exercise in promoting critical thinking by individual's that is being promoted by Trump team and so is in part a counter to tptw idea's.
    Last edited by BMJ; 28th January 2018 at 16:21.

  4. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to BMJ For This Post:

    Astute (16th December 2018), Bill Ryan (28th January 2018), Chip (24th January 2019), Deux Corbeaux (27th January 2019), DNA (18th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (28th January 2018), Hervé (28th January 2018), johnji (29th January 2018), Navigator (28th January 2018), peterpam (11th December 2018), Satori (28th January 2018), T Smith (18th September 2018), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  5. Link to Post #3
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,884
    Thanked 94,606 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Jordan Peterson's Vice News Interview: Another Cathy Newman Moment

    Joe Quinn Sott.net
    Fri, 09 Feb 2018 21:40 UTC


    The short video below is the latest of many dozens of interviews that Jordan Peterson has given over the last year, yet it stands out as one of the very few that were conducted by a reporter that was either hostile towards, or largely clueless about, Peterson's agenda. In their short write-up on their website, Vice News describes Peterson's book, 12 Rules for Life, as "a mix of pop psychology and self-help" which, for anyone familiar with the book or Peterson's work, tells you all you need to know about Vice News.

    The interview with Peterson is less than 6 minutes long, yet even in that short period of time, the Vice reporter manages to expose his own ignorance while Peterson conveys the depth of his thinking on the issues of the #metoo movement, sexual harassment in the workplace and 'political correctness' in general.

    The Vice reporter gets straight to the point when he suggests that political correctness in universities is confined to university campuses and that it is not "veering towards apocalypse". Peterson points out that "it's spreading into corporations throughout the US via HR departments". Which is true. The reporter counters with "yes, but in what ways that are not 'hey, how about you not grab the ass of your coworker..."

    Peterson gives the example of NBC regulating hugging among employees. The reporter suggested that this was "a response to generations of men taking advantage". Peterson tries to help him understand the deeper point, that "it's not easy to solve a complicated problem and ready-made ideological solutions don't work, they make it worse", which the reporter ignorantly dismisses as "just a maxim", when it clearly is not in this instance, because it directly relates to the deeper point Peterson is making.

    So Peterson again tries to explain by saying that it's not about a single question but a series of questions that no one is posing. He then offers one of those questions: "Can men and women work together?" This is an important question, but the Vice reporter thinks it's ludicrous: 'Of course men and women can work together!' The Vice reporter works with many women! Yet the point is that, if employers have to resort to regulating hugging between workers, then the fundamental question of whether or not men and women can work together SHOULD be asked, because that is what is implied by taking the step of regulating hugging.

    And where do we draw the line? If employers regulate hugging, but men still 'harass' women in some way, what is the next step? What is the last step? Segregation? If so, have we not then answered the question of whether or not men and women can work together? Let's assume no one wants to go there. So how do we solve this alleged problem that has all of Western society in its thrall? Peterson asks another of the unasked questions relating to 'sexual harassment' in the workplace, which must be asked if the problem is to be properly addressed and solved: "Should women wear makeup in the workplace?" The Vice reporter laughs at what strikes him as an outrageous question. But it's not.

    The source of sexual harassment in the workplace (and elsewhere) is men, right? NBC has taken the step of regulating hugging between coworkers in an effort to prevent lecherous men from exploiting women. Is that going to work? Maybe, maybe not. But if the goal is to sexually sanitize the workplace, we need to look at all possible factors contributing to the problem. One factor, clearly, is women who wear makeup to work. Peterson explains, accurately, the reason (most) women wear makeup: to increase their sexual attractiveness to men. Why would women continue to do that if their declared goal is to prevent unwanted sexual advances? The answer, of course, is that women would continue to do that if they are completely unaware of their own primitive biological drives, supplanting the reality of those drives with a carefully crafted (albeit unconscious) narrative of innocence and purity that dumps responsibility for sexual attraction at the feet of men only.

    Peterson thinks not just one step ahead, but many. He does his best to see where ideas, and especially ideologies, will lead societies, and demands that everyone adhering to or promoting an ideology be damn sure they have thought seriously about the possible or probable destination. No one can be 100% sure about the end result of an ideology, but only a fool would disregard the lessons of history, particularly those of the 20th century, when in a very short period of time, major ideologies swept human societies down the road to massive death and suffering.

    That death and suffering didn't just come out of nowhere. Each step was preceded by a smaller step that made tragedy just a tad more possible than it was before. Often those steps took the form of new, vaguely defined "crimes" that seemed to make sense at the time and address a real issue, but which were then applied in truly Kafka-esque fashions that even their supporters didn't see coming. That is what is happening today, and that is what Peterson is bringing attention to. For example, no one disagrees that rape is abhorrent, but rape has been steadily stripped of its semantic content to the point that it can now apply to consensual sex that the woman decides she didn't want at any time after the act, whether the next day, or weeks or months later. The same goes for "harassment", which can now be applied to any behavior the "victim" finds offensive, including any form of unwanted sexual attention. That can be a well-intentioned hug, an awkwardly phrased request for a date, or a look that lingers for a second too long.

    Feminists like the Vice reporters may think that it's a good thing that such behaviors are being steadily responded to with stronger and stronger consequences for the "offender". But what such feminists don't seem to realize - or don't seem to care about - is that by putting the onus of proof on the accused instead of the accuser, any man (and in the future, any woman) may find themselves accused of crimes they simply did not commit. That makes everyone a potential offender. All it takes is an accusation, a denunciation. That is a very dangerous step to take. And unfortunately for all of us, we're already well on our way.

    Too many times in the past, human society has sleepwalked into massive upheaval and suffering. Very few saw what was coming and attempted to avert disaster. Most didn't even realize their predicament until the point of no return had been passed. If we are to avoid yet another repeat of history, people like Peterson are desperately needed to sound the warning bell well ahead of time.


    Related:
    The Channel 4 full interview with Cathy Newman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  6. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Alan (19th September 2018), Astute (16th December 2018), BMJ (11th June 2019), Chip (24th January 2019), Deux Corbeaux (19th September 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (10th February 2018), genevieve (10th February 2018), peterpam (11th December 2018), Rahkyt (23rd January 2019), Sophocles (17th September 2018), Star Mariner (8th June 2019), T Smith (2nd June 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    26th December 2010
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    9,562
    Thanks
    37,831
    Thanked 52,741 times in 8,858 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    Jordan Peterson's Vice News Interview: Another Cathy Newman Moment

    Joe Quinn Sott.net
    Fri, 09 Feb 2018 21:40 UTC


    The short video below is the latest of many dozens of interviews that Jordan Peterson has given over the last year, yet it stands out as one of the very few that were conducted by a reporter that was either hostile towards, or largely clueless about, Peterson's agenda. In their short write-up on their website, Vice News describes Peterson's book, 12 Rules for Life, as "a mix of pop psychology and self-help" which, for anyone familiar with the book or Peterson's work, tells you all you need to know about Vice News.

    The interview with Peterson is less than 6 minutes long, yet even in that short period of time, the Vice reporter manages to expose his own ignorance while Peterson conveys the depth of his thinking on the issues of the #metoo movement, sexual harassment in the workplace and 'political correctness' in general.

    The Vice reporter gets straight to the point when he suggests that political correctness in universities is confined to university campuses and that it is not "veering towards apocalypse". Peterson points out that "it's spreading into corporations throughout the US via HR departments". Which is true. The reporter counters with "yes, but in what ways that are not 'hey, how about you not grab the ass of your coworker..."

