Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Poll: What do you think of Jordan Peterson?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
He's a turd.
9.09%
1 9.09%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's a turd.
9.09%
1 9.09%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's a turd.
0%
0 0%
He's definitely a turd.
81.82%
9 81.82%
Total 11 vote(s) 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
#1

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Yet another anti-Peterson thread ... this time it's official. Here is a thread for you to all post your favorite content that goes against Jordan Peterson's total B.S.

Here's a new one I just came across, another one of the awesome YouTuber "Rationality Rules"'s new vids. Jordan Peterson's God debunked:

My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
The following 1 user Likes EvieTheAvocado's post:
  • GenesisNemesis
Reply
#2

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
I don't know much about him, but he does seem to be selling easy answers, to my mind.
"What senses do we lack that we cannot see or hear another world all around us?" -- Frank Herbert
The following 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, SYZ, Capn Awesome
Reply
#3

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Peterson has a bad case of Guruitis. He has become a guru to the muddled classes and must now bloviate unceasingly. Guru bloviation syndrome means keeping your bloviations straight, which like lying, can be hard to do. Some bloviater gurus fade away. EST's Werner Erhard for example. Some become founders of great pest religions like Mohammad.
Sitting in the club car of the hell bound train.

The following 2 users Like Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, skyking
Reply
#4
Big Grin 
The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Hahaahaaaaa...

I read the topic header as referring to these...
 
[Image: 81XG3YOSf5L._UY695_.jpg]
Air Jordan 5 Retro "CEMENT" - 136027 104
 
 
I had to read Peterson's Wikipedia entry to figure out exactly who he was, as his name is virtually unknown
herein Australia.  Anybody who calls themselves a "public intellectual" obviously has delusions of grandeur.
I'm also not certain as to why anybody would care what this non-entity has to say anyway; why he's become
a self-appointed monitor of Canadian society's ethics?  And after all, a BA in political science, and a  Ph.D in
psychology are each  pretty common academic qualifications—at least in Australia.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 1 user Likes SYZ's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado
Reply
#5

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Hell, I thought he was the Peterson guy who chopped up his pregnant wife on Christmas   and dumped her body in a nearby lake while he was fishing.

[Image: scott-peterson-murder-trial-evidence-F.j...C400&ssl=1]


I thought maybe they let him go free, he got religion, and is out and about preaching his nonsense.
                                                         T4618
The following 2 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, Marozz
Reply
#6

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Peterson makes glib look smart for a lot of people.
"Talk nonsense, but talk your own nonsense, and I'll kiss you for it. To go wrong in one's own way is better than to go right in someone else's. 
F. D.
The following 3 users Like Mark's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, Dancefortwo, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#7

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Some video collections of his most blathery bloviations reminds me of Sarah Palin's early mad word salad gallops to interviewers when she was running for vice president. It does not inspire confidence. The problem for Monsieur Peterson is that he does indeed say so many silly things as he burbles on You Tube. This leads to his worst efforts being collected for our entertainment. And will eventually result in him being a figure of fun, a favorite bad example. A real life Jack Handey. A self caricature of a once competent professional gone loopy, intoxicated by his own urge to blither nonsense at the sight of a microphone.

Google "Jordan Peterson is an idiot" and read on.
Sitting in the club car of the hell bound train.

The following 3 users Like Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, grympy, skyking
Reply
#8

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread


My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
Reply
#9

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/t...we-deserve

A review here of Peterson's book "Maps of Meaning".  The takeaway, much of Peterson's book is meaningless word salad.  The sort of post-modernist gibberish that has given pomo a deservedly bad name.

"In the purely intrapsychic sphere, such conflict often emerges when attainment of what is desired presently necessarily interferes with attainment of what is desired (or avoidance of what is feared) in the future. Permanent satisfactory resolution of such conflict (between temptation and “moral purity,” for example) requires the construction of an abstract moral system, powerful enough to allow what an occurrence signifies for the future to govern reaction to what it signifies now. Even that construction, however, is necessarily incomplete when considered only as an “intrapsychic” phenomena. "
--

Blah. blah. blah.  If you cannot dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.  Lots and lots of bullshit.
600
pages of bullshit Peterson's gig seems to be to make some sensible remarks, a lot of questionable claims, larded with impenetrable, vague nonsense full of jargon, neologisms and baffle gab.

From this book review.
"(Many of the book’s reviews on Amazon contain sentiments like: I am not sure I understood it, but it’s absolutely brilliant.)"
Sitting in the club car of the hell bound train.

