Forum menu
So in six pages has anyone countered anything in the OP’s video?
Don't be silly. Why would anyone do that when they can deflect by making up things he hasn't said. If enough people say it over and over again then it must be true. Welcome to 2018.
Don’t be silly. Why would anyone do that when they can deflect by making up things he hasn’t said. If enough people say it over and over again then it must be true. Welcome to 2018.
I know, his fanbois keep ignoring the questions and keep saying nobody has made a valid comment.
Tough crowd isn't it.
As a general point how does his views on monogamy and reducing violence account for the domestic violence rates?
Compare these two statements
He changes
"I really believe that"
to
"I wouldn't say I believed that I have my suspicions that"
So yes, slightly different. Believes/suspects/thinks, all in the same ball park.
I'm sure if we had people scrutinizing and comparing statements that we had made in the past there would be many a time where such slight differences had occurred.
So in six pages has anyone countered anything in the OP’s video?
Given the length and how tedious Peterson is still waiting for the OP to provide some relevant highlights/times for discussion. I have listened to him a few times and find him tedious and disingenuous in the extreme. Perhaps he has improved but cant be arsed wasting that time watching it without good reason.
well you can debunk his nonsense about lobsters pretty easily
serotonin may be common to both species but trying to justify his human social hierarchy idea on this basis displays a stunning level of ignorance about the hormonal & neurological make up of both species
he's a quack
https://giphy.com/gifs/L9BR6nx99sgyQ/html5
@dissonance, {in the past} he's had some interesting view points, but I think now he is fully engulfed in 'fame', he's gone way off the reservation and definitely plays to a crowd. There's so much he doesn't speak about, many holes he leaves, maybe because the topic would be a tinderbox, who knows.
He's basically a soundbite machine.
@mikesmith, agreed, I'd like to hear view-point on that, to explore the links between parental abuse/alienation and the potential effects that has on children as they grow into adults. The little research i've done indicates there is a link between this and DV, again if people took this stuff seriously and didn't fall into playing the gender politics game, maybe we could reduce the amount of trauma clueless rents mete out onto their children. OR at least take steps to manage it.
But I fear we'll just continue the cycle of this kind of shitshow.
I have listened to him a few times and find him tedious and disingenuous in the extreme. Perhaps he has improved
He hasn't. The stuff he rambles on about could be covered in 10 minutes by a decent speaker. Do his fans pay by the minute...
Don’t be silly. Why would anyone do that when they can deflect by making up things he hasn’t said. If enough people say it over and over again then it must be true. Welcome to 2018.
Instead of feigning offence, why don't you provide us with a specific claim for discussion?
Frankly, those people who are continuously having a pop at Geetee are saying much more about what is lacking in their lives than his.
Completely agree, my first post on this was thinking how odd it was that some people got so worked up about him. I still think its odd. I've put it down to some on the left's hysterical hatred of anything that could be construed as right wing. Some of your posts.
Saying Geetee has ‘issues’ is being incredibly diplomatic. The fact that his constant evangelising of the rapey shyster he thinks is ‘normal’ probably tells you everything you need to know
This especially stinks. What exactly is "everything we need to know" binners ?
So an hour in, plenty of complaints, still no real answer, think this sums it up.
I’ve put it down to some on the left’s hysterical hatred of anything that could be construed as right wing.
A claim with no evidence offered to support it. Now, who does that remind me of...
I’ve put it down to some on the left’s hysterical hatred of anything that could be construed as right wing.
This. It's absurd and I'll bet it's driving more people towards the right (or at least away from the left, but since there doesn't seem to be any centre ground now) than anything else. People really need to wake up and get a grip of themselves.
As a general point how does his views on monogamy and reducing violence account for the domestic violence rates?
I don't know what his views on monogamy and reducing violence are, perhaps kerley could give us all a quick synopsis.
Instead of feigning offence, why don’t you provide us with a specific claim for discussion?
