# Jordan Peterson **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [February 8, 2020, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650 "2020-02-08T23:12:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2020, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/141 "2020-02-19T17:49:42Z")
> [@dorvann](#): > > “Highly intelligent people can people can believe very stupid or even crazy things.” See [The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity](https://advanced.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/The-Basic-Laws-of-Human-Stupidity.pdf) [PDF] by Carlo M. Cipolla > [@](#): > > THE SECOND BASIC LAW > > **The probability that a certain person will be stupid is independent of any other characteristic of that person.** > > … > > The evidence that education has nothing to do with the probability was provided by experiments carried on in a large number of universities all over the world. One may distinguish the composite population which constitutes a university in five major groups, namely the blue-collar workers, the white-collar employees, the students, the administrators and the professors. > > Whenever I analyzed the blue-collar workers I found that the fraction σ of them were stupid. As σ’s value was higher than I expected (First Law), paying my tribute to fashion I thought at first that segregation, poverty, lack of education were to be blamed. But moving up the social ladder I found that the same ratio was prevalent among the white-collar employees and among the students. More impressive still were the results among the professors. Whether I considered a large university or a small college, a famous institution or an obscure one, I found that the same fraction σ of the professors are stupid. So bewildered was I by the results, that I made a special point to extend my research to a specially selected group, to a real elite, the Nobel laureates. The result confirmed Nature’s supreme powers: σ fraction of the Nobel laureates are stupid. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [February 19, 2020, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/142 "2020-02-19T19:29:41Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > a direct line between my friend who uses ze/zer pronouns and has trouble coping when the local vegan restaurant is closed for the day, and Soviet Gulags. I think that’s either the quasi-strawman/slippery slope argument or the delusional fear JP has. Either it’s genuinely believed that it’s the first step to gulags or it’s facetiously presented as such. I’m not sure which. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2020, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/143 "2020-02-20T08:05:25Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > And Peterson has hundreds of hours of his ideas and opinions available for public consumption. If you actually want to begin discussing his ideas on their merits, as others have failed to do so far, then maybe you could narrow it down a bit. I had thought about responding more to other points you made, and I may later, but let’s look at this part. Certainly. Here are some of his claims. This particular quote shows up a lot, but here is [one cite](https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jordan-peterson-clinical-psychologist-canada-popularity-convincing-why-left-wing-alt-right-cathy-a8208301.html): > [@](#): > > Peterson, who has said that the idea of white privilege is a “Marxist lie” and theorised that “radical feminists” don’t speak out about human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia because of “their unconscious wish for brutal male domination”, is fast becoming a mainstream commentator. Here is [his tweet](https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/913533213301182465): > [@](#): > > # 2 of questions to get crucified for asking: Do feminists avoid criticizing Islam because they unconsciously long for masculine dominance? I think he’s fucking nuts. Your thoughts on this? What do you think about feminists and their unconscious wish for brutal male domination? andy posted a few of his other claims. We can start there. Other people have posted this > [@](#): > > First, I will never use words I hate, like the trendy and artificially constructed words “zhe” and “zher.” These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century. Please connect the missing dots between using “zhe” and then killing at least 100 million people. You claim everyone is avoiding actual discussion of this thoughts so here is an opportunity to discuss. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2020, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/144 "2020-02-20T08:23:57Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > And Peterson has hundreds of hours of his ideas and opinions available for public consumption. If you actually want to begin discussing his ideas on their merits, as others have failed to do so far, then maybe you could narrow it down a bit. I had thought about responding more to other points you made, and I may later, but let’s look at this part. Certainly. Here are some of his claims. This particular quote shows up a lot, but here is [one cite](https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jordan-peterson-clinical-psychologist-canada-popularity-convincing-why-left-wing-alt-right-cathy-a8208301.html): > [@](#): > > Peterson, who has said that the idea of white privilege is a “Marxist lie” and theorised that “radical feminists” don’t speak out about human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia because of “their unconscious wish for brutal male domination”, is fast becoming a mainstream commentator. Here is [his tweet](https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/913533213301182465): > [@](#): > > # 2 of questions to get crucified for asking: Do feminists avoid criticizing Islam because they unconsciously long for masculine dominance? I think he’s fucking nuts. Your thoughts on this? What do you think about feminists and their unconscious wish for brutal male domination? andy posted a few of his other claims. We can start there. Other people have posted this quote, which is [from his OpEd](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/jordan-peterson-the-right-to-be-politically-incorrect). > [@](#): > > First, I will never use words I hate, like the trendy and artificially constructed words “zhe” and “zher.” These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest, and which is, in my professional opinion, frighteningly similar to the Marxist doctrines that killed at least 100 million people in the 20th century. > > These words are at the vanguard of a radical leftist ideology that is frighteningly similar to Marxism. > > I have been studying authoritarianism on the right and the left for 35 years. I wrote a book, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, on the topic, which explores how ideologies hijack language and belief. As a result of my studies, I have come to believe that Marxism is a murderous ideology. I believe its practitioners in modern universities should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to promote such vicious, untenable and anti-human ideas, and for indoctrinating their students with these beliefs. I am therefore not going to mouth Marxist words. That would make me a puppet of the radical left, and that is not going to happen. Period. Please connect the missing dots between using “zhe” and then killing at least 100 million people. You claim everyone is avoiding actual discussion of this thoughts so here is an opportunity to discuss. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2020, 9:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/145 "2020-02-20T09:39:29Z")
> [@RingsOfPylon](#): > > post-modernism […] Yes, it’s a sham and we all know it :dubious: _Do_ we? _All_ of us? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2020, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/146 "2020-02-20T14:46:29Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > :dubious: _Do_ we? _All_ of us? In the way that JP likes to use it to construct strawmen. Yes. We _do_. _All_ of us. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/147 "2020-02-21T00:20:34Z")
Marxism killed a hundred million people? Really? I hate communism as much as Joe McCarthy, but that number still seems at least an order of magnitude too high. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/148 "2020-02-21T01:37:20Z")
That seems pretty close if you include China: certainly well within an order of magnitude. ---
**Author:** ![dorvann](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/df705f/32.png) [@dorvann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dorvann)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/149 "2020-02-21T02:12:24Z")
> [@DrCube](#): > > Marxism killed a hundred million people? Really? I hate communism as much as Joe McCarthy, but that number still seems at least an order of magnitude too high. This site give the death toll for the Stalin regime at 20 million and Mao’s regime at 40 million for a total of 60 million. So 100 million maybe high but it’s not implausible. [http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm](http://necrometrics.com/20c5m.htm) ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/150 "2020-02-21T02:19:01Z")
Yeah, it does jibe within the range when you talk about global totals and especially if you consider “collateral damage”. But that only points out the disparity in saying that it is the sort of thing to where you can slip down the slope just for being required to be consientious about someone’s alternative pronoun convention in academic circles. Yes, the pronouning bit can be at times, outright precious (“zher”?). But really, who’s getting hurt, just roll your eyes and deal with it, Professor. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/151 "2020-02-21T08:49:55Z")
Marxism =/= Stalinism and Maoism. Or are we going to start blaming Capitalism directly for every atrocity by capitalist adherents? Because in that case I’ve got some Middle Passage, British Raj, Congo Free State and Nazi Holocaust figures I need to add up, amongst others… ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/152 "2020-02-21T13:51:43Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > I think he’s fucking nuts. He isn’t fucking nuts. He is, however, FAR less smart than he thinks he is. Peterson is another classic example of a guy who presents as super intelligent to people who want to hear his message. He is poised, confident, and a good speaker who sprinkles smarty-pants words in there. He as also, however, Peter Principled himself way above his level of competence. Peterson presents himself as an expert on many things he is not at all expert in, and it shows. But since he’s developed a fanbase that has made him rich, it’s working for him. ---
