Author Topic: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?  (Read 269 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Montgomery

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Location: vancouver Island
How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« on: October 08, 2020, 01:37:31 pm »
Is he still the darling of the right or is he now just a hasbeen fool.

Jordan could never get past his apparent Christian belief in a god and not being a Christian. Or vice versa, depending on how he tried to explain the issue away?

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #1 on: October 08, 2020, 02:06:56 pm »
Search it up... lots of hits for him when you search...

Offline Montgomery

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Location: vancouver Island
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #2 on: October 08, 2020, 02:37:37 pm »
Search it up... lots of hits for him when you search...

I'm probably as up to date on Jordan as anyone here but searching doesn't answer the question for me. There are lots of pros and cons on him. My best reference on him would be on the way Sam Harris has exposed his problem on his belief/disbelief in a god and christianity.

Sam credits him with high intelligence  and I have to agree on that. The problem is, people of high intelligence can be very wrong on some issues due to political leaning and much more importantly, childhood indoctrination that is so very pwerful.

That's the reason why a brin surgeon, for instance, can be a Christian believer. Much the same as a duckling can believe that the coyote is it's mother if it's imprinted on the coyote.

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4922
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #3 on: October 08, 2020, 04:41:14 pm »
I don't believe people are right or wrong, but different opinions they have are.  So like you say, I agree with him on some things and disagree on others.

He's been very ill recently, so he's been out of the spotlight for awhile.
"The economy has been relatively strong but Trudeau has chosen to run deficits year after year & has said will continue to do so well into the future.  This means we'll be in a worse & more vulnerable financial position when a recession hits when we HAVE to run deficits again." - Me, Oct. 3, 2019

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #4 on: October 08, 2020, 07:11:12 pm »
I'm probably as up to date on Jordan as anyone here but searching doesn't answer the question for me. There are lots of pros and cons on him. My best reference on him would be on the way Sam Harris has exposed his problem on his belief/disbelief in a god and christianity.

I listened to that, I think.  Harris (and most intellectuals) tower over him and are kind enough to let him off the hook.  I think because he brings a lot of exposure to whatever channel he is in.

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #5 on: October 08, 2020, 07:12:20 pm »
The big problem with Peterson is he has to moralize on everything.  He quotes Nietzsche and adds "that's good" to stuff he agrees with.  Gee, thanks Jordan...

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4922
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2020, 11:46:36 pm »
The big problem with Peterson is he has to moralize on everything.  He quotes Nietzsche and adds "that's good" to stuff he agrees with.  Gee, thanks Jordan...

Nietzsche literally moralized everything.  His books were called "On the Genealogy of Morality" and "Beyond Good and Evil".

But i see what you're saying.  I think to be an academic, you can't be an activist.  You need to look at things objectively, or else it becomes much easier to run into confirmation bias, and then your research is just worthless lies.  From an academic sense, "Hitler did X and that's bad" isn't nearly as important as "Hitler did X because of Y and Z".

Peterson's perspectives on psychology are 1000x more interesting than his political views.
"The economy has been relatively strong but Trudeau has chosen to run deficits year after year & has said will continue to do so well into the future.  This means we'll be in a worse & more vulnerable financial position when a recession hits when we HAVE to run deficits again." - Me, Oct. 3, 2019

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2020, 08:13:52 am »
Nietzsche literally moralized everything.  His books were called "On the Genealogy of Morality" and "Beyond Good and Evil".

Dissecting morality isn't moralizing ?  What are you talking about ?  It's called "BEYOND" Good and Evil, right ?

Quote
But i see what you're saying.  I think to be an academic, you can't be an activist.  You need to look at things objectively, or else it becomes much easier to run into confirmation bias, and then your research is just worthless lies.  From an academic sense, "Hitler did X and that's bad" isn't nearly as important as "Hitler did X because of Y and Z".

Well, I didn't think of it that way but what you wrote makes sense.  I do think academics can be free to moralize, but their primary goal is to assess and provide a landscape for thought and discussion.