    Peterson gives the example of NBC regulating hugging among employees. The reporter suggested that this was "a response to generations of men taking advantage". Peterson tries to help him understand the deeper point, that "it's not easy to solve a complicated problem and ready-made ideological solutions don't work, they make it worse", which the reporter ignorantly dismisses as "just a maxim", when it clearly is not in this instance, because it directly relates to the deeper point Peterson is making.

    So Peterson again tries to explain by saying that it's not about a single question but a series of questions that no one is posing. He then offers one of those questions: "Can men and women work together?" This is an important question, but the Vice reporter thinks it's ludicrous: 'Of course men and women can work together!' The Vice reporter works with many women! Yet the point is that, if employers have to resort to regulating hugging between workers, then the fundamental question of whether or not men and women can work together SHOULD be asked, because that is what is implied by taking the step of regulating hugging.

    And where do we draw the line? If employers regulate hugging, but men still 'harass' women in some way, what is the next step? What is the last step? Segregation? If so, have we not then answered the question of whether or not men and women can work together? Let's assume no one wants to go there. So how do we solve this alleged problem that has all of Western society in its thrall? Peterson asks another of the unasked questions relating to 'sexual harassment' in the workplace, which must be asked if the problem is to be properly addressed and solved: "Should women wear makeup in the workplace?" The Vice reporter laughs at what strikes him as an outrageous question. But it's not.

    The source of sexual harassment in the workplace (and elsewhere) is men, right? NBC has taken the step of regulating hugging between coworkers in an effort to prevent lecherous men from exploiting women. Is that going to work? Maybe, maybe not. But if the goal is to sexually sanitize the workplace, we need to look at all possible factors contributing to the problem. One factor, clearly, is women who wear makeup to work. Peterson explains, accurately, the reason (most) women wear makeup: to increase their sexual attractiveness to men. Why would women continue to do that if their declared goal is to prevent unwanted sexual advances? The answer, of course, is that women would continue to do that if they are completely unaware of their own primitive biological drives, supplanting the reality of those drives with a carefully crafted (albeit unconscious) narrative of innocence and purity that dumps responsibility for sexual attraction at the feet of men only.

    Peterson thinks not just one step ahead, but many. He does his best to see where ideas, and especially ideologies, will lead societies, and demands that everyone adhering to or promoting an ideology be damn sure they have thought seriously about the possible or probable destination. No one can be 100% sure about the end result of an ideology, but only a fool would disregard the lessons of history, particularly those of the 20th century, when in a very short period of time, major ideologies swept human societies down the road to massive death and suffering.

    That death and suffering didn't just come out of nowhere. Each step was preceded by a smaller step that made tragedy just a tad more possible than it was before. Often those steps took the form of new, vaguely defined "crimes" that seemed to make sense at the time and address a real issue, but which were then applied in truly Kafka-esque fashions that even their supporters didn't see coming. That is what is happening today, and that is what Peterson is bringing attention to. For example, no one disagrees that rape is abhorrent, but rape has been steadily stripped of its semantic content to the point that it can now apply to consensual sex that the woman decides she didn't want at any time after the act, whether the next day, or weeks or months later. The same goes for "harassment", which can now be applied to any behavior the "victim" finds offensive, including any form of unwanted sexual attention. That can be a well-intentioned hug, an awkwardly phrased request for a date, or a look that lingers for a second too long.

    Feminists like the Vice reporters may think that it's a good thing that such behaviors are being steadily responded to with stronger and stronger consequences for the "offender". But what such feminists don't seem to realize - or don't seem to care about - is that by putting the onus of proof on the accused instead of the accuser, any man (and in the future, any woman) may find themselves accused of crimes they simply did not commit. That makes everyone a potential offender. All it takes is an accusation, a denunciation. That is a very dangerous step to take. And unfortunately for all of us, we're already well on our way.

    Too many times in the past, human society has sleepwalked into massive upheaval and suffering. Very few saw what was coming and attempted to avert disaster. Most didn't even realize their predicament until the point of no return had been passed. If we are to avoid yet another repeat of history, people like Peterson are desperately needed to sound the warning bell well ahead of time.

    Related:
    The Channel 4 full interview with Cathy Newman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

    I had to substantially cut Hervé's post because i was having messages of being more than 5000 words and it would not post - which is weird, never had that before, anyhow, here my comments.

    I like Peterson, he is asking the right questions.

    This reminds me when I was working in Turkey - YES TURKEY, A MUSLIM COUNTRY - where there is more professional working women than in France, and of course, women would put makeup to go to work. Well, when I was there, I would put makeup to go to a work meeting, and then I arrive at a large corporation whose Vice-President was a woman, my age, and she had no make up, while she had previously.

    Believe it or not, I inquired why to her. She told me that executive women throughout the country had decided to wear no makeup whatsoever, to be on the same footing as men.

    I found it very compelling.

    I also remember a Canadian psychologist asking me, when I was horrified at women wearing the chador in Canada, well he asked me what is the difference between being entirely covered up, versus wearing makeup, lipstick, eyelash, false breast, false buttock, high heels.

    They are both costume to hide who you truly are aren't they - to tell the truth, I had no comments to his question, I could not answer, he was right. We are talking here 25 years ago, and it has gotten worst.

    I must say that I have seen first-hand sexual discrimination (fewer women selected for higher paid jobs, regardless of competencies - very sturdy glass ceiling) in the workforce and plain sexual harassment (or sexual threats to have promotions for example). Up to a point where we were telling ourselves, the girls, that we wanted to be 40 so that it would stop. And then getting there and it only slowed down, did not stop.
    Last edited by Flash; 10th February 2018 at 15:21.

  8. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    Astute (16th December 2018), AutumnW (11th February 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (10th February 2018), Hervé (10th February 2018), peterpam (25th March 2019), Sophocles (10th November 2018), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Turkey Avalon Member
    Join Date
    29th January 2011
    Location
    Planet Earth. Possibly for too long.
    Age
    42
    Posts
    197
    Thanks
    207
    Thanked 1,073 times in 179 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote I also remember a Canadian psychologist asking me, when I was horrified at women wearing the chador in Canada, well he asked me what is the difference between being entirely covered up, versus wearing makeup, lipstick, eyelash, false breast, false buttock, high heels.
    Hey Flash, if you ever see that Canadian psychologist again remind him/her about the repressing of women, disrespect to feminine side, not having vote in political system etc.etc. To be honest the question he asked you is utter nonsense.

    By the way, I tried to like what Jordan Peterson says but nope, seriously didnt like anything about him. He gives the energy of a clever ego+ narcissistic/aggressive mind disguised in clever "alternative" rhetoric, "ooooh look at him, he is intelligent and he is against mainstream media, mainstream thoughts etc.etc." I tried to listen to what he says in a couple of speeches but couldnt find anything interesting - except that big ego trying to disguise (it cannot of course). I dont know why alternative culture tries to make a big deal out of him?

  10. Link to Post #6
    Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    26th December 2010
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    9,562
    Thanks
    37,831
    Thanked 52,741 times in 8,858 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote Posted by Feritciva (here)
    Quote I also remember a Canadian psychologist asking me, when I was horrified at women wearing the chador in Canada, well he asked me what is the difference between being entirely covered up, versus wearing makeup, lipstick, eyelash, false breast, false buttock, high heels.
    Hey Flash, if you ever see that Canadian psychologist again remind him/her about the repressing of women, disrespect to feminine side, not having vote in political system etc.etc. To be honest the question he asked you is utter nonsense.