**Author:** ![Bruce\_Wayne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bruce\_Wayne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bruce_Wayne)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/153 "2020-02-21T17:35:51Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > Here is [his tweet](https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/913533213301182465): I think he’s fucking nuts. Your thoughts on this? What do you think about feminists and their unconscious wish for brutal male domination? The adjective “brutal” wasn’t in the original tweet. You may not think it matters but it doesn’t give you the appearance of making your argument in good faith. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/154 "2020-02-21T18:03:57Z")
> [@Bruce\_Wayne](#): > > The adjective “brutal” wasn’t in the original tweet. You may not think it matters but it doesn’t give you the appearance of making your argument in good faith. He didn’t say it in that Tweet, he said it [in this podcast.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eV4iXfjonqI&t=6m20s) ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2020, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/155 "2020-02-21T22:07:31Z")
In another day and age he’d just be the crank professor that, safely tenured, pontificates about how the world is going mad and every so often publishes and most of the print run is sold at his own and other college bookstores to burden grad students. You sit through his course, grind your teeth and collect the credit-hours. Today he has YouTube and an audience of people who are wowed at the dight of an actual live academic who says what they like. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [February 22, 2020, 9:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/156 "2020-02-22T09:26:18Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > He isn’t fucking nuts. > > He is, however, FAR less smart than he thinks he is. Peterson is another classic example of a guy who presents as super intelligent to people who want to hear his message. He is poised, confident, and a good speaker who sprinkles smarty-pants words in there. > > He as also, however, Peter Principled himself way above his level of competence. Peterson presents himself as an expert on many things he is not at all expert in, and it shows. But since he’s developed a fanbase that has made him rich, it’s working for him. I really don’t know. As I said up-thread, I was only aware of him because a guy linked to one of his videos and I only watched enough to get turned off. I wonder how much he believes in his message and how much is an act to get rich. > [@Bruce\_Wayne](#): > > The adjective “brutal” wasn’t in the original tweet. You may not think it matters but it doesn’t give you the appearance of making your argument in good faith. Go ahead a click on the video that Miller shared. He linked to the location in the video, so it only takes one minute of your time. What do you think about feminists and their unconscious wish for brutal male domination? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2020, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/157 "2020-02-24T14:20:36Z")
So much of Peterson’s dreck reminds me of Wolfgang Pauli’s apocryphal quote “That is not only not right; it is not even wrong.” (i.e. even a wrong statement can serve some edifying purpose if it is substantial and well-argued). ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2020, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/158 "2020-02-24T14:42:51Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > I really don’t know. As I said up-thread, I was only aware of him because a guy linked to one of his videos and I only watched enough to get turned off. > > I wonder how much he believes in his message and how much is an act to get rich. Always lean towards the money explanation. Always. He is also a crank professor, of course, as JRDelirious said. There’s a BILLION of these people. Just the other day a professor got on CBC and argued that “Paw Patrol” was secretly indoctrinating kids into a neo-liberalist cult. He is currently enjoying the experience of being dragged on Twitter with sarcastic jokes, but seriously, this kind of stupidity is oddly common in tenured professors, whose job security and isolation from the real world can result in a stew of ridiculous ideas and total, unflinching belief in personal infallibility. ---
**Author:** ![DirkHardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6a8cbe/32.png) [@DirkHardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkHardly)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/159 "2020-02-26T14:32:31Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > So, none, then? How long ago was this law passed? How long does it have to stay on the books with Peterson facing zero repercussions before you can concede that his concerns were unfounded? An infinite amount of time. There is no expiration date for the existence of an unjust law which could be enforced any time at the whim of some official’s discretion. Would you argue any different? > [@Miller](#): > > There’s a trans woman in Peterson’s class. He wants to call her “him,” but is (allegedly) prevented from doing so by government regulations. He has to call her “her.” > > There’s a black guy in someone else’s class - let’s say David Duke, if he were a professor. Duke wants to call this guy a nigger, but is prevented from doing so by government regulations. He has to call him black, or African. > > Other than “nigger” being more offensive than misgendering, how is the former an example of compelled speech, while the latter is not? Because someone calling a transwoman “him” is expressing the opinion that the person is in fact male and would be prevented from doing so. Or perhaps they’re simply insisting on addressing people by their sex and not their gender. And the opinion that someone is a male is not inherently offensive. In the second hypothetical Duke is apparently of the opinion that the student is black/AA, and the student seems to share that opinion. Duke is free to express that opinion through any means other than racial epithets. There is no loss of the ability to express an opinion, only a relatively small limitation on how it may be expressed. The two situations aren’t at all the same thing and the further fact that racial epithets are universally offensive (for this purpose) and gender pronouns are not, only adds to how they are distinguishable. > [@Miller](#): > > I’m not sure what the “narrow context” has to do with anything, here. Lots of terms are benign in one context, and offensive in another. The majority of uses of the term “fag” in the UK refer to cigarettes. Does that make the use of the term in reference to gay people okay? Would your problem with this issue disappear if we had more synonyms for pronouns? Because terms which are offensive only in certain contexts might depend entirely on the subjective feelings of the listener. And the law, in multiple contexts, does not particularly care about the subjective feelings of any specific person because that person may be irrational and unreasonable. So it adopts the standard of a fictional reasonable person. And such a person need not be inherently offended by the use of gendered language in and of itself. Also, I would think the intended meaning of the word “fag” would be evident from context. Should a gay person be able to claim a legal offense just because someone used that term to clearly indicate a cigarette in their presence? > [@Miller](#): > > No, what I’m rebutting is your appeal to authority in asserting that, because Peterson has advanced degrees, he must therefore have good ideas. You haven’t actually presented any of his good ideas, you’ve just insisted that, because he’s got a PhD, he must therefore be smart. All the actual evidence in this thread - in the form of things hes actually said - indicate the opposite. Is it possible that I’m wrong? Sure. But you’re going to have to do a lot more legwork than shouting “HARVARD!” to convince me that there’s a direct line between my friend who uses ze/zer pronouns and has trouble coping when the local vegan restaurant is closed for the day, and Soviet Gulags. No, I characterized your argument properly. Talking generally about how intelligent and educated people can be wrong and stupid, or citing Ben Carson, proves nothing about whether Peterson is wrong or stupid, generally or in any specific instance. And many of Peterson’s points concern human behavior, and since he is a qualified expert (impressively so) in that field then there is no appeal to authority. There is also no appeal to authority for the general argument that Peterson’s academic and professional accomplishments indicate a presumption of intelligence. That would be the common understanding of the significance of such things. Unless you are arguing that the PhD and teaching at Harvard are completely meaningless? If your own resume/CV were put up against Peterson’s who do you think most people would guess was more intelligent and more generally apt to be right? Do you really feel such a determination would be baseless? I’m not here to defend everything Peterson has ever said, and I don’t think he would either. But his credentials are not insignificant and generally speaking create a presumption that can’t easily be dismissed, especially when discussing human behavior. So yes, simply citing those credentials is enough when the majority of his critics, who don’t even possess such credentials, limit their own attacks to things like “he’s stupid/crazy.” And I think the only link between pronouns and Gulags Peterson would make is that some people on one side of that issue wish to legally enforce their own ideas of acceptable speech on others. Controlling speech in such a manner is a hallmark of authoritarian gov’ts, certainly a valid comparison in kind even if not in degree. The Gulags, of course, are one historical example of what happens when a gov’t can criminalize broad categories of speech. I will add that the law professor who encouraged me to read, and constantly referenced, \*The Gulag Archipelago \* was as left-wing as they come. ---
**Author:** ![DirkHardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6a8cbe/32.png) [@DirkHardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkHardly)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650/160 "2020-02-26T14:34:14Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > HAHAHAHAHAHA You’re hilarious! Are you actually a comedian, trying out new material here or what? > > There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch and there ain’t no such thing as an objective standard for reasonableness. You can tell because any two people would need to agree on whether something is reasonable; that’s not objective by definition. Even the description of the term requires at least one person to subjectively decide if something is reasonable. > > So your term is stupid and hilarious, like I said, because it has no basis in reality. > > Hey, why not try and convince me that “alternative facts” is a phrase with some meaning next? So showing a 4 you decided to double down? Good strategy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jordan-peterson/847650.md?page=9)