The following 1 user Likes Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado
Reply
#10

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
I've listened to several of his interviews and a handful of his speeches/lectures. Was even obliged to read a chapter from his 12 Rules book (or whatever the title was). Can't say I agree with him. In fact, I think he's full of shit basically ... moreso when it comes to gender differences and social issues than with his interpretation of scripture.

I mean, he extrapolates what he likes to think is true about human societies from his incredibly naive and poor analysis of the neurological makeup of lobsters ... and thinks women get paid less because they are more agreeable than men even though he never considers the fact that studies show women who score high on agreeableness still get paid less than men with similar scores. He also doesn't quite get how white privilege is a thing.

EDIT: Also equates men to order and women to chaos/destruction. And explicitly says in his book that woman's rejection of man is an example of this sort of chaos/destruction.
The following 3 users Like Grandizer's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, Tres Leches, epronovost
Reply
#11

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
I've heard chunks of him on different podcasts but haven't really gotten a bead on what he's about. Not sure the effort is worth making but he does seem very popular. Main thing I remember was him talking to Sam Harris and to me Peterson didn't make any sense at all, talking about the nature of truth. Maybe I just didn't understand it but it sounded woo-ey.
The following 2 users Like jerry mcmasters's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, Tres Leches
Reply
#12

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
(12-12-2018, 12:05 AM)jerry mcmasters Wrote: I've heard chunks of him on different podcasts but haven't really gotten a bead on what he's about.  Not sure the effort is worth making but he does seem very popular.  Main thing I remember was him talking to Sam Harris and to me Peterson didn't make any sense at all, talking about the nature of truth.  Maybe I just didn't understand it but it sounded woo-ey.

Check out the book review of his Maps of Meaning.   I linked to that a few posts above. There is nothing to understand in much of what he says.  It's fancy sounding double talk.  He states a few banalities, throws out some questionable nonsense and the bloviates at length.  It's his technique.  He's smart enough to blather some authoritative bull dada but it is still airy-fairy nonsense.

He has a degree so he trades on his authority as a recognized scholar.  In the end, he is just a clever post modernist blatherskite.  It's his schtick and it pays well.  Past blatherers that have trod this road include Hegel and Ayn Rand.   Read the review I linked to.  It is a long read but thorough.  It is an eye-opener.  Nathan J. Robinson, the reviewer, read his 600 page doorstop so you don't have to.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/t...we-deserve
Sitting in the club car of the hell bound train.

Reply
#13

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
(12-12-2018, 12:05 AM)jerry mcmasters Wrote: Main thing I remember was him talking to Sam Harris and to me Peterson didn't make any sense at all, talking about the nature of truth.  Maybe I just didn't understand it but it sounded woo-ey.

My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
Reply
#14

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
(12-12-2018, 12:45 AM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote:
(12-12-2018, 12:05 AM)jerry mcmasters Wrote: I've heard chunks of him on different podcasts but haven't really gotten a bead on what he's about.  Not sure the effort is worth making but he does seem very popular.  Main thing I remember was him talking to Sam Harris and to me Peterson didn't make any sense at all, talking about the nature of truth.  Maybe I just didn't understand it but it sounded woo-ey.

Check out the book review of his Maps of Meaning.   I linked to that a few posts above. There is nothing to understand in much of what he says.  It's fancy sounding double talk.  He states a few banalities, throws out some questionable nonsense and the bloviates at length.  It's his technique.  He's smart enough to blather some authoritative bull dada but it is still airy-fairy nonsense.

He has a degree so he trades on his authority as a recognized scholar.  In the end, he is just a clever post modernist blatherskite.  It's his schtick and it pays well.  Past blatherers that have trod this road include Hegel and Ayn Rand.   Read the review I linked to.  It is a long read but thorough.  It is an eye-opener.  Nathan J. Robinson, the reviewer, read his 600 page doorstop so you don't have to.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/t...we-deserve

As a philosopher lover, and amateur philosopher, there are many famous philosophers throughout history that I'm a fan of.

Hegel isn't one of them. But, perhaps I'm biased, because one of my favorite philosophers, Schopenhauer, couldn't stand Hegel either.