    By the way, I tried to like what Jordan Peterson says but nope, seriously didnt like anything about him. He gives the energy of a clever ego+ narcissistic/aggressive mind disguised in clever "alternative" rhetoric, "ooooh look at him, he is intelligent and he is against mainstream media, mainstream thoughts etc.etc." I tried to listen to what he says in a couple of speeches but couldnt find anything interesting - except that big ego trying to disguise (it cannot of course). I dont know why alternative culture tries to make a big deal out of him?
    Well, for the psychologist, what I understood very clearly is that women are taken by the repressive society in all aspect, be it in Muslim fundamentalism or in disguise of unnatural nature like in America or Europe. This is basically the same refusal of women being whom they are, simply women, without having to do with all kind of gymnastics just to survive in this world, like full covered dresses or full surgeries for covering nature.

    In this I agree When I see women not able to go out without makeup, or implanting false breast to feel desired because some men want it, aren't we under the same intended male ownership?

    As for Americans not taking responsibilities going with the given rights, and this is more obvious in the left "socialistic" country that is Canada, rights so outweight responsibilities that it becomes ridiculous.

    Right of the criminals far overweight right or the victims in Canada, far far overweight it (a recidivist pedophile for example will usually have between 6 months and 2 years of jail).
    On the other hand, right of children covered by venemous parents who have the teacher under their fist and teachers that cannot teach anylonger, rights... name it.
    You definitely do not have this societal problem yet in Turkey as for the rights of people, you still are fighting and should, for human rights.

    Although you definitely have it as for the inflated artificial implants in women bodies.

    Peterson talks from what he knows, and what he knows is in Universities first, then in the Canadian society. And in this, I agree with him.

    The problem stems from the lack of personal responsibilities at all levels, if we were personally responsible at all level and wanted more of ourselves, we would not support what draws us backward, each one of us.
    Last edited by Flash; 10th February 2018 at 18:10.

  11. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Flash For This Post:

    Chip (24th January 2019), Deux Corbeaux (19th September 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (10th February 2018), Hervé (10th February 2018), peterpam (8th June 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  12. Link to Post #7
    Canada Avalon Member Justplain's Avatar
    Join Date
    8th April 2016
    Posts
    1,191
    Thanks
    3,235
    Thanked 6,545 times in 1,126 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    We need to remember that tptw use whatever means available to divide us, and turn each against the other. If this leads to social fracturing, it increases their ability for creeping regulation and imposition of more government oversight. They would like us to believe that we cant live in peace, that we will always have wars, therefore always need weapons and armies.

    If we recognize that we want not to tread on our neighbours territory, or 'rights', then we only follow a cordial communication with others. Also, we follow the 'maxim' of innocent until proven guilty. When we nitpick about terminology we miss the point. Behaving in a civilized manner to others is of utmost importance. Witch hunts based on innuendo and rumors is a harmful waste of time.

  13. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Justplain For This Post:

    Deux Corbeaux (19th September 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Hervé (10th February 2018), peterpam (25th March 2019), Sophocles (17th September 2018), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  14. Link to Post #8
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    4th November 2012
    Posts
    2,210
    Thanks
    3,982
    Thanked 8,840 times in 1,934 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote Posted by Flash (here)
    Quote Posted by Hervé (here)
    Jordan Peterson's Vice News Interview: Another Cathy Newman Moment

    Joe Quinn Sott.net
    Fri, 09 Feb 2018 21:40 UTC


    The short video below is the latest of many dozens of interviews that Jordan Peterson has given over the last year, yet it stands out as one of the very few that were conducted by a reporter that was either hostile towards, or largely clueless about, Peterson's agenda. In their short write-up on their website, Vice News describes Peterson's book, 12 Rules for Life, as "a mix of pop psychology and self-help" which, for anyone familiar with the book or Peterson's work, tells you all you need to know about Vice News.

    The interview with Peterson is less than 6 minutes long, yet even in that short period of time, the Vice reporter manages to expose his own ignorance while Peterson conveys the depth of his thinking on the issues of the #metoo movement, sexual harassment in the workplace and 'political correctness' in general.

    The Vice reporter gets straight to the point when he suggests that political correctness in universities is confined to university campuses and that it is not "veering towards apocalypse". Peterson points out that "it's spreading into corporations throughout the US via HR departments". Which is true. The reporter counters with "yes, but in what ways that are not 'hey, how about you not grab the ass of your coworker..."

    Peterson gives the example of NBC regulating hugging among employees. The reporter suggested that this was "a response to generations of men taking advantage". Peterson tries to help him understand the deeper point, that "it's not easy to solve a complicated problem and ready-made ideological solutions don't work, they make it worse", which the reporter ignorantly dismisses as "just a maxim", when it clearly is not in this instance, because it directly relates to the deeper point Peterson is making.

    So Peterson again tries to explain by saying that it's not about a single question but a series of questions that no one is posing. He then offers one of those questions: "Can men and women work together?" This is an important question, but the Vice reporter thinks it's ludicrous: 'Of course men and women can work together!' The Vice reporter works with many women! Yet the point is that, if employers have to resort to regulating hugging between workers, then the fundamental question of whether or not men and women can work together SHOULD be asked, because that is what is implied by taking the step of regulating hugging.

    And where do we draw the line? If employers regulate hugging, but men still 'harass' women in some way, what is the next step? What is the last step? Segregation? If so, have we not then answered the question of whether or not men and women can work together? Let's assume no one wants to go there. So how do we solve this alleged problem that has all of Western society in its thrall? Peterson asks another of the unasked questions relating to 'sexual harassment' in the workplace, which must be asked if the problem is to be properly addressed and solved: "Should women wear makeup in the workplace?" The Vice reporter laughs at what strikes him as an outrageous question. But it's not.

    The source of sexual harassment in the workplace (and elsewhere) is men, right? NBC has taken the step of regulating hugging between coworkers in an effort to prevent lecherous men from exploiting women. Is that going to work? Maybe, maybe not. But if the goal is to sexually sanitize the workplace, we need to look at all possible factors contributing to the problem. One factor, clearly, is women who wear makeup to work. Peterson explains, accurately, the reason (most) women wear makeup: to increase their sexual attractiveness to men. Why would women continue to do that if their declared goal is to prevent unwanted sexual advances? The answer, of course, is that women would continue to do that if they are completely unaware of their own primitive biological drives, supplanting the reality of those drives with a carefully crafted (albeit unconscious) narrative of innocence and purity that dumps responsibility for sexual attraction at the feet of men only.

    Peterson thinks not just one step ahead, but many. He does his best to see where ideas, and especially ideologies, will lead societies, and demands that everyone adhering to or promoting an ideology be damn sure they have thought seriously about the possible or probable destination. No one can be 100% sure about the end result of an ideology, but only a fool would disregard the lessons of history, particularly those of the 20th century, when in a very short period of time, major ideologies swept human societies down the road to massive death and suffering.

    That death and suffering didn't just come out of nowhere. Each step was preceded by a smaller step that made tragedy just a tad more possible than it was before. Often those steps took the form of new, vaguely defined "crimes" that seemed to make sense at the time and address a real issue, but which were then applied in truly Kafka-esque fashions that even their supporters didn't see coming. That is what is happening today, and that is what Peterson is bringing attention to. For example, no one disagrees that rape is abhorrent, but rape has been steadily stripped of its semantic content to the point that it can now apply to consensual sex that the woman decides she didn't want at any time after the act, whether the next day, or weeks or months later. The same goes for "harassment", which can now be applied to any behavior the "victim" finds offensive, including any form of unwanted sexual attention. That can be a well-intentioned hug, an awkwardly phrased request for a date, or a look that lingers for a second too long.

