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

Not a lot of discussion on the actual proposal in here, just a lot of "I don't like Peterson".

I don't think it'd make any difference what so ever. If they're going to the site, they've obviously already bought into Peterson's views and are therefore unlikely to be taking courses in Critical Race Theory or similar topics.
I can't imagine anyone's going to stop him, so go for it.
 
As with anyone that buys into the "Cultural Marxism" conspiracy theory, he's catering to the conservative persecution complex.
There's no shortage of examples showing that to be a path to popularity.
How much did the globalist pay you to post this? :mad:
 
I don't think it'd make any difference what so ever. If they're going to the site, they've obviously already bought into Peterson's views and are therefore unlikely to be taking courses in Critical Race Theory or similar topics.
I can't imagine anyone's going to stop him, so go for it.

Okay, but this is a forum, and it would be cool if people discussed the topic at hand and not just crapped on Peterson. It's cool if you don't like him, you don't have to, but it makes for a bad thread to just have people profess their dislike of him.

I gave it a shot earlier, even if somewhat incendiary. Anyway, it's fight night, I'll leave you gentlemen to it.
 
As with anyone that buys into the "Cultural Marxism" conspiracy theory, he's catering to the conservative persecution complex.
There's no shortage of examples showing that to be a path to popularity.


I like that term "conservative persecution complex"

Did you read that somewhere or did you make that up on your own.
 
Well, some people fear exploring ideas outside of those within their social circles. So it stands to reason they would be intimidated by anything that might challenge their way of thinking. Intimidation isn't necessarily an action, it could be just difficult terrain. Such as 1+1 for a wee tyke, or a snowy road for our southern Sherbros. Have some sympathy you heartless monster!
Doesn't that also apply to the people looking to use this site since they're avoiding professors that disagree with them?
Some of those names were at least big names in their field.


Peterson is not
Sam Harris in no way comes close to Peterson in terms of credentials in their respective fields.
 
I like that term "conservative persecution complex"

Did you read that somewhere or did you make that up on your own.

Not sure who coined it. Actually it was mostly brought up in the context of moderating this site.
 
If every "intellectual leader" is hiding in a laboratory, then mediocre intellectuals are the best that we can ask for, to partake in the public debates.

Or would you prefer that the public debate continues to be dominated by celebrities and people with no education whatsoever?


I don't think Peterson is dumb but the way the right wing carries water for this guy you'd think he was one of the smartest people to ever live
 
Doesn't that also apply to the people looking to use this site since they're avoiding professors that disagree with them?

Sam Harris in no way comes close to Peterson in terms of credentials in their respective fields.


Krauss was a leader in cosmology and i could be wrong but wasn't Dawkins as well.
 
Doesn't that also apply to the people looking to use this site since they're avoiding professors that disagree with them?
Perhaps to a small degree. But disagreement seems to be the norm here.
 
Shitcan all of sociology and anthropology?

He's gone full fucking quack. Which was kind of inevitable, but he'll argue himself out of relevance soon enough.
 
Krauss was a leader in cosmology and i could be wrong but wasn't Dawkins as well.
Those two are which is why I didn't single them out. Dawkins is basically a grumpy old troll nowadays but back in the day he was no joke so I can forgive him resting on his laurels. But Sam has published nothing of consequence in neuroscience. Doesn't mean he's not worth listening to, just that if we're using contributions to one's field as a measuring stick here than Peterson> Harris.
Perhaps to a small degree. But disagreement seems to be the norm here.
I wasn't referring to the WR but the site Peterson is trying to set up which steers students away from so called cultural Marxist professors.
 
Those two are which is why I didn't single them out. Dawkins is basically a grumpy old troll nowadays but back in the day he was no joke so I can forgive him resting on his laurels. But Sam has published nothing of consequence in neuroscience. Doesn't mean he's not worth listening to, just that if we're using contributions to one's field as a measuring stick here than Peterson> Harris.

I wasn't referring to the WR but the site Peterson is trying to set up which steers students away from so called cultural Marxist professors.
Oh. D'oh! That makes more sense.
 
Shitcan all of sociology and anthropology?

He's gone full fucking quack. Which was kind of inevitable, but he'll argue himself out of relevance soon enough.
He more than doubled his overall earnings with his Patreon account, it was bound to have an effect him in the long run.
 
Those two are which is why I didn't single them out. Dawkins is basically a grumpy old troll nowadays but back in the day he was no joke so I can forgive him resting on his laurels. But Sam has published nothing of consequence in neuroscience. Doesn't mean he's not worth listening to, just that if we're using contributions to one's field as a measuring stick here than Peterson> Harris.

I wasn't referring to the WR but the site Peterson is trying to set up which steers students away from so called cultural Marxist professors.


Okay that's a fair point. I'm not a huge Sam Harris fan either. Sure he's very smart but I don't hang on his every word like so many others do.

And I'm not trying to knock Peterson either. Clearly he's a smart man but it's not like other people in his field are looking to him for validation on their discoveries
 
If there's one thing that I'd criticize Peterson about, other than some of his inconsistencies, it's that he's probably a bit too much of an idealist to achieve the practical results that he desires.

From reading this thread, it's pretty obvious that he has become a polarizing personality between the right and the left because of the way that he has laid out his arguments. Which is not necessarily the reaction that he is seeking, but it's the one he's getting. He is being recognized as a threat on the left, so the idea of him being capable of building any sort of "common sense" dialogue between the two camps, is probably lost to him.

Putting yourself up as a "public intellectual" is pretty tough because the risk of being boxed in as a "left-wing" or "right-wing" guy is very high, therefore shutting yourself out from many people's ears, which is why "smarter" men than Peterson probably don't do it.
 
He more than doubled his overall earnings with his Patreon account, it was bound to have an effect him in the long run.
He monetized his YT site too, no? He's probably around a $million for the year with that, Patreon, speaking fees, etc.
 
I don't think Peterson is dumb but the way the right wing carries water for this guy you'd think he was one of the smartest people to ever live

He's probably one of the smartest people to constantly put themselves up for public scrutiny. Which might just mean that he's the dumbest smart guy around. Or the smartest dumb guy, whichever you prefer.
 
Back
Top