Is Jordan B Peterson's new website idea an atrocious one or reasonable one?

[Space]

Yes, nothing screams "professionally vulnerable" like academic tenure. lol

And nothing says "risking it all" like hauling in 70K a month on You Tube.

 

[AviatorShades]

t's unrealistic to believe the left will ever stop with their lists and doxxing and shaming tactics. They enjoy/depend on the fact that their targets are unlikely to target them back, crippled by their own archaic standards of masculinity/morality.

Lets see how many "SJW" lecturers who thought towing the marxist line was the easiest road to fulltime employment stand their ground when they face the same kind of ostracization. These people are rank cowards. Most only adopted extreme marxism in the first place because they were afraid of being singled out by their peers.

 

[senri]

I think there are plenty of contexts in which the answers "yes" or "no" can completely suffice.

I think JP needs to decide if he wants to identify as a theist or an agnostic and then stand on that decision regardless of who he is addressing on issues of faith and religion.

I did not actually watch the interview, but I read several reviews of his discussion with Sam Harris that indicated to me JP was just conveniently equivocating whenever necessary.

You should take the time to watch the second podcast between Jordan and Sam to get a more nuanced approach to his thinking. It is a very complicated subject that cannot be answered directly into yes or no.

I have another question for you if you do not mind. Do you like to interact with people who are conscientious or more orderly that can categorically explain things with conviction?

 

[ultramanhyata]

You should take the time to watch the second podcast between Jordan and Sam to get a more nuanced approach to his thinking. It is a very complicated subject that cannot be answered directly into yes or no.

But there is a word for that - "agnostic".

I have another question for you if you do not mind. Do you like to interact with people who are conscientious or more orderly that can categorically explain things with conviction?

With respect, I don't understand the question.

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

I legit only heard of this guy last week when I searched about Patreon and he is one of the guys that make the most money out of it.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I legit only heard of this guy last week when I searched about Patreon and he is one of the guys that make the most money out of it.

That's surprising, there's a cohort of WRers who follow this guy like he's a prophet and he had two big threads decdicated to him. Oh well, I guess not everyone wastes as much time here as I.

With respect, I don't understand the question.

Its a word salad with ingredients from Peterson's lectures, I don't even think he knows what it means.

 

[senri]

But there is a word for that - "agnostic".

He is agnostic about the issue you have to deconstruct these intellectuals instead of looking for a peg to place them in, This is the same case folks make with respect to Mr Harris. Jordan even says he is agnostic about issue in the video you quoted from a few posts ago

Do you have an affinity with people who are industrious or orderly?

 

[senri]

That's surprising, there's a cohort of WRers who follow this guy like he's a prophet and he had two big threads decdicated to him. Oh well, I guess not everyone wastes as much time here as I.

Its a word salad with ingredients from Peterson's lectures, I don't even think he knows what it means.

I understand the tribalism with Jordan Peterson hero worship, especially with those who love all things Kek. However what he talks about is nothing new, I'm just trying to understand Mr Ultra's frame of mind.

 

[ultramanhyata]

Do you have an affinity with people who are industrious or orderly?

It really depends on the individual. I have had close friends who would fit those descriptions. But I have also had close friends who would almost fit the opposite of those descriptions.

There are two answers to two basic questions I would like to hear from JP:

1. Are you a Christian?
2. (If yes) How do you define the term "Christian"?

If he has already answered these questions and you can link me to those responses, I will give them a look/listen.

 

[TheRealBadAss]

If one says they are a christian, then refuses to state if they believe Jesus rose from the dead, while not even stating what would convince them of it being true or false, that is a copout, a dodge.

It really isn't. Questions like that point to a child-like understanding of Christianity. Or more likely an attempt (usually by teenage atheists) to impose a litmus test on Christians.

These are not new questions. Faith vs. belief. Literalism vs. interpretation, etc. People have wrestled with these issues for centuries.

Peterson's views on religion (Christianity in particular) are very thoughtful and nuanced. And he's clearly laid them out in dozens of videos (hundreds of hours?) all available on YouTube for free. You aren't going to successfully play "gotcha" with him on this topic.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

Where would you place Peterson on the political spectrum in Canada?

I'm not sure - relative political spectrums aren't really my forte.

Peterson's opposition to postmodernists is not arbitrary, is more the point I was trying to get at.

 

[hillelslovak87]

It really isn't. Questions like that point to a child-like understanding of Christianity. Or more likely an attempt (usually by teenage atheists) to impose a litmus test on Christians.

These are not new questions. Faith vs. belief. Literalism vs. interpretation, etc. People have wrestled with these issues for centuries.