    Feminists like the Vice reporters may think that it's a good thing that such behaviors are being steadily responded to with stronger and stronger consequences for the "offender". But what such feminists don't seem to realize - or don't seem to care about - is that by putting the onus of proof on the accused instead of the accuser, any man (and in the future, any woman) may find themselves accused of crimes they simply did not commit. That makes everyone a potential offender. All it takes is an accusation, a denunciation. That is a very dangerous step to take. And unfortunately for all of us, we're already well on our way.

    Too many times in the past, human society has sleepwalked into massive upheaval and suffering. Very few saw what was coming and attempted to avert disaster. Most didn't even realize their predicament until the point of no return had been passed. If we are to avoid yet another repeat of history, people like Peterson are desperately needed to sound the warning bell well ahead of time.

    Related:
    The Channel 4 full interview with Cathy Newman: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54

    I had to substantially cut Hervé's post because i was having messages of being more than 5000 words and it would not post - which is weird, never had that before, anyhow, here my comments.

    I like Peterson, he is asking the right questions.

    This reminds me when I was working in Turkey - YES TURKEY, A MUSLIM COUNTRY - where there is more professional working women than in France, and of course, women would put makeup to go to work. Well, when I was there, I would put makeup to go to a work meeting, and then I arrive at a large corporation whose Vice-President was a woman, my age, and she had no make up, while she had previously.

    Believe it or not, I inquired why to her. She told me that executive women throughout the country had decided to wear no makeup whatsoever, to be on the same footing as men.

    I found it very compelling.

    I also remember a Canadian psychologist asking me, when I was horrified at women wearing the chador in Canada, well he asked me what is the difference between being entirely covered up, versus wearing makeup, lipstick, eyelash, false breast, false buttock, high heels.

    They are both costume to hide who you truly are aren't they - to tell the truth, I had no comments to his question, I could not answer, he was right. We are talking here 25 years ago, and it has gotten worst.

    I must say that I have seen first-hand sexual discrimination (fewer women selected for higher paid jobs, regardless of competencies - very sturdy glass ceiling) in the workforce and plain sexual harassment (or sexual threats to have promotions for example). Up to a point where we were telling ourselves, the girls, that we wanted to be 40 so that it would stop. And then getting there and it only slowed down, did not stop.
    Interesting Flash. In our society it is all about sending out mixed signals. But I question your idea of women being essentially 'owned' in both cultures. Women wield much more power in Western society than we, as women are willing to admit.

  15. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to AutumnW For This Post:

    Deux Corbeaux (1st June 2019), DNA (18th September 2018), Flash (11th February 2018), Hervé (13th February 2018), peterpam (25th March 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  16. Link to Post #9
    Canada Avalon Member
    Join Date
    4th November 2012
    Posts
    2,210
    Thanks
    3,982
    Thanked 8,840 times in 1,934 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Peterson seems to be focussing on character as primary and that each of us have the task of doing the very best we cam as we let political and cultural considerations and affiliations fade into the background. We should approach each other as individuals, not as symbols.

    Our society over politicizes the personal and overly personalizes the political.

  17. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to AutumnW For This Post:

    Deux Corbeaux (1st June 2019), DNA (18th September 2018), Flash (11th February 2018), Foxie Loxie (17th September 2018), Hervé (13th February 2018), peterpam (11th December 2018), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  18. Link to Post #10
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,884
    Thanked 94,606 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Jordan Peterson: An Education in One Evening

    Jeffrey A. Tucker, AIER
    The Epoch Times
    Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00 UTC


    Jordan Peterson, author of "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos"© Courtesy of Jordan Peterson

    Jordan Peterson is our tour guide for the modern world
    Jordan Peterson might be today's most influential public intellectual, having achieved that fame in only two years, following a long career as an academic and a practicing clinical psychologist. He burst onto the media scene with a hard stand against forced speech imposed by a law in Canada. Then, he became a symbol of resistance against the wild excesses of postmodern identity politics.

    The media have yet to figure this out, but their jeering attacks on him have unleashed a lion.

    Today, he travels the country and the world, selling out theater venues like a rockstar, with tickets going for $60 to $300 each, along with hats and t-shirts being snapped up in the lobby and a long line of people wanting pictures for their social profiles. He has just booked another 50 appearances, in addition to the 50 currently on the list, with the venues getting larger by the week.

    Think of it: You can buy tickets to hear the thoughts of a quiet classic liberal intellectual on StubHub!

    It's all truly hard to believe or even imagine. For those of us who believe in ideas - at a time when free speech and free thought in academia are rare, and media culture reduces all ideas to angry sound bites and partisan politics - this is a hugely encouraging phenomenon. It means that serious thought isn't dying; on the contrary, there is such a high demand for penetrating and profound ideas that regular people are willing to pay to get them.

    A Singular Figure

    It's perhaps true that Noam Chomsky could have filled up such a theater at the height of the Vietnam War. Maybe William F. Buckley could have done the same at one point in his career. But I'm not sure either one of these could have gone on tour and reliably filled thousands of seats with paying customers night after night, for month after month. Ayn Rand is another possible case, but I doubt her demographic draw would have been as vast and varied.

    I'm trying to think of any other living intellectual - a pure intellectual, not a comedian or sports star or musician or rabble-rousing political commentator - who could pack a house of 3,000 people paying this amount to see him. Maybe I've overlooked someone, but I can't think of anyone.

    And so you wonder what's really behind this remarkable rise of this man and his show. If you look him up, you will find no shortage of opinion pieces that suggest that Peterson is all about anger, resentment against modernity, some rebellious and maybe bigoted movement of reaction and authoritarianism.

    The problem with these claims is that there isn't a shred of evidence to back them up; they are easily and instantly refuted by the slightest exposure to the Peterson corpus, whether on video or in print.

    Appearance
    Last night, I attended a lecture at a venue outside of Hartford, Connecticut. The show seemed to have every seat filled: people from all walks of life, but they mostly tilted in the young direction. There was an announcement regarding a no-video policy, otherwise, our view would have been blocked by hundreds of cell phones held high for 90 minutes.

    The announcer further said there would be no heckling of any sort allowed, under any circumstances. The people cheered, I among them. I think we are all pretty well fed up with tribal wars being fought with screams, signs, and anger. We came to listen and learn. That's all.

    The opener was Dave Rubin (who recently interviewed me). He skillfully warmed up the crowd with an introduction worthy of a beloved hero. The crowd cheered at every sentence. Rubin knows why people are here. He knows what Peterson has meant to this generation. He knows that everyone there has watched Peterson's YouTube videos and bought his mega-bestselling book 12 Rules.

    Then, Peterson came onstage, and revealed an authentic sense of gratitude and appreciation for those who came just to hear him talk for 90 minutes. He had no magic opening to get people going. On the contrary, he seemed anxious to lower expectations. He began with some small observations about the tour and his book, the strange place in which he finds himself, and some fascinating anecdotes from his long career, spotted with some vignettes from political and economic history.

    He is sometimes inadvertently funny, so sometimes, the audience would laugh affectionately. This would make him laugh in turn, and then wonder out loud why people thought what he said was funny.

