The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

[IDL]

I'm aware of that. His efforts to deal with the problems Nietzsche described are a ridiculous hodgepodge of outdated ideas about truth "varying independently" with fact (yes I'm being cheeky), and a return to Christianity. He's one of my favorite YTers and I appreciate what he adds to the conversation, and he's done more help to my understanding of Nietzsche than anyone else. But he's the old man on the porch and some of his ideas are leading people in the wrong direction- toward the right wing's reviving brand of postmodernism.

It's been done already and isn't an interesting topic IMO, but he's made it pretty clear that he distinguishes between scientific truth, and meta-truth (such as truth contained in story form such as mythology or a Shakespearean play. The passing down of wisdom essentially), and that he doesn't see them as the same thing. He's explained the distinction and it's a pretty basic concept and self evident really.

 

[unimackpass]

I'm aware of that. His efforts to deal with the problems Nietzsche described are a ridiculous hodgepodge of outdated ideas about truth "varying independently" with fact (yes I'm being cheeky), and a return to Christianity. He's one of my favorite YTers and I appreciate what he adds to the conversation, and he's done more help to my understanding of Nietzsche than anyone else. But he's the old man on the porch and some of his ideas are leading people in the wrong direction- toward the right wing's reviving brand of postmodernism.

He is addressing assumptions made by Nietzsche that framed much of his assumptions concerning metaphysics. The old man on the porch is challenging things left behind by the "anointed" that not everyone is agreeing should be left behind, he is addressing a lot of assumptions that many would rather not have to address. Even good ideas can be used improperly so that in itself is not always the best measurement of ideas obviously . Curious of what in particular you see concerning "right wing postmodernism " and Peterson.
Just curious, did you watch the whole interview above? Found it quite interesting.

 

[unimackpass]

It's been done already and isn't an interesting topic IMO, but he's made it pretty clear that he distinguishes between scientific truth, and meta-truth (such as truth contained in story form such as mythology or a Shakespearean play. The passing down of wisdom essentially), and that he doesn't see them as the same thing. He's explained the distinction and it's a pretty basic concept and self evident really.

Pretty much self evident is a good way to put it. The thing that Peterson addresses so well, and you can tell it's what drives him absolutely insane , is statements of "absolutes" being made by the likes of "Dawkins and his minions" rather than observance and discussion.

 

[IDL]

Pretty much self evident is a good way to put it. The thing that Peterson addresses so well, and you can tell it's what drives him absolutely insane , is statements of "absolutes" being made by the likes of "Dawkins and his minions" rather than observance and discussion.

Yeah it's the throwing away of the baby with the bathwater, or missing the forest for the trees basically.

I can appreciate the difficulty in distilling truths from abstractions. No simple task. But, it's in there to be extracted in many cases nonetheless.

 

[unimackpass]

Yeah it's the throwing away of the baby with the bathwater, or missing the forest for the trees basically.

I can appreciate the difficulty in distilling truths from abstractions. No simple task. But, it's in there to be extracted in many cases nonetheless.

It's bin defined as cyclopean or Cyclops like in how one dimensional they see the world. Ironically they're a characterization of what the ancient world long ago saw as a malformed approach to knowledge. This is fantastic. Their the joke at the party and don't even realize it.

 

[MaxMMA]

Watched a few of his videos the other day and I have to say I'm a little confused with is lectures. Granted I watched only 5 of his videos, but it seems like that regardless of the topic the root force that drives social behavior according to him is "Males climbing the dominance hierarchy in order to get access to females."

Has this guy ever had a piece of pussy? He talks about this like there is a 90/10 ratio of Males to females on this planet, and the only way to pass on your genes is to get to the top of this hierarchy. Has he never experienced the phenomenon of good looking women hooking up with and even marrying fat, ugly, no job having losers?

Does he not realize that there are also poor/ugly women that procreate with poor/ugly men every day?

Just looking for some insight on this clown suit wearing individual because at first glance it seems like he should be laughed off stage, not receiving standing ovations.