Quote
Peterson's perspectives on psychology are 1000x more interesting than his political views.

I actually think there's lots of room right now for a moralist of his ilk.  But he isn't the guy.

Offline Montgomery

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 198
  • Location: vancouver Island
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #8 on: October 09, 2020, 11:19:47 am »
Nietzsche literally moralized everything.  His books were called "On the Genealogy of Morality" and "Beyond Good and Evil".

But i see what you're saying.  I think to be an academic, you can't be an activist.  You need to look at things objectively, or else it becomes much easier to run into confirmation bias, and then your research is just worthless lies.  From an academic sense, "Hitler did X and that's bad" isn't nearly as important as "Hitler did X because of Y and Z".

Peterson's perspectives on psychology are 1000x more interesting than his political views.

Yes, but consider that Jordan's reputation rests largely on his inability to say what he means on being a Christian believer or not. For a highly intelligent individual, that's completely unacceptable.

Harris had the stake ready to drive into his devious heart but must have seen good reasons to allow him to survive. Perhaps Harris was thinking of his value as a 'moralist', as is being hinted at by MH.

I agree with MH in that if we're to have a moralist then the person who takes on the job will have to start from a less flawed position than Jordan's. He can never doubletalk his way out of his Christian/atheist positions.

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4922
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2020, 01:04:00 am »
Dissecting morality isn't moralizing ?  What are you talking about ?  It's called "BEYOND" Good and Evil, right ?
Well, "beyond" meaning the world isn't black and white, God vs Satan.  He was a philosopher, their job is often to moralize.

Quote
Well, I didn't think of it that way but what you wrote makes sense.  I do think academics can be free to moralize, but their primary goal is to assess and provide a landscape for thought and discussion.
Is moralizing different than activism?  I don't know.  Some fields you need to moralize, like philosophy, or theology.  It's hard to be a good ie: historian for example when you have a activist agenda and start looking for certain things and ignoring others.  The same with science.  Copper is better at conducting electricity than iron because it is, not because a researcher wants it to be.

Sometimes moralizing is unavoidable, we're human, so you can just try to be as objective as possible.  I took a course on the Israel-Palestine conflict once.  Obviously the subject can be controversial and heated.  The prof was great, she always reminded us to "put our scholar caps on" and look at the issue as academics. It removes your emotional bias and personal moralizing/ideology from the issue.  I'll never forget that.  We all see things from different perspectives based on our life experiences and identity etc.  If you can only look at reality through your own lens you'll often miss a lot.

Quote
I actually think there's lots of room right now for a moralist of his ilk.  But he isn't the guy.

I think he's just a guy among many.  We don't need a saviour, we just need civil discourse.  People like him are important because they express intelligent arguments that are counter to the politically correct moral "consensus".  You need brave people like that, even if they're sometimes wrong.  Ideas that are accepted but never challenged can be dangerous.  History is filled with examples.

Socrates was executed for "corrupting the youth".  Jesus was nailed to a cross.  Who are we crucifying today?  What are our holy beliefs that only heretics question?
"The economy has been relatively strong but Trudeau has chosen to run deficits year after year & has said will continue to do so well into the future.  This means we'll be in a worse & more vulnerable financial position when a recession hits when we HAVE to run deficits again." - Me, Oct. 3, 2019
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #10 on: October 15, 2020, 09:15:21 am »
Well, "beyond" meaning the world isn't black and white, God vs Satan.  He was a philosopher, their job is often to moralize.

Right, but he is known chiefly as the person who killed 'God' and morality by dissecting it and breaking it down as a human need.

Quote
Is moralizing different than activism?  I don't know.  Some fields you need to moralize, like philosophy, or theology.  It's hard to be a good ie: historian for example when you have a activist agenda and start looking for certain things and ignoring others.  The same with science.  Copper is better at conducting electricity than iron because it is, not because a researcher wants it to be.

'Activism' is different, but I see what you are saying.  It has come to mean fighting for identity politics and the onboard morality it contains.  I think that the primary goal of an academic is/should be knowledge.

