Author Topic: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?  (Read 332 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7961
Re: How about a Discussion on Jordan Peterson?
« 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...