Peterson's views on religion (Christianity in particular) are very thoughtful and nuanced. And he's clearly laid them out in dozens of videos (hundreds of hours?) all available on YouTube for free. You aren't going to successfully play "gotcha" with him on this topic.

You cant get a gotcha when someone simply rationalizes away the questions you ask, and wont qualify their standard of proof, either subjectively or objectively.

 

[TheRealBadAss]

You cant get a gotcha when someone simply rationalizes away the questions you ask, and wont qualify their standard of proof, either subjectively or objectively.

Religious faith is not a 5th grade chemistry experiment. Standard of proof? Really?

If the hundreds of hours he's devoted to this topic and posted to YouTube aren't enough, maybe you should take this up with Peterson yourself. He does question and answer sessions all the time and his email address is public. Although, to be honest, I'm not really sure what your issue is and I doubt you'd be satisfied with whatever answer you got anyway, as it most likely wouldn't give you your "gotcha!" moment.

This may not be true in your case, but reading through the thread, those focusing on the resurrection of Jesus question are clearly desperately grasping for "gotcha!". If your worst criticism of a public intellectual is "He is ambiguous about whether he believes Jesus literally rose from the dead", that says a lot.

 

[Metusalemi]

He seems to have a temper and tweets like this doesn't make him look good.

 

[hillelslovak87]

Religious faith is not a 5th grade chemistry experiment. Standard of proof? Really?

If the hundreds of hours he's devoted to this topic and posted to YouTube aren't enough, maybe you should take this up with Peterson yourself. He does question and answer sessions all the time and his email address is public. Although, to be honest, I'm not really sure what your issue is and I doubt you'd be satisfied with whatever answer you got anyway, as it most likely wouldn't give you your "gotcha!" moment.

This may not be true in your case, but reading through the thread, those focusing on the resurrection of Jesus question are clearly desperately grasping for "gotcha!". If your worst criticism of a public intellectual is "He is ambiguous about whether he believes Jesus literally rose from the dead", that says a lot.

Beliefs need to be based within someone's perception of reality. If one does not think an action happened, one cannot simply believe it did. Beliefs make claims about the state of the world. One cannot simply skirt past this, and drone on in the pretense of this fact being undecided. Philosophical dodges dont impress me, nor do they do any work when people attempt to actual address questions.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

Yes, nothing screams "professionally vulnerable" like academic tenure. lol

Peterson himself has pointed out the privileged and protected position that professors hold.
Not sure why this is a worthwhile talking point, considering how few people with the same protections actually take a stand for anything unpopular or controversial.

And nothing says "risking it all" like hauling in 70K a month on You Tube.

How long has he been making a good earning off his YouTube?

Exactly as I stated in the post you quoted, JP trades on this false notion from the paranoid alt-rightists that he is intellectually brave. You are just proving that observation true.

No. You're confirming your biases by hollowly shooting down points that make more sense than yours.

 

[senri]

It really depends on the individual. I have had close friends who would fit those descriptions. But I have also had close friends who would almost fit the opposite of those descriptions.

There are two answers to two basic questions I would like to hear from JP:

1. Are you a Christian?
2. (If yes) How do you define the term "Christian"?

If he has already answered these questions and you can link me to those responses, I will give them a look/listen.

He says he is christian, a few times. He would define it multiple factoral like a scientist but is agnostic with some issues as he himself is investigating the religion as well as the others. From what i understand he is trying to distill any utility out of it that has yet to be discovered with the use of objective truth. But that is not enough for a few people, they need him to make a binary choice to categorize his belief. The topic is complicated

 

[Clear Winner]

It's not hard to believe at all. It's just that you and the other haters have obviously never sat down and watched one his videos all the way through because you're prejudiced against him for his opinion on pronouns. He's not a right-winger, he's a classic liberal, you guys don't know anything about him or about anything he says. All you can come up with are personal attacks since you're unaware of any of his arguments or material, and can't address them.

I'm more to the left and I enjoy his videos. Talks a lot of sense, IMO.

 

[ultramanhyata]

He would define it multiple factoral like a scientist but is agnostic with some issues as he himself is investigating the religion as well as the others.

I am going to go out on a limb and assume that English is not your first language.

Christianity is 2000 years old. Certain central tenets have been clearly, historically defined. It is illegitimate for JP to begin from the conclusion that he is, in fact, a "Christian" and then engage in a debate over exactly what that label may or may not imply.

But his approach definitely reflects his painfully obvious egomania.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

Where would you place Peterson on the political spectrum in Canada?

He's a classic British liberal.