Quote
Sometimes moralizing is unavoidable, we're human, so you can just try to be as objective as possible.  I took a course on the Israel-Palestine conflict once.  Obviously the subject can be controversial and heated.  The prof was great, she always reminded us to "put our scholar caps on" and look at the issue as academics. It removes your emotional bias and personal moralizing/ideology from the issue.  I'll never forget that.  We all see things from different perspectives based on our life experiences and identity etc.  If you can only look at reality through your own lens you'll often miss a lot.

Yes, and politics is difficult between it sits between "pure" knowledge and emotions.  But if it drifts one way or the other then a correction happens.

Quote
I think he's just a guy among many.  We don't need a saviour, we just need civil discourse.  People like him are important because they express intelligent arguments that are counter to the politically correct moral "consensus".  You need brave people like that, even if they're sometimes wrong.  Ideas that are accepted but never challenged can be dangerous.  History is filled with examples.

Socrates was executed for "corrupting the youth".  Jesus was nailed to a cross.  Who are we crucifying today?  What are our holy beliefs that only heretics question?

The thing is, he had a foothold in being a contrarian in the service of "civil discourse" and he blew it.  All he would have had to do is be a little more careful with his language.  Did he deserve to be demonized ?  I would say not, but he was the one who blew it.  You can blame the mob, but I don't blame a dog who bites me I blame the master, the leash maker, my wife, you, Waldo... anybody else... but the dog and myself...

Offline the_squid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2929
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #11 on: October 15, 2020, 11:30:46 am »
Quote
Did he deserve to be demonized ?  I would say not, but he was the one who blew it.

This is a contradictory statement.  You’re trying to have your ‘woke’ and eat it too.  He didn’t deserve it, but it was his fault.   

For all the faults I find with the guy, he’s all about civil discourse.  The ‘woke’ activists are the a-holes who can’t handle any disagreement with the positions that they hold sacred.  Their allies, like yourself, make excuses for them, even when they’re clearly in the wrong. 

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #12 on: October 15, 2020, 11:40:30 am »
This is a contradictory statement.  You’re trying to have your ‘woke’ and eat it too.  He didn’t deserve it, but it was his fault.   

Ok.  If he was a minimally competent academic, he wouldn't be here.

Quote
For all the faults I find with the guy, he’s all about civil discourse.  The ‘woke’ activists are the a-holes who can’t handle any disagreement with the positions that they hold sacred.  Their allies, like yourself, make excuses for them, even when they’re clearly in the wrong.

I disagree.  He wants to be civil, but he misgenders people ... makes unconsidered statements.... he isn't being civil, he is denying people their rights, associating with extremists and overstating his case.  Nice that he wants to be 'civil' but he should lead by example.

Offline the_squid

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2929
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #13 on: October 15, 2020, 11:46:06 am »
Ok.  If he was a minimally competent academic, he wouldn't be here.

I disagree.  He wants to be civil, but he misgenders people ... makes unconsidered statements.... he isn't being civil, he is denying people their rights, associating with extremists and overstating his case.  Nice that he wants to be 'civil' but he should lead by example.

“Misgendering”  is the discussion.  Why should people have to obey to use a bunch of made-up words?

What extremists does he associate with?  Be specific.

Offline MH

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7828
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« Reply #14 on: October 15, 2020, 11:54:53 am »
“Misgendering”  is the discussion.  Why should people have to obey to use a bunch of made-up words?

I think that people have to agree to a set of rules in order to engage in the discussion.  Jordan misgenders people who are in the discussion, which is offensive to the people who are in the discussion.  He is looking for the right to use whatever pronouns he wants, but he should be respectful in the discussion itself.

Otherwise, I guess it would be ok for other people in the discussion to call him fascist, idiot or whatever they like.  (It's not)

Quote
What extremists does he associate with?  Be specific.

The Rebel is a far-right publication that promotes objectionable views.  He jumped into bed with them early on, because they promised to raise money for him.