[Image: Hegel_And_Schopenhauer1.jpg]

Quote:Schopenhauer and Hegel were both prominent 19th century philosophers in Germany. As the comic indicates, Hegel was the more prominent of the two, and continues to be the more prominent of the two to this day (although the line that Schopenhauer is only remembered for influencing Nietzsche is certainly an exaggeration). Schopenhauer was quite bitter about Hegel's success, apparently in part due to a particular incident where both of them had a philosophy seminar scheduled at the same time, and everyone went to Hegel's, leaving his pretty much totally empty. Some choice quotes from Schopenhauer on Hegel:

"Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to achieve the intellectual corruption of an whole generation."
- The World as Will and Idea, vol. 2 (1844)

"But the height of audacity in serving up pure nonsense, in stringing together senseless and extravagant mazes of words, such as had previously been known only in madhouses, was finally reached in Hegel, and became the instrument of the most barefaced general mystification that has ever taken place, with a result which will appear fabulous to posterity, and will remain as a monument to German stupidity. "
- The World as Will and Idea, vol. 2 (1844)

"Now if for this purpose I were to say that the so-called philosophy of this fellow Hegel is a colossal piece of mystification which will yet provide posterity with an inexhaustible theme for laughter at our times, that it is a pseudo-philosophy paralyzing all mental powers, stifling all real thinking, and, by the most outrageous misuse of language, putting in its place the hollowest, most senseless, thoughtless, and, as is confirmed by its success, most stupefying verbiage, I should be quite right.

If I were to say that this pseudo-philosophy has as its central idea an absurd notion grasped from thin air, that it dispenses with reasons and consequents, in other words, is demonstrated by nothing, and itself does not prove or explain anything, that it lacks originality and is a mere parody of scholastic realism and at the same time of Spinozism, and that the monster is also supposed to represent Christianity turned inside out, hence, The face of a lion, the belly of a goat, the hindquarters of a dragon, again I should be right.

Further, if I were to say that this [Great Philosopher] of the Danish Academy scribbled nonsense quite unlike any mortal before him, so that whoever could read his most eulogized work, the so-called Phenomenology of the Mind, without feeling as if he were in a madhouse, would qualify as an inmate for Bedlam, I should be no less right."
- On the Basis of Morality (1839)

Courtesy of Existentialist Comics.

[Image: quote-in-every-page-of-david-hume-there-...265286.jpg]

Hegel was also a collectivist ... and I can't stand collectivism.

Oh, and Rand? All her new ideas were crap and it was more about politics than anything. The only things she said that made sense were just stolen from philosophers before her that were far better thinkers, insofar as I can tell.

I'm no ethical egoist, but there are also better arguments for ethical egoism than hers.
My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
Reply
#15

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
On Ayn Rand

https://books.google.com/books/about/The...&q&f=false

Google books has some parts of Ayn Rand's Journals.  One of the most interesting parts that can be read online is for an early novel, never finished, called "The Little Street".  It is weird to say the least.  In her journals, Rand gives full vent to her peevish, ugly, philosophy of life.  She managed to tone it down for later novels, but it still comes through if you look carefully.  Rand idolized Nietzschean supermen.  People who had no regard whatsoever for other people or the norms of civilized behavior.  She loathed average people.  To extremes.  Unfortunately Google Books doesn't allow cut and paste.  It is a short read but well worth the effort for those of us who are kook watchers.  Millions still revere this bizarre creature.

Her outline for this novel is a real gigglefest.  Rand was as crazy as a shit house rat.  AynRand.org is still furiously flogging her crap.
Sitting in the club car of the hell bound train.

Reply
#16

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
She was also a sexist pig:

My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
The following 3 users Like EvieTheAvocado's post:
  • Smercury44, Tres Leches, Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#17

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
This thread needs a few True Believers.  None of them came over from TTA?  (yeah, I said it...TTA TTA TTA) 
god, ugh
The following 2 users Like julep's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, Tres Leches
Reply
#18

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Don't get me started on Rand.
"What senses do we lack that we cannot see or hear another world all around us?" -- Frank Herbert
The following 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post:
  • EvieTheAvocado, julep
Reply
#19

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
(12-13-2018, 02:12 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Don't get me started on Rand.

She's the ultimate pseudo-philosopher*.



*I wouldn't even qualify JPD as a philosopher ... I mean, he's just the Deepak Chopra of Christianity, lol.

And, from what I've read of—and about—Hegel so far ... Schopenhauer was quite right to criticize Hegel of being the overrated Pseudo-philosopher of his time.

Ayn Rand is the nutty individualist and Hegel is the nutty collectivist.

Here's a one of Schopenaherur's quotes on, Hegel, in case anyone missed it due to the length of my post and it being bundled with other quotes . . .