 

[Gunny]

I suggest you keep watching. Your impression is massively under informed

 

[dontsnitch]

Stopped reading at the suggestion that a married man with kids has not had sex.

There are also two mega threads with his content.

 

[Sir Punchalot]

He is the guru du jour.

 

[2DUM2TAP]

A doctor with a degree in Clinical psychology. Former associate professor at Harvard, and Professor at Uof T. Who the F*ck are you?

 

[IDL]

If talking about human behavior in general, then it is more about patterns across populations groups and across time.

 

[MaxMMA]

Stopped reading at the suggestion that a married man with kids has not had sex.

There are also two mega threads with his content.

I realize that more than likely a man of his age has probably inserted his penis into a vagina at some point, but in all 5 videos I watched he keeps saying the same thing about the dominance hierarchy.

Also one of the videos he said his problem with atheism is that if there were no higher power, people would go around doing whatever they wanted... common.

 

[MaxMMA]

A doctor with a degree in Clinical psychology. Former associate professor at Harvard, and Professor at Uof T. Who the F*ck are you?

Someone that doesn't try to relate every social behavior to getting pussy.

 

[bigbangspiritbomb]

I suggest you keep watching. Your impression is massively under informed

+ 1

Said dude is married. TS sounds like he has down syndrome.

 

[dontsnitch]

I realize that more than likely a man of his age has probably inserted his penis into a vagina at some point, but in all 5 videos I watched he keeps saying the same thing about the dominance hierarchy.

Also one of the videos he said his problem with atheism is that if there were no higher power, people would go around doing whatever they wanted... common.

I think his view is a little more nuanced than that. He believes, like Nietzsche, that in the absence of God, mankind will substitute another God. He's not saying you can't be moral without the belief that the universe was created.

Also, the dominance hierarchy is basic identity politics.

 

[IDL]

I think his view is a little more nuanced than that. He believes, like Nietzsche, that in the absence of God, mankind will substitute another God. He's not saying you can't be moral without the belief that the universe was created.

Also, the dominance hierarchy is basic identity politics.

Identity politics I'd say is just one form of it. Within any given group though, there are also hierarchies. It goes down to the individual competing against another individual (I guess that is the most granular form of identity politics if you were to take it that far)

 

[dontsnitch]

Identity politics I'd say is just one form of it. Within any given group though, there are also hierarchies. It goes down to the individual competing against another individual (I guess that is the most granular form of identity politics if you were to take it that far)

I don't know if it really matters, but I meant to type "basically identity politics". Mr. MaxMMA is just getting introduced to this, don't want to overwhelm him with Peterson jargon.

 

[Denter]

I think his view is a little more nuanced than that. He believes, like Nietzsche, that in the absence of God, mankind will substitute another God. He's not saying you can't be moral without the belief that the universe was created.

Also, the dominance hierarchy is basic identity politics.

Yes, and contrary to what most think, Nietzsche wasn't trying to smash morality, but only to destroy those false idols that had crept in, and keep the true ones. His 'hammer' was not a smashing hammer, but a sounding hammer- to look for hollow idols.

Are we immoralists harming virtue? No more than anarchists harm princes. Only since the princes have been shot at, do they once more sit securely on their thrones. Moral: morality must be shot at.

 

[dontsnitch]

Yes, and contrary to what most think, Nietzsche wasn't trying to smash morality, but only to destroy those false idols that had crept in, and keep the true ones. His 'hammer' was not a smashing hammer, but a sounding hammer- to look for hollow idols.

Nietzsche is one of the most misunderstood philosophers. From "God is dead", to his Superman, to what you're describing.

It's been years since I've read him, but I've always noticed people misquoting him. Hell, even I've been guilty of twisting him to argue about nihilism.

 

[Metusalemi]

Damn!

Peterson is taking his gloves off. He is determined to take down political correctness/neo-marxism/post modernism in our society.