Jordan Peterson's Ban & Rebuttal

[rambot]

JP and his "self help" outlook says nothing that almost every other self help book espouses. I have no problem with those things he says.

I'm not a huge fan of how he characterizes things he disagrees with. But to be fair, it seems almost everyone does that with great frequency.

 

[Nithavela]

JP and his "self help" outlook says nothing that almost every other self help book espouses. I have no problem with those things he says.

I'm not a huge fan of how he characterizes things he disagrees with. But to be fair, it seems almost everyone does that with great frequency.

I don't have as much of an issue with Peterson as with his fanboys.

 

[rambot]

I don't have as much of an issue with Peterson as with his fanboys.

Lightening rods attract lightenning.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

He's all theory, no praxis.

I like theory and is principles seem pretty practical. Not sure I'll make it through Maps tough. It could take years.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

JP and his "self help" outlook says nothing that almost every other self help book espouses. I have no problem with those things he says.

I'm not a huge fan of how he characterizes things he disagrees with. But to be fair, it seems almost everyone does that with great frequency.

So, in essence, like most other people with advanced degrees in the social sciences... 90% common sense things that people already know deep down; 10% hot air about things they personally don't like.

I've observed that Jordan takes a lot of heat because his "10% hot air" piece of the pie leans right of center instead of left of center.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

So, in essence, like most other people with advanced degrees in the social sciences... 90% common sense things that people already know deep down;

Must be pretty deep down to the point of not really knowing. Have you looked in Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Must be pretty deep down to the point of not really knowing. Have you looked in Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief?

So Peterson is 90% hot air then.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

So Peterson is 90% hot air then.

I have only just started Maps of Meaning. He must be read carefully. But I am interested in what he has to say about mythic language and knowledge.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

He is one of the most convincing representatives of the Right that I have cmoe across.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

He is one of the most convincing representatives of the Right that I have cmoe across.

It would seem as if the targets of political/social debate are always either the most convincing and least convincing people (on either side)...as to where the "moderately convincing" "average Joes" of various movements often get a pass.

I think that's partially strategic for a few reasons.
A) It's easy to argue against extremists
B) It's hard to argue against convincing people
C) If you publicly give both the same treatment, you can give the impression that they're "the same" - as to give the impression that the opposing side doesn't have any nuance.

For instance, I would say Alex Jones is one of the least credible, least convincing people on the right... Andrew Klavan would be an example of a more convincing, credible (at least in the way he comes across) person on the right who makes reasonable sounding arguments, is tough to debate against, and keeps his cool and doesn't delve into the conspiracy realm like Alex Jones does.

Yet, to see the way they're labelled and reviewed by "Media Matters", they're both given the same kinds of negative labels, and both are portrayed as if they're "equally threatening" and equally radical, when that's clearly not the case.

Meanwhile, only moderately convincing conservatives are given a pass or ignored regardless of how radical their viewpoints actually are.


The same is true when it goes in the other direction as well. When the right is looking to critique them, they zero in on the goofballs (because they're easy to debate), or the really smart folks who can give them a run for their money and label them all under the moniker of "the left"