- Joined
- Jun 28, 2011
- Messages
- 29,151
- Reaction score
- 1,307
Articulate why Peterson is a faux-intellectual, please.Dyson is an even bigger faux-intellectual can than Peterson. He wins the word-salad tossing contest.
Articulate why Peterson is a faux-intellectual, please.Dyson is an even bigger faux-intellectual can than Peterson. He wins the word-salad tossing contest.
I don't care if guys throw ad hominem attacks around online, but this was a formal debate. Dyson is a clown, no wonder the crowd started booing. It looks like it rattled Peterson though, whereas he's usually known for keeping his cool in situations like that. I think he's been pushing himself too hard lately. My prediction is this whole rock star world tour that he's on now is gonna end with him being hospitalized for exhaustion or something like that.
It's creepy how Peterson has become almost like an Antichrist figure for so many on the left.
Articulate why Peterson is a faux-intellectual, please.
I think we've been down this long and painful road before...
I don't care if guys throw ad hominem attacks around online, but this was a formal debate. Dyson is a clown, no wonder the crowd started booing. It looks like it rattled Peterson though, whereas he's usually known for keeping his cool in situations like that. I think he's been pushing himself too hard lately. My prediction is this whole rock star world tour that he's on now is gonna end with him being hospitalized for exhaustion or something like that.
It's creepy how Peterson has become almost like an Antichrist figure for so many on the left.
Peterson I think was trying to get into something more underlying, but it wasn't obvious what he was getting at as related solely to the topic. I know it was related but it wasn't obvious and could be perceived as confusing. I think he was trying to talk about the ideology underlying political correctness, but not political correctness itself. I think it would have been a better conversation if it was kept closer to topic in a conventional sense.
Why can't you be an individual who is also part of a group. Like how most normal people act. Why is it one or the other.
What exactly was his "point"?
He seems to be speeding up rather than slowing down.
Sure sign of the end.
Early on he brought up society benefiting most through an individual to individual philosophy at the core. So he touched on ideology there and in my opinion did so to show we had to pick a path to apply to speech and the limiting thereof. To me that's on point. When he spoke of left wing government atrocities in the prior century that was to invite common ground into the discussion on how far is too far. Also on point, and they ducked it. When Dyson turned it around Peterson had no problem naming instances. To my memory, the PC side refused to denounce any specific instance in history.
The lady tried to answer but it was a shallow answer. Not something she has really thought about most likely. Dyson just tried to turn it around and make it about the right rather than attempt to answer.
Early on he brought up society benefiting most through an individual to individual philosophy at the core. So he touched on ideology there and in my opinion did so to show we had to pick a path to apply to speech and the limiting thereof. To me that's on point. When he spoke of left wing government atrocities in the prior century that was to invite common ground into the discussion on how far is too far. Also on point, and they ducked it. When Dyson turned it around Peterson had no problem naming instances. To my memory, the PC side refused to denounce any specific instance in history.
No matter how he sees himself others will place him into a group (whether he likes it or not).
Don’t be scared
That may be true for Mr. Dyson, who only sees Professor Peterson as an "angry white man".
Regardless, his group analysis is quite irrelevant.
People have been worried about Peterson collapsing from exhaustion for a long time now. Dude is a machine. He seems to be speeding up rather than slowing down.
He's not teaching anymore and he's closed his practice, ostensibly temporarily. Sure he's busy, but he's no more busy than other successful people who are in the same line of work i.e. 'pop intellectualism'. This isn't even a dig at Peterson, but this martyrdom that's ascribed to him isn't real: all successful people are extremely busy, and so is he. It seems like he cleared out his life sufficiently to bear his new responsibilities.