. . . you get the impression he may not have been very fond of Hegel and his philosophy:



"Hegel, installed from above, by the powers that be, as the certified Great Philosopher, was a flat-headed, insipid, nauseating, illiterate charlatan who reached the pinnacle of audacity in scribbling together and dishing up the craziest mystifying nonsense. This nonsense has been noisily proclaimed as immortal wisdom by mercenary followers and readily accepted as such by all fools, who thus joined into as perfect a chorus of admiration as had ever been heard before. The extensive field of spiritual influence with which Hegel was furnished by those in power has enabled him to achieve the intellectual corruption of a whole generation."
- The World as Will and Idea, vol. 2 (1844)
My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
Reply
#20

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
This article about Peterson appeared in my local paper today...

Jordan Peterson: Why some (but not all) Christians are flocking to the culture warrior

Jordan Peterson doesn't go to church and won't be pinned down on what he believes about God,
much less the resurrection. So he seems like a strange choice to have inspired the headline in a
Christian magazine, "Is Jordan B Peterson the saviour of Christianity?", among many other think
pieces about what the church can learn from him.

The Christian web site that ran the Peterson story is HERE.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
Reply
#21

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Here's a debate in which the continental philosopher Zizek demolishes Peterson after Peterson was foolish enough to throw down a gauntlet to Zizek for a debate anytime. One reviewer of this video said that whatever you think of Zizek, it's clear he knows philosophy and Peterson manifestly does NOT.

Reply
#22

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
Did you see his discussion with Matt Dilahunty? He got his ass kicked there, too.
My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
Reply
#23

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
I think I have rather neutral attitude towards Peterson. Even though I disagree with him a lot, in many cases I admit he is right.

As a Christian I disagree with his views about God, but I think he has a point, a very good point, in many of his politically incorrect statements. I don’t say now what I like about him because I want to make a psychological test with you  Smile

It’s a widely known fact that people usually has bias when we discuss persons like Trump or Peterson. You either like or dislike. I’m from Europe, so can’t comment very much about US politicians, but I realize this bias in myself easily: There are local politicians I like, and others I dislike.

When I hear some of those I like saying something stupid, I tend to soften my reaction and give him/her excuses. But if someone I dislike says something good and vice, I tend to think ”Well, he learned it from someone else, not original thinking. Besides, he’s still a moron”. I’m sure you know what I mean.

So, my test for you: Can you find anything good that Peterson has said?

And I’m not seeking for funny answers and jokes, but something that makes anti-jordanists slightly angry or willing to oppose, or a little bit ashamed of themselves. So, can you find anything truly good in his opinions and statements?
Reply
#24

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
(08-15-2019, 04:34 AM)Kimdal Wrote: So, my test for you: Can you find anything good that Peterson has said?

That's a fairly tough challenge, but I would say some of his critique of postmodernism are fairly good or at least correct. Postmodernism has a jargon problem that makes it easy to say anything and nothing at the same time. It redefines words constantly. It's cultural relativism can be dogmatic. It's profoundly divise when comes the time to apply any of its findings outside of an academic circle.

The problem though, is that Peterson is a notorious abuser of jargon, redefines words constantly and can easily say anything or nothing when he writes. This makes his critique of postmodernism rather hypocritical though still valid. Unfortunately, he also uses his critique of postmodernism as a hammer to attempt to silence academic fields and researches he opposes (aka anything that challenges or critique the WASP narrative of culture and history) and, frequently, proves him wrong in a disgusting and dangerous attempt to "poison the well". This reveals that Peterson real problem with postmodernism is that it challenges his dogmatism, not that it as a jargon problem and is prone to relativism. But, that's pretty much Peterson in a nutshell. The man makes three correct statements, but then makes six idiotic ones right after that completely undermines the previous three.
Reply
#25

The Official Anti-Jordan Peterson Thread
(08-15-2019, 04:34 AM)Kimdal Wrote: I think he has a point, a very good point, in many of his politically incorrect statements.

You're in the wrong thread, mate. This is the Anti Jordan Peterson thread. If you want to speak well, rather than ill, of that tosser then go make a Pro-Jordan Peterson thread instead of clogging up this thread about what a twat he is with stuff that's positive about him Tongue
My Argument Against Free Will Wrote:(1) Ultimately, to control your actions you have to originate your original nature.

(2) But you can't originate your original nature—it's already there.

(3) So, ultimately, you can't control your actions.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)