    His humility is endearing, really a model. His absolute refusal to engage in any kind of manipulative demagoguery is a fantastic relief. He made it clear within the first 10 minutes that if anyone had come for red meat, he or she will be deeply disappointed.

    This isn't a rally. It's not a cult. It's not a religion. It's not designed for any political purpose. It's not even about Peterson. This show is about serious ideas and nothing else. Its sole goal is to inspire deep thought about life, meaning, purpose, and all of our futures on this earth, which, as he kept reminding us, we will not leave alive.

    Improvisation
    A captivating aspect of listening to Peterson in any venue is merely to observe his uncommon erudition. His vocabulary is vast and effortlessly transferred from mind to voice, flowing from sentence to sentence with penetrating power that seems almost without limit, without a single utterance of "uh" or "hmmm."

    He unveils gradually, with a powerful inner fire, the contents of his mind as it pertains to the great topic of understanding and navigating ourselves and the world around us. It's not clear if he had a particular plan for what he would say that night but he might have; regardless, his speech is different every single time.

    It has an improvisatory feel. The entire package is nothing short of awe-inspiring, and all the more so because Peterson himself isn't particularly interested in his personal talent; for him, it is all about the insight and understanding. He is in awe of the opportunity to do what he does best: teach and counsel.

    Hope

    Once the speech got going, he chose to talk first about the things about the world that aren't getting the headlines today. If you pick up the papers, you would think everything around us is collapsing. But if you look at the data, what you see is very different.

    Poverty is falling at a rate never seen in history. Many fatal diseases are being eradicated. War is less common than ever. Violence is falling. Technology has brought information to the masses. The standard of living around the world-even where it never before existed in any form -is rising at an amazing rate, with only one exception: where political totalitarianism keeps people down.

    And here, he began that real point. It's not enough to rattle off the phenomenal statistics about the improvement of the human condition. We must understand the "why." His answer was clear as a bell: Growing amounts of freedom are unleashing creativity within the structures of capitalistic institutions that are encouraging people to enter into networks of productivity, cooperation, and marvelous achievement.

    At this point, I heard his clearest statement yet about his ideological commitments. He is a proponent of human freedom and human rights, a liberal in the classical sense, which is to say, a genuine liberal who believes in freedom of speech, association, and trade. That seems rather simple to observe but, apparently, not.

    He has been a severe critic of the conventional left, and has thereby been brutally treated by mainstream media, with countless interlocutors attempting to ferret out his inner malice. Incredibly, he has been smeared as having some kind of secret rightist agenda to pave the way for some kind of authoritarian (or racist, misogynist, or you name it) takeover; most absurdly, he has been accused, without the slightest bit of evidence, of carrying water for the alt-right.

    Truth
    The last of those claims is truly infuriating. If anything, he has done herculean work in drawing people away from both rightist and leftist versions of identitarian collectivism. People who worry about the rise of identitarian nationalism and racism as a reaction to the social-democratic left should be deeply grateful to him, since he explains that there is a liberal alternative.

    Here is a man who stood on stage and talked at length about the two types of poisonous totalitarianism that wrecked the 20th century: communism and Nazism. He urged everyone to read two great books by authors who suffered deeply for their dissent against the regime: Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago and Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning. They aren't extremist literature, but serve to illustrate the moral core of what it means to live in truth and resist the lie, even to the point of massive personal suffering.

    At this point, he revealed much about what is really driving him. He explained that his study of 20th-century totalitarian bloodshed showed him that all modern cases of absolutist despotism weren't really about bad men leading good people into Hell. These experiences were about the willingness of vast numbers of people around the leader and ruled by the leader to lie - or at least decline to tell the truth - because they lacked the conviction to speak the truth, or were too lazy, or feared the consequences.

    The lie, he said, is the reason for the loss of liberty and the good life. The reverse also is true. The key to building and maintaining freedom is to think and speak the truth, even when confronting a world bent on ignoring and disparaging that truth.

    At this point in his lecture, the audience entered into a new level of engagement. Rapt attention. Mouths wide open. No one checking their phones. Everyone still. And so it lasted for another full hour as Peterson's mind traveled through more history, philosophy, sociology, economics, and moral psychology.

    As I thought about it later, it struck me that this 90-minute tour de force nearly amounted to an undergraduate liberal arts education, with this one difference: Students simply aren't learning this material in today's regimented and agenda-driven educational institutions. It's not so much that Peterson is saying new and amazingly innovative things, though there is plenty of new insight here. It's that he is saying real and truly useful things that have emerged from a genuine search for truth.

    Faith
    He demonstrated what the search for truth looks like in his riff on religious faith. It somehow manages to be deeply respectful of the religious narratives, without pushing an implausible piety that today's students would find tendentious and tedious.

    His now-famous commentary on Genesis struck me as truly creative, with an argument that the key to the Western faith is its conviction that humans are made in the image and likeness of God - with the spark of Divinity - and possessing of some features of the creative power that led to the invention of the world itself. If we lose that story, we risk the destruction of the deepest cultural foundation that undergirds our freedom, rights, and prosperity.

    His point isn't that students should be taught religious dogma. Rather, his point was that a real education should lead not to nihilism but a paradigm of meaning that informs the way we conduct our lives. It isn't enough just to tear everything down and cause students to believe only in power as the one real thing, whether good or bad. Educators and intellectuals have a duty to inspire the search for truth and to assist in the discovery of the good in their own lives and the world around them.

    He gave the following vivid illustration of the life of a post-graduation senior just entering the wiles of the workforce and regular life, with all its confusions and challenges. Imagine a helicopter dropping a 22-year-old in the middle of the ocean and the pilot yelling through a megaphone: "Find your way to shore!"

    This is the situation young people find themselves in today, which is precisely why Peterson's clarion call for heroic responsibility resonates so loudly.

    Meaning

    He finally turned to the issue of meaning in life, and the need for adventure, somewhat circling back to his list of modern achievements for human well-being. Human achievements came about because people dedicated themselves to an impossible idea. They took risks. They confronted their deepest fears. They overcame envy, bureaucracy, doubts, and smears. They stood for truth. And they very likely didn't get the credit. But they lived and are living lives of great adventure and meaning.

    So should we all.

    You might be wondering where politics fits into all of this. If any members of the mainstream press who have been smearing this man as nothing but a waterboy for the titanic shift in national and world politics are reading now, please know this. He made himself extremely clear: The key to a good life isn't to be found within politics, it is to be found from within.

    And you know what? The audience cheered. Cheered! What does this tell us about what is happening at these Peterson events? For one thing, it tells me that my initial impressions of him from two years ago were entirely wrong.

    I'm embarrassed to admit that I thought he was just another political pundit on the make, a man who would exploit our anger to gather a cult around himself. I was dead wrong. My presumption reflected my personal exhaustion with this mode of public manipulation that always collapses into some kind of unseemly personality cult or financial racket.

    That is not what Peterson is about. As he himself has gradually come to learn, his voice is part of a long line of liberal intellectuals - even if he rises above most of them in history - there to urge people to turn toward peace, tolerance, personal heroism, and truth, in service of making the best possible use of our days on earth.

    It Ends
    Every great demagogue has a rehearsed and inspiring ending to his speech, something to give people a desire to do something wild and inspire devotion to the person who inspired them to do it. Peterson again defied expectations. He maintained the soft delivery style he used for the entire speech, and finished a final point about being a good person, living a great life, and getting along with others. He then waited a few seconds and quietly said, "And that's all for now."

