What did this philosopher mean by this?
What did this philosopher mean by this?
Is it okay for a man like Jordan Peterson to have an ego as he does
what philosopher? i only see the ramblings of the surrogated dad of some internet memesters
He wants to seem like he's not a weak, anxious academic trapped in verbal formulas perennially defeated by circumstance by attacking the 'prophets'
A real chad wouldn't even care about academics
Woow Genious hes the smattest men ever
So has he never actually written a book or essay that cites sources for the arguments he made and that he wanted people to take seriously?
Isn't Peterson just the modern day Lacan or Foucault?
are there any good philosophers named chad?
I don't think he has even read Foucault
they were important for their fields peterson is just a meme self help guru
Is this literally identity politics?
Isn't Lacan the dude whose ecrits are filled with actual formulas? He IS the anxious academic, what is he even saying
i'm torn on peterson. on one hand i appreciate his attempt to rejuvenate jung and his defense of freedom of speech, but on the other hand it's hard to respect the anti-pomo posturing of a guy who seems to have never honestly engaged with the thinkers he derides.
Lacan was certainly meme tier in his day
Peterson is only espousing positive things to anxious and deprived young men. At least he's a decent person for them.
peterson must be one of the most gifted self-marketers in the world. it's really incredible how famous and rich he has become, just by offering people vague and hand-wavy tidbits of psychological "insight"
This. if he ever goes after Baudrillard Im going to lose it.
And one down side of his message for his constituents, is that they now completely cast off all PoMo. Someone I know who likes Peterson, but doesnt really read too much tried to shame me for reading Pynchon, after he found out he's categorized as PoMo
What did he meme by this?
He wanted to trigger all the edgy pseuds of Veeky Forums. He succeeded.
but what gets me is when he does so by constructing a strawman for his followers to perceive and attack as an other. i suppose there's a certain pragmatism to it - every one needs an 'other,' right? - but i can't get behind such disingenuity.
He sure likes to rile a whole lot about pseudoscience on twitter for a psychology professor.
Psychology is meant to be an empirical science, right? Does anyone know of any hypotheses that Peterson has formulated and confirmed empirically? What exactly is his specialty or area of expertise within psychology?
Well I've never even watched a Petersen video and I already knew all (ALL) of post-modernism was literally shit, and post-pomo is even worse.
Jokes on him. I have no idea what he's talking about either.
The most dishonest thing is he characterises his straw man as something like 'chaos' to be fought because they're unrelated phenomena which to him means 'hypocritical' manifestation of the same thing.
It means he'd rather be a self help hack than an actual philosopher.
I can actually answer this because I took some of his courses
He's a clinical psychologist focused on personality, and his most influential work is subdividing the big five personality traits into 10 components (2 for each trait). It's a pretty interesting read if you're into that stuff
PoMo isn't shit. There have been some genuine good ideas and books emerging from it
Textbook Frankphobia, the calling card of the ineffectual Anglo
If Peterson is such a brainlet, why haven't any of you geniuses blown the fuck out of him with your superior argumentation skills?
It happens basically every Pseuderson thread.
Lol Baudrillard is the bottom of the fucking pomo barrel. Literal excrement
Uninstall your life
weak, anxious academics trapped in verbal formulas perennially defeated by circumstance
Hmm, I wonder
T. Mindless Peterson drone
I meant actually arguing with him personally. If you think your views can stand up to scrutiny, you should have no problem showing your face and debating him in some actual public setting.
Wtf is he talking about, he's arguing from a Derridean standpoint the fucking moron
He got too popular so now the resentful poomos need to tear him down, just like they do everything.
handful of lit browsers are gonna fly to Toronto just to possibly get the chance to debate some guy, ostensibly by just walking into his lectures and challenging him lol an autist
Ok? Or do you think he'll accept huge debate challenges from randoms?
user can't offer debate because that would entail actually standing for something.
implying that's the only reason you can't do it
What the hell? Give me a practical rundown of how this should happen? There's twitter and YouTube, I guess, but do you remember that shitty video Zero Books made about him? Did he ever respond to that?