So various claims are made with no evidence offered (and the evidence that is turns out to be false) and now you want to be supplied with your own material? Priceless!
So an hour in, plenty of complaints, still no real answer
It was four days ago that I was trying to get some specifics from one of the detractors so don't hold your breath!
A claim with no evidence offered to support it. Now, who does that remind me of…
Almost everyone on this thread.
Couldnt you act as man in the middle and give one nice simple example of one of the things he says that you like and why?
Evweyrhing to do with gender patriarchy post modernism corruption of the social sciences sovereignty of the individual the dangers of identity politics inherent trait characteristics between men and women the importance of individual responsibility the need to ensure we find something constructive for people to do on society especially poor white working class men and boys (but not exclusively them).
PARKLIFE!
I think it's time to leave this thread to the fanboi's circle jerk.
JP has the solution to that entire word salad.!
He truly is the 2nd coming !!
He's still chatting shit about lobsters tho
PARKLIFE!
post modernism corruption of the social sciences
JP's qualifications are all in "dodgy post modernist pseudo-social sciences" . So essentially, are you suggesting that he's saying all those other pseudo scientists are making shit up, apart from him? (despite the volumes of evidence that he's just as bad as all the other peddlers of dodgy shite)
Seems legit
So essentially, are you suggesting that he’s saying all those other pseudo scientists are making shit up, apart from him?
You may remember this from the Brexit times
These are not the experts we are looking for, this new expert who is an anti expert is the expert we should listen to...
Evweyrhing to do with gender patriarchy post modernism corruption of the social sciences sovereignty of the individual the dangers of identity politics inherent trait characteristics between men and women the importance of individual responsibility the need to ensure we find something constructive for people to do on society especially poor white working class men and boys (but not exclusively them).
ffs.....if that is all it takes to be hailed as a solution to the male identity crisis then I’m gonna be lauded as the saving grace of masculinity.....you wanna hear my soliloquy on the modern male condition ?......
Grow a set of balls and don’t be a dick
There you go........simple 👍....job done....let’s go down the pub🥃
So various claims are made with no evidence offered (and the evidence that is turns out to be false) and now you want to be supplied with your own material? Priceless!
Thank you for proving my point.
People really need to wake up and get a grip of themselves.
I reckon his supporters have no problem with getting a grip.
you’re [geetee is] so easily duped
I’m not concerned about you, just a little saddened.
He’s a misogynist.
Unthinking acceptance is a hallmark of his followers.
he’s deliberately divisive
Sorry ransos, which evidence backed nugget of wisdom from the above did I unwittingly help you prove?
Is that a whiff of hypocrisy I can detect...?
I reckon his supporters have no problem with getting a grip.
Classy!
(I believe that's STW's pre-approved reply to such posts)
it is sbob, though it still doesn't add much to your contribution, so far it seems you just want to complain about other people....
What I would like is for people to back up their claims against Peterson, otherwise it just looks like a pack of baseless ****ers bullying the OP.
Sorry ransos, which evidence backed nugget of wisdom from the above did I unwittingly help you prove?
That you're all mouth and no trousers.
What I would like is for people to back up their claims against Peterson, otherwise it just looks like a pack of baseless **** bullying the OP.
It is up to Peterson and his supporters to substantiate his claims. Otherwise they look like a pack of whiny cockbags.
Apart from his lectures being somewhat vague and unscientific, here's a load for you to be getting on with. Knock yourself out.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Pseudoscience
He talks a lot about stuff he really doesn't know, perhaps sticking to his subject would be best. If he was that good a university lecturer then he should at least be able to get his views across clearly. As the link says "His statements are notoriously incoherent and ambiguous, which allows him to handwave criticism as mere misrepresentations of his views."
If that is true then he should go away and write a clear succinct book full of his thoughts which can be examined for truth or not. But then perhaps the people who give him money may decide not to.
As for the OP, it appears that every time Peterson does something he's on here telling us about it. Perhaps have a thread that you can update as needed when Peterson describes his breakfast or something equally important that we need to know? Or even better, perhaps leave Peterson in the background and pick one or more of his pronouncements and start a thread on that? It would then allow us to play the ball and not discuss the strange man himself ("atheism causes baldness"? Oy vey).
Cult of personality is a very dangerous thing indeed. Just look at Trump.
(but not exclusively them).
Awesome.
Now what social sciences in particular do you have in mind and how have they been corrupted?
For example I am struggling to see how that word salad would impact the study of public finance or information studies. Can you get more specific beyond the lazy boogie man of "social science"?
As for your interest in supporting working class white men. Isnt that a tad identity politics? Or is it just the right sort of identity?
It is up to Peterson and his supporters to substantiate his claims. Otherwise they look like a pack of whiny cockbags.
Its a fair point JHJ goes to great lengths to provide links to support his arguments and we get to judge them based on that
getee posts a link to one of petersens word salad lectures & tells us its the answer to everything
hes yet to explain why lobsters are a good model for humans when it comes to social hierarchy
<p class="css-1xl4flh e2kc3sl0">Mr. Nestor says he recently wrote a paper on how testosterone levels and sperm count are dropping. He argues sociocultural transformations are probably making men less virile, and Mr. Peterson nods along.</p>
<p class="css-1xl4flh e2kc3sl0">At one point in the discussion, Mr. Peterson, who had been relatively quiet, becomes heated on the topic of women who find marriage oppressive.</p>
<p class="css-1xl4flh e2kc3sl0">“So I don’t know who these people think marriages are oppressing,” he says. “I read Betty Friedan’s book because I was very curious about it, and it’s so whiny, it’s just enough to drive a modern person mad to listen to these suburban housewives from the late ’50s ensconced in their comfortable secure lives complaining about the fact that they’re bored because they don’t have enough opportunity. It’s like, Jesus get a hobby. For Christ’s sake, you — you — ”</p>
From a follower
<p class="css-1xl4flh e2kc3sl0">Jacob Logan, 18, from Alliston, Ontario, was first in line for Mr. Peterson’s talk on Thursday, May 3 at the Queen Elizabeth Theater. He had arrived 12 hours early, wearing a shirt with lobsters stacked upon each other. He also had 100 name tags to hand out on which he had scrawled the name “Bucko.” It’s a nickname Mr. Peterson sometimes uses for his fans.</p>
<p class="css-1xl4flh e2kc3sl0">“Whenever I listen to him, it’s like he’s telling me something I already knew,” Mr. Logan says. “Learning is remembering.”</p>
If that doesn't scream confirmation bias I don't know what does
“You’re a divine locus of consciousness,” Mr. Peterson tells the crowd of 1,200 or so people.
Random word generator
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html
Happy to lead people along, some spatterings of random common sense with an undercurrent of privileged white man who doesn't want to accept a re-balancing of the world, of course with diversity we could just let it take it's course, the people who gain the most from that are those already in power.
But as this thread proves, there are some who think he tells all the truths and grants revelations (or confirmations) to his followers. Not for the majority it seems.
I've spent enough time reading his crap wrapped up as semi spiritual, life affirming, Rees Mogg rose tinted specs for a simpler time where Men were in charge and women knew their place. Followed by an Ah, you fell into that little trap, what I really meant/emphasised etc etc was something not actually as controversial but hey by accident I got all this publicity.
AKA Borris, AKA Trump
That you’re all mouth and no trousers.
Congratulations on completing your round of "I know you are but what am I". What are we playing next, hopscotch?
It is up to Peterson and his supporters to substantiate his claims.
Yet seemingly not up to his detractors to substantiate theirs? There's a word for that.
Otherwise they look like a pack of whiny cockbags.
Sorry, who does?