    The audience rose in applause immediately, out of respect for the man but mainly out of appreciation for his message. As I waited to go backstage, I asked three young men why they had come to this event. The first one, a senior in college and a major in engineering, said very quickly: "I'm searching for meaning in life." His other two colleagues concurred. That was the beginning and end of it. They were thrilled to be here.

    Politics promised to give us a meaningful life. It failed. Now, we have to find it elsewhere. As the poet Virgil led Dante through Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell, Jordan Peterson is the tour guide of the modern world in its confrontation with our inner selves.
    About the Author:
    Jeffrey Tucker is editorial director for the American Institute for Economic Research. He is the author of five books, including Right-Wing Collectivism: The Other Threat to Liberty.
    Related:
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  19. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Bruno (17th September 2018), Deux Corbeaux (19th September 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Flash (17th September 2018), Foxie Loxie (17th September 2018), NancyV (19th September 2018), Paul (17th September 2018), peterpam (8th June 2019), Sophocles (17th September 2018), Star Mariner (8th June 2019), T Smith (2nd June 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  20. Link to Post #11
    United States Avalon Member Foxie Loxie's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th September 2015
    Location
    Central NY
    Age
    75
    Posts
    3,079
    Thanks
    67,683
    Thanked 17,324 times in 2,953 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    A return to "sanity"???

  21. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Foxie Loxie For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Deux Corbeaux (19th September 2018), DNA (18th September 2018), Flash (17th September 2018), Hervé (17th September 2018), Paul (17th September 2018), peterpam (8th June 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  22. Link to Post #12
    Avalon Member Hughe's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th November 2010
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    752
    Thanks
    1,129
    Thanked 2,570 times in 602 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    He is gaining more and more fame on Internet.
    A truck load of motivational speakers can't win over Jordan Peterson's honesty.

    "Trying hard and you will succeed?"
    This is a biggest lie and false hope that motivational speakers, dumb teachers in schools keep talking. Yes, some will rise on top of the food chain but 99% will fail anyway.
    Last edited by Hughe; 19th September 2018 at 02:09.
    For free society!

  23. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Hughe For This Post:

    DeDukshyn (20th September 2018), Flash (11th December 2018), Hervé (21st September 2018), peterpam (11th December 2018), Sophocles (10th November 2018), Wind (23rd September 2018)

  24. Link to Post #13
    Avalon Member Sophocles's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th February 2011
    Location
    Nanset
    Age
    38
    Posts
    752
    Thanks
    13,634
    Thanked 3,849 times in 713 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Why bother with facts when we have (correct) politics?

    Jordan Peterson recently had a talk in Norway. During his stay he also guested a tv-show called "Skavlan". Here in conversation with Annie Løøf (Swedish politician). It`s a short segment about the gender issue. 1,30 minutes.

    Quote Jordan Peterson: "It`s not what the evidence suggests"

    Annie Løøf: " Ok, well, we don`t agree on that"



    Full interview JP on Skavlan:



    Here`s an interview (1h 42 min long) I`m currently watching.

    The yt description:
    Quote "As part of our 30th-anniversary dissection of masculinity, Helen Lewis interrogated controversial Canadian academic and bestselling author Jordan Peterson about the patriarchy, #MeToo, the alt-right, gay parenting, fascist ideologies, his all-beef diet and much more..."
    But so far I think JP does a far better job in his "dissection" of the fallacies/opinions presented by his interviewer...

    Last edited by Sophocles; 10th November 2018 at 06:38.

  25. The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Sophocles For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Chip (24th January 2019), Deux Corbeaux (14th November 2018), Ernie Nemeth (18th June 2019), Flash (11th December 2018), Hervé (10th November 2018), peterpam (8th June 2019), T Smith (2nd June 2019), Valerie Villars (10th November 2018)

  26. Link to Post #14
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,884
    Thanked 94,606 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    The sweet, sweet irony of Jordan Peterson's rise to fame

    Rex Murphy National Post
    Fri, 07 Dec 2018 14:40 UTC


    University of Toronto professor and best-selling author Jordan Peterson is seen at his home in Toronto on May 31, 2017. © Tyler Anderson / National Post

    It's a no-contest, call-off-the-fight race for the ineluctable choice of Canadian book of the year. It has to be 12 Rules for Life

    Who doesn't love a good origin story (Book of Genesis, A Brief History of Time, Batman Begins)?

    Two years ago, almost to the day, a child was born in the little town of ... Sorry, my mistake, let me start again. It's those damn far-too-early Christmas carols.

    Two years ago, almost to the day (Nov. 29, 2017), the University of Toronto's Varsity newspaper carried the bold, not to say ominous, headline: "Hundreds sign open letter to U of T admin calling for Jordan Peterson's termination."

    The story underneath bristled with comminations of Peterson's "gross misconduct," his "efforts at agitation ... inflammatory denunciations ... evident connections to white supremacists ... disruptive behaviour." U of T's administration had acknowledged the "danger he posed both to students and faculty" it claimed, and if he didn't comply with "the law, the Ontario Human Rights Code and university policy" (I paraphrase) his academic goose was cooked, his copybook irredeemably blotted, and his career as a professor would soon be as one with the fates of the Norwegian Blue, the great auk, the dodo and (among the unsophisticated) red wine with fish.

    And how did Peterson respond? Well, thank the stars, he didn't flee into Egypt or, as being more proximate and fairly cheap with Air Miles, Vermont. He stood his well-reasoned ground, exhibited stores of that most fugitive of academic virtues - intellectual courage - and more or less told the pack of puerile leftlings chasing him with pitchforks and torches that their grandmothers wore severely unstylish army boots.


    Demonstrators gather outside Queen’s University’s Grant Hall to protest a lecture by University of Toronto Prof. Jordan Peterson on March 5, 2018. © Elliot Ferguson/Postmedia News

    The only thing I regret as missing from that period, an element which would have poeticized this fable of his emergence on the world stage as a superstar academic, is that he didn't don a chasuble and nail copies of Maps of Meaning (12 Rules was yet to come) to the doors of the U of T Library.

    I've adverted to this point before, but it is such a vat of sweet ironic syrup, it's worth a repeat. If, in place of honourably debating him, his opponents hadn't tried to howl him down, tag him as a bigot, and have him fired, he'd today most likely still be placidly wandering the grounds and groves south of Bloor Street, one among many of the unsung pedagogues of the University of Toronto. Honourable men and women, all, but not, as a rule, to be found lecturing in Madrid one day, Oxford the next, felling shallow leftist interviewers on the BBC (redundancy) the next, podcasting to hundreds of thousands, and racking up more twitter hits than everyone except, maybe, Taylor Swift and Meghan Markle.


    People line up outside Centennial Hall in London, Ont., to hear Prof. Jordan Peterson speak on July 21, 2018. © Shannon Coulter/Postmedia News

    So here he is, just two years on, with 12 Rules for Life surpassing two million in sales, YouTube his (almost) private dominion, his ideas radiated through all the old and new media, and saluted and high-certified by one of the most independent minds in this age of mush-think, Camille Paglia, as "restoring a peak period in North American thought, when Canada was renowned for pioneering, speculative thinkers like media analyst Marshall McLuhan and myth critic Northrop Frye."

    Now there's a trinity: Frye, McLuhan and Peterson.

    She continues with what at least I see as the incontestable observation that she has "yet to see a single profile of Peterson, even from sympathetic journalists, that accurately portrays the vast scope, tenor and importance of his work." To which can only be added she had best not look for one in the darkness visible of most of the Toronto literary media, where reviews have rained down snark and preening put-downs from the mastodons of political correctness and perpetually grieved identity-politics obsessives. To amend a fine declaration - a true academic is not without honour, save in his own home.