Yeah sure man, I'll devise an entire plan for you on how you can debate Peterson just so you can safely close the tab and never even think about carrying it out.
This isn't my first day on the internet, I already know everything I need to know about you dude. You aren't kidding anyone.
He has mentioned in a number of his videos that he'll accept any challenge to debate him. For example this video
(ignore the cringy self-insertion as Harrison Ford)
He would probably respond to an intelligently written email proposing a debate; if not you could go to the press and explain how he refused to even debate the central tenets of his own philosophy.
(ignore the cringy self-insertion as Harrison Ford)
It's Clint Eastwood you fookin plebian
Ya I bet you never even read a po-mo book. Just put a bullet in your head you stupid nigger.
I love Peterson.
I hope his influence increases tenfold. He will capture all the pseuds and no-gf losers, take their money, and leave them all hanging when the tides change and he finds another disaffected group to exploit. It's almost like self-selected eugenics, because most of his followers seem too weak to live without him. Just my take. Incredibly smart man.
lol no. Anything after biology is a meme science.
Well tat shouldn't be too hard. You can do it now. Take one of his claims and follow the source, and you can guarantee he's either bullshiting or making a post modern argument himself.
give his email, i am going to tear him a new one
This. Hustlers gon' hustle.
Some people are easy marks.
I'm not even a guy who feels qualified to debate him, or particularly wants to. I was just questioning your stupid claim.
I already know everything I need to know about you dude. You aren't kidding anyone.
Peterson is completely genuine. Sure he promotes himself, but he doesn't say a single thing he doesn't mean in the process. He is most certainly not a shill nor does he misrepresent his beliefs to attract a crowd. He speaks his truth and people have come to him and he is capitalizing on that while maintaining his integrity.
he speaks his truth
When will kermit posters get it?
tell me to clean my room
i dont care
tell Lacan to clean his room
it'ls beat down time
The funny part is I think peterson is actually sincere.
Egoism is the very essence of a noble soul.
Peterson has an enormous impact rating as a academic, huge amount of citations, and is leading the charge with converting forms of narrative therapy into online, easily accessible formats. You don't know what you're talking about. I bet you'd dismiss Rogers or Maslow as self-help gurus as well.
It's the day and age. Look at the fucking president for Christ's sake.
Google scholar Jordan peterson profile. He has made a lot of contributions.
He means exactly what Veeky Forums agrees to. That post modernist would get destroyed by Socrates/Plato since they wouldn't play their language games.
Yet cultural marxism has led to the impending doom of European nations such as Sweden and Germany.
post-modernist is thought cancer if there ever was such a thing.
Baubillard is Aristotle for pseuds. Again, Peterson strikes right with his tweet. You just think he is "wow amazing" when he regurgitates A through a whacko jacko pomo dictionary.
They're Letzter Mensch. So is JP but that is beside the point.
What's wrong with DJT?
This. I will never understand the hype behind him.
I'm confused how he takes "their money" when he releases university lectures for free in his channel and has a biblical series going on.
manage dysfunctional people into functional and independent units
When will you boys grow up to respect leadership and guidance?
Yes, that is completely voluntary choice for people to do. I haven't given him any money yet I've watched his videos. Money isn't prerequisite for watching his YT channel.
They'd rather be off the hook, either from developing themselves or from helping to develop others.
This nigga is making $60k per month, I was born in the wrong fucking continent altogether it seems.
Continent doesn't restrict your access to Youtube, Patreon. Go and make your own channel and become self-help meme guru racking up 60k when its so easy.
All science is a meme science, STEMsperg.
Where I live people fall for the eastern mysticism meme which is not my specialty. And nobody is going to watch an Asian talk about Jung and Christianity, they expect Yoