You are missing the fucking point. Peterson wants to go back to how things were BEFORE, he HATES how things are now. You can talk about how great women have it now all you want but stop trying to deny that his entire goal is to UNDO all of that. Edit: not that your opinion that women have it better than men isn’t utterly ridiculous.
Very aggressive. No thanks.
How does women achieving more freedom make their lives so unbearable exactly?
What a bunch of hooey. So what if radicalized young men respond to it? They’re already primed to blame women for their every ill. They aren’t exactly the brightest bulbs on the tree, who cares if this babble speaks to them. That isn’t an endorsement of it’s depth in my book.
In the history of psychotherapy, psychiatry and psychology there has never been a shortage those patting each other on the back promoting each other’s nonsense for profit. Every half baked pseudo psychology paperback on the shelf has a litany of endorsements from the like minded with many letters after their names. Even Dr Oz and Dr Phil ! Colour me unimpressed on that front.
So you got nothing, gotcha.
You need to tune down that macho posturing for anyone to listen to you, never mind take you seriously.
You need to stop pretending to be offended when you can’t refute a point.
Mr. Peterson has been in the news a lot since this thread was started. Today’s New York Times op-ed proclaims he is some sort of Canadian male silent minority archetype.
His views are traditional, and it is not uncommon for religious people to emphasize tradition. It would be harder to define him as progressive, but I think he lies between the views argued above — given that he does say some silly things and draw conclusions that exceed his evidence. There are reasons paternalism is unfashionable.
I don’t think his entire point is ultimately about subjugation and oppression. Some of his views have more merit than others.
It sounds like his basic premise is that there is an “objective truth” to basic individual and social moral systems. There is a best way we should frame our thinking and our interactions with others.
It sounds like he got this by interacting with individuals in therapy and now applies it to broad social communities. And his view of this objective truth is what he uses to make his comments on gender, immigration etc., relative to the societal systems he thinks work best.
But…there is no objective truth. Period. Now what?
well, biological dispositions maybe.
I’ve only recently come across him, frankly he seems to make far more sense than the SJWs that are going on about how horrible he is.
While I don’t agree with everything he says, I’d have to say most of it seems quite sensible.
I’m sure he seems pretty sensible to people who actually use “SJW” as an insult. Which pretty much proves our point by itself.
Nice you’re able to talk for everyone.
Actually you’ve made my point re SJWs.
Thanks.
Some of his stuff seems okay. But his views on postmodernism and feminism often seem dated. There are problems with intellectual populism and that includes not biting the hands which feed him. Peterson is a good debater and more skilled at communication than many of his detractors.
Oh yes, he is also very charismatic. Which just makes his horrible positions all the scarier.
He certainly exposes the shallowness of many of his opponents positions. The Cathy Newman nails that.
OTOH his YouTube fans seem to have a proclivity for breathless headlines featuring an all-caps verb like “Jordan Peterson DESTROYS liberal interviewer”, “Leftist questioner gets SCHOOLED by Jordan Peterson” and in one clip where the other party simply stood their own toe to toe, “Liberal pundit SNAPS at Jordan Peterson and instantly regrets it”; and when you look at them all you see is a debate proceeding more or less normally and both sides strongly making their points.
That’s absolutely true, noticed that myself.
I find these kinds of adoring posts, detract from what he actually IS saying.
He did destroy that lady in that interview, she’s the kinda person you hate that she’s on your side.
There seem to be a lot of Cathy Newmans in this very thread. “So what Jordan Peterson is saying is…” followed by attacking straw men.
Peterson would have considered himself center-left not too long ago. But he has landed in the company of people like Sam Harris, Steven Pinker, Richard Dawkins, Brett Weinstein and others who consider themselves on the ‘left’, and some conservative thinkers from the ‘right’ like Charles Murray, Andrew Sullivan and others who have found themselves unlikely allies who are utterly alienated by the illiberal social justice and postmodern left, and repelled by what has become of the right. I find myself in the same strange place.
If what people like Peterson are saying is both ‘obvious’ yet being greedily devoured by millions of people (his book has had a long run at #1 on the NYT Bestseller list), perhaps it’s because the right and left have descended into parodies of themselves and people are desperate to just hear someone who seems to be talking sense.
The people running the most scared seem to be evolutionary biologists like Dawkins and Weinstein, who are seeing the very basis of their sciences under attack from both the creationists on the right and the postmoderns on the left who refuse to consider that differences between groups of people could be anything other than socially constructed, that all differences must be due to existing power structures and patriarchal oppression, and that societies can be changed through fiat and control.
Where Peterson comes in is that as a therapist, he sees the narratives in play doing real harm to young people, and is trying to offset it. Peterson says that college administrators and cultural figures are constantly sending messages that are exactly the opposite of what a therapist would say to help someone handle anxiety or depression. The message the postmodernists are sending is that if you are the member of a group that has historically held power you have original sin and should be ashamed and shut up and let other people run things while you slink away unless you recant and become a champion of the oppressed and follow their lead. On the other hand, if you are the member of an ‘oppressed’ group, all the trouble in your life is the fault of others, and you are not responsible. And your fears are so reasonable that you need safe spaces and protection from language you don’t like, which is redefined as violence.
In both cases, it’s exactly the wrong message. So Peterson is trying to do mass therapy in the opposite direction.