    We're about to enter the year-end book review festivals, when the works of the year passing will be given rank and celebration. Some will have a problem this year with a work they can't pass over but which will give them cramps to mention.


    Prof. Jordan Peterson speaks to a sold-out crowd in Grande Prairie, Alta., on Feb. 10, 2018, as part of a tour for his book, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. © Kevin Hampson/Postmedia News

    It's a no-contest, call-off-the-fight race for the ineluctable choice of Canadian book of the year. It has to be 12 Rules for Life from the once near-ostracized clinical psychologist and professor, whom his home university was threatening with dismissal, and fellow faculty more than willing to leave high and dry as the canines barked, Dr. Jordan Peterson.

    By way of coda, I actually think, seriously, the Book of Genesis is the better origin fable, just on language alone. But Jordan Peterson is out front of Batman Begins by whole leagues.

    (Needless disclosure: Jordan Peterson sometimes shows up, and good thing too, in these pages.)
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  27. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    Antagenet (11th December 2018), BMJ (11th June 2019), Bruno (11th December 2018), ByTheNorthernSea (11th December 2018), Deux Corbeaux (2nd June 2019), Flash (11th December 2018), Franny (12th December 2018), NancyV (25th March 2019), peterpam (8th June 2019), Sophocles (11th December 2018), T Smith (2nd June 2019), Valerie Villars (11th December 2018), Wind (12th December 2018)

  28. Link to Post #15
    Avalon Member norman's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th March 2010
    Location
    too close to the hot air exhaust
    Age
    63
    Posts
    4,884
    Thanks
    7,333
    Thanked 22,774 times in 4,212 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
    A return to "sanity"???

    "A Glitch in the Matrix" - Jordan Peterson, the Intellectual Dark Web & the Mainstream Media


    https://medium.com/rebel-wisdom/a-gl...a-f9a82dd096f2



    Journalist David Fuller made the first full documentary about Jordan Peterson, and also used to work at Channel 4 News as producer and reporter for over a decade. He takes a close look at the recent viral interview with Cathy Newman and uses this cultural watershed to unpack the deeper political, psychological and archetypal levels of the clash.

    Rebel Wisdom is a new platform making films about the biggest ideas


    Last edited by norman; 23rd January 2019 at 13:58.
    .................................................. my first language is TYPO..............................................

  29. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to norman For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Deux Corbeaux (27th January 2019), Hervé (23rd January 2019), Ivanhoe (2nd June 2019), NancyV (25th March 2019), onawah (23rd January 2019), peterpam (8th June 2019), Sophocles (23rd January 2019), T Smith (2nd June 2019), Tintin (23rd January 2019)

  30. Link to Post #16
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    10,951
    Thanks
    26,743
    Thanked 46,745 times in 9,535 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Alexandra Bruce's take on THE INTELLECTUAL DARK WEB AND THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA:
    "This is an important documentary by former BBC4 producer, David Fuller that explores what he calls “The shadow side of Liberalism”, which is supposed to be an open and inclusive ideology but having won the culture war, it has become the new elitist Bourgeoisie, as rigid, reactionary and delusional as any previous hegemony.

    We are in a cultural watershed moment. The institutional biases of the Mainstream Media make them incapable of seeing the forces that are challenging their consensus. Fuller unpacks the deeper political, psychological and archetypal levels of the clash, which is being discussed by denizens of what’s being called the “Intellectual Dark Web”, whose most well-known members include Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson, media personalities David Rubin and Ben Shapiro.

    As Peterson says here, the time has come to discuss our fundamental assumptions, such as the dignity of the human soul.

    “You can’t treat yourself properly without assuming that. You can’t have a relationship with another person. You can’t stabilize your family. You can’t have a functional society. So, what does it mean for this human soul to have dignity?

    “Well, part of the idea is that you’re participating in Creation, itself and you do that with your actions and your language. And you get to decide whether you’re tilting the world a bit more towards Heaven or a bit more towards Hell and that’s ACTUALLY what you’re doing. So, that’s a place where the literal and the metaphorical truth come together. And people are terrified of that idea, as they should be, because it’s a massive responsibility.”

    Peterson says there’s a lot of talk about “Rights” without a commensurate discussion of “Responsibilities” when they are two sides of the same coin, although almost never distinguished as such. There’s been only one half of the discussion going on.

    He asks, what are you leaving out of the discussion when you’re not talking about responsibility? Might you be leaving out the meaning of life? As a human being suffering away, what makes it all worthwhile? Rights? It’s almost impossible to describe how bad of an idea that is! Responsibility. That’s what gives life meaning.

    Jordan Peterson says that the new Counter Culture is the idea that you can grow up to become fully responsible and engaged in life and to do something useful; that self-responsibility is the key to healing, self-empowerment and peace. Apparently, Leftists on Twitter have found a way to unanimously despise this message and its messengers."
    https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/jor...nstream-media/
    Last edited by onawah; 23rd January 2019 at 17:57.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  31. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Hervé (23rd January 2019), Ivanhoe (2nd June 2019), NancyV (25th March 2019), peterpam (8th June 2019), Sophocles (23rd January 2019)

  32. Link to Post #17
    France Administrator Hervé's Avatar
    Join Date
    7th March 2011
    Location
    Brittany
    Posts
    16,725
    Thanks
    59,884
    Thanked 94,606 times in 15,435 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    'The left has gone too far': Jordan Peterson gives warning against 'totalitarian tilt' coming from the left

    RT
    Sat, 23 Mar 2019 14:58 UTC


    Professor Jordan Peterson © RT

    Controversial academic Jordan Peterson told RT's Afshin Rattansi that the left's obsession with equality of outcome is doomed to failure, advocating instead for individuals to assume greater personal responsibility.

    "It seems to be very difficult for people on the left to draw a line between what's acceptable and what's unacceptable," Peterson told the host of RT's Going Underground when asked to comment on the rise in popularity of socialism-friendly politicians such as Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn.

    While acknowledging that the moderate left has ushered in labor laws and other reforms which have benefited society, the Canadian professor argued that the emphasis on "diversity, inclusivity and equity is a sign that the left has gone far too far."

    Calls for equality of outcome, as opposed to equality of opportunity, particularly worry Peterson, who has become a pariah among liberals after he spoke out against gender-neutral pronoun legislation being proposed in Canada - an intellectual rebellion which launched him into the limelight.
    I think that any attempt to pursue equality of outcome is doomed to a totalitarian tilt, because it's technically impossible to equalize outcomes across all possible identity groups
    Peterson, however, insisted he has no illusions about the hardships of life which may make socialism so appealing to so many. But he suggested a different path.
    "My contention is the best bet that you have in this veil [vale] of catastrophe and tears is to take responsibility for your own life and speak truthfully and act courageously," he told Rattansi.
    Last edited by Hervé; 25th March 2019 at 14:38.
    "La réalité est un rêve que l'on fait atterrir" San Antonio AKA F. Dard

    Troll-hood motto: Never, ever, however, whatsoever, to anyone, a point concede.