Think I'll go and test the Timmy Taylors downstairs.
xxx
Yet seemingly not up to his detractors to substantiate theirs? There’s a word for that.
Tell us what it is, then. Or is that too difficult for you?
You'd think that someone would've fronted up by now. Oh well.
Evweyrhing to do with gender patriarchy post modernism corruption of the social sciences sovereignty of the individual the dangers of identity politics inherent trait characteristics between men and women the importance of individual responsibility the need to ensure we find something constructive for people to do on society especially poor white working class men and boys (but not exclusively them).
Tell us what it is, then. Or is that too difficult for you?
As if by magic, I already have.
You’d think that someone would’ve fronted up by now. Oh well.
You need to calm down old fruit, have a herbal tea.
I've not listened to a single word this bloke has said, but have been following these threads with interest. What's abundantly clear to me solely from people's reactions is this:
1) He's a blatant self-publicist and getting rather rich on the back of it.
2) He says contentious things which are either self-contradictory or sufficiently vague that listeners on either side of the fence can pick what they want to hear from it, with a healthy dose of confirmation bias, in order to proclaim him as either the messiah of the poor oppressed male or as a mysogynistic asshat. The truth I expect is, well, as I said in 1), he'll say anything that will fill theatres and sell books. See also, Donald Trump and a supporting cast of 2018 politicians. For all his failings, Trump is a grand master at saying a lot of words and letting people pick the bones out of it, he'll contradict himself in the same sentence. People remember what they want to hear and conveniently ignore everything else.
Am I near the mark here?
And with my <mod> hat on for a moment, this is all getting a bit tetchy and personal in the discussions, please play nicely or we'll take your ball away.
GT's politics are somewhat anathemic to mine own, but that doesn't mean I can give him a kicking for it. Play the argument, not the man.
As you were.
Pretty much bang on with the assessment Cougar, and the Trump comparison stands up
JP, like trump and other demagogues, says something contentious and controversial, then other people take their words and run with them to justify doing some really nasty, violent and unpleasant shit (see all the incel idiots who worship this clown).
At which point said demagogues shrug and say ‘hey... nothing to do with me’
He’s making a fortune by providing a justification to some pretty nasty people for their backward and misogynistic worldview, and looks pretty pleased with himself while doing so.
And while there are enough gullible, inadequate half-wits around to keep swallowing this shite, the gravy train keeps rolling....
Perhaps you might find some of Peterson's key arguments more palatabld if they are made for you by Jonathan Pie.
This clip is exactly the subject that brought Peterson to public attention, when he vehemently opposed Bill C16 and compelled speech.
Now I am as in favour of trans rights as anyone and vocally outspoken on this subject, but not even my best friend, who is trans, thinks that compelling people to use required pronouns is a good idea, indeed far from it, she believes it's a travesty to go down that road.
Anyway, here is the Pie video; let me know what you think.
Now I am as in favour of trans rights as anyone and vocally outspoken on this subject, but not even my best friend, who is trans, thinks that compelling people to use required pronouns is a good idea, indeed far from it, she believes it’s a travesty to go down that road.
and plenty of people disagree on that one too. Is this the one where he heads off to the slippery slope?
Perhaps you could address the points made already before trying to convince us all he is just a great guy? Cougar made some above.
Now I am as in favour of trans rights as anyone and vocally outspoken on this subject
You are outspoken in your worship of jp, I don't recall ever seen a statement from you supporting "trans" rights. I wouldn't classify myself as being outspoken on the subject, but I think I am more active than you in support whenever the subject gets raised on this forum.
but not even my best friend, who is trans,
A rather "incredible" call to authority that I frankly just don't believe. Which IMO is a dishonest argumentative technique you frequently use.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Subscribe</div>
<div></div>
<div class="">>“Whenever I listen to him, it’s like he’s telling me something I already knew,”</div>
"So you can say "Oh, I really identify with you. So. Much"