  33. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hervé For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Deux Corbeaux (25th March 2019), Ivanhoe (2nd June 2019), NancyV (25th March 2019), peterpam (8th June 2019), Sophocles (1st June 2019), Tintin (25th March 2019)

  34. Link to Post #18
    Madagascar Avalon Member silvanelf's Avatar
    Join Date
    19th May 2019
    Age
    59
    Posts
    143
    Thanks
    1,467
    Thanked 404 times in 119 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Jordan Peterson doesn't understand postmodernism. What a pile of nonsense in that article!

    Postmodernism and marxism stand in sharp contrast to each other, while both of them have nothing to do with identity politics. I'm surprised that so many forum members are buying Peterson's nonsense hook, line, and sinker.

    Quote taken from the link above:

    Quote Peterson said it's not possible to understand our current society without considering the role postmodernism plays within it, "because postmodernism, in many ways-especially as it's played out politically-is the new skin that the old Marxism now inhabits."

    "Even the French intellectuals had to admit that communism was a bad deal by the end of the 1960s," he said. From there, the communists played a "sleight of hand game, in some sense," and rebranded their ideology "under a postmodern guise."

    "That's where identity politics came from," he said. And from there, it "spread like wildfire" from France, to the United States through the English department at Yale University, "and then everywhere."Marxism preached that the natural and economic landscape is a battle between the so-called proletariat and the bourgeois. It claimed that economic systems were going to enslave people and keep them down, Peterson said.
    https://www.sott.net/article/357261-...-Marxist-VIDEO

  35. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to silvanelf For This Post:

    Akasha (19th June 2019), BMJ (11th June 2019)

  36. Link to Post #19
    Avalon Member T Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    15th January 2011
    Posts
    1,108
    Thanks
    5,978
    Thanked 4,650 times in 999 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote Posted by silvanelf (here)
    Jordan Peterson doesn't understand postmodernism. What a pile of nonsense in that article!

    Postmodernism and marxism stand in sharp contrast to each other, while both of them have nothing to do with identity politics. I'm surprised that so many forum members are buying Peterson's nonsense hook, line, and sinker.

    Quote taken from the link above:

    Quote Peterson said it's not possible to understand our current society without considering the role postmodernism plays within it, "because postmodernism, in many ways-especially as it's played out politically-is the new skin that the old Marxism now inhabits."

    "Even the French intellectuals had to admit that communism was a bad deal by the end of the 1960s," he said. From there, the communists played a "sleight of hand game, in some sense," and rebranded their ideology "under a postmodern guise."

    "That's where identity politics came from," he said. And from there, it "spread like wildfire" from France, to the United States through the English department at Yale University, "and then everywhere."Marxism preached that the natural and economic landscape is a battle between the so-called proletariat and the bourgeois. It claimed that economic systems were going to enslave people and keep them down, Peterson said.
    https://www.sott.net/article/357261-...-Marxist-VIDEO
    From what I've gleaned from Peterson's lectures, he does draw compelling arguments linking Marxism and Postmoderism, i.e. both philosophies describe a dialectic between oppressed and oppressor, with the synthesis being the driving narrative of history. Identity politics, simplified for sake of definition here as the integral aspect of identity being one's group affiliation, assumes the same dialectic, e.g. oppressed vs. oppressor, depending on one's identity politics. It's the same narrative albeit it refines the notion of proletariat and bourgeoisie with tribalism du jour.

    I'm not specifically countering your observations here and am interested to learn how Marxism and Postmodernism stand in such sharp contrast? Elaboration would be helpful to better understand or refute Peterson's position.

    Kind Regards,

    T Smith

  37. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to T Smith For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Deux Corbeaux (2nd June 2019), Hervé (2nd June 2019), silvanelf (2nd June 2019), Wind (2nd June 2019)

  38. Link to Post #20
    France Avalon Member Deux Corbeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    12th August 2018
    Language
    Dutch
    Age
    72
    Posts
    428
    Thanks
    3,602
    Thanked 2,511 times in 406 posts

    Default Re: Jordan Peterson: A Voice Uttering Horse Sense In A Desert Of Thoughts

    Quote Posted by T Smith (here)
    Quote Posted by silvanelf (here)
    Jordan Peterson doesn't understand postmodernism. What a pile of nonsense in that article!

    Postmodernism and marxism stand in sharp contrast to each other, while both of them have nothing to do with identity politics. I'm surprised that so many forum members are buying Peterson's nonsense hook, line, and sinker.

    Quote taken from the link above:

    Quote Peterson said it's not possible to understand our current society without considering the role postmodernism plays within it, "because postmodernism, in many ways-especially as it's played out politically-is the new skin that the old Marxism now inhabits."

    "Even the French intellectuals had to admit that communism was a bad deal by the end of the 1960s," he said. From there, the communists played a "sleight of hand game, in some sense," and rebranded their ideology "under a postmodern guise."

    "That's where identity politics came from," he said. And from there, it "spread like wildfire" from France, to the United States through the English department at Yale University, "and then everywhere."Marxism preached that the natural and economic landscape is a battle between the so-called proletariat and the bourgeois. It claimed that economic systems were going to enslave people and keep them down, Peterson said.
    https://www.sott.net/article/357261-...-Marxist-VIDEO
    From what I've gleaned from Peterson's lectures, he does draw compelling arguments linking Marxism and Postmoderism, i.e. both philosophies describe a dialectic between oppressed and oppressor, with the synthesis being the driving narrative of history. Identity politics, simplified for sake of definition here as the integral aspect of identity being one's group affiliation, assumes the same dialectic, e.g. oppressed vs. oppressor, depending on one's identity politics. It's the same narrative albeit it refines the notion of proletariat and bourgeoisie with tribalism du jour.

    I'm not specifically countering your observations here and am interested to learn how Marxism and Postmodernism stand in such sharp contrast? Elaboration would be helpful to better understand or refute Peterson's position.

    Kind Regards,

    T Smith
    This is all part of what’s called Cultural Marxism.

    Here’s a good documentary

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America.

    https://topdocumentaryfilms.com/cult...ption-america/

    The anti-capitalist principles of Karl Marx are alive and thriving in the United States. That's the opening premise of the documentary Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America, an intriguing examination of the vast divides which exist in modern western society. In the film's estimation, these chasms were created by the infiltration of Marxist ideals into the cultural fabric of the U.S., thus resulting in the erosion of traditionalist, Christian values which have long defined the character of the country.

    The film speaks to an audience that has been soured by the direction of the country in recent decades, and who long for a return to a way of life that last dominated prior to the sexual revolution of the 1960s. The filmmakers believe that's the period in history when the culture first began to reject the values of prior generations, and thereby ushered in a pervasive anti-establishment movement. This new way of thinking was primarily driven by America's susceptible youth.

    Aided by a panel of interview subjects including former presidential candidates Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan, the film attempts to unspool the means by which this revolt was made possible. It places a significant part of the blame firmly at the doorstep of the "Frankfurt School", and Marxist theorist/professor Antonio Gramsci. He believed that a de-Christianization of the west was in order, and could only be achieved through a patient infiltration of its most treasured institutions.

    According to the viewpoints presented in the film, evidence of his mission's success can be found in the destruction of the family unit, the marginalization of religion, and wildly disintegrating sexual morality. Once these fundamentals are violated, all other aspects of a functioning society are made vulnerable as well, including the country's military power, banking systems, protections for gun ownership and the sanctity of the constitution itself.

    Last edited by Deux Corbeaux; 2nd June 2019 at 07:07. Reason: Add video

  39. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Deux Corbeaux For This Post:

    BMJ (11th June 2019), Hervé (2nd June 2019), peterpam (8th June 2019), T Smith (2nd June 2019), Tintin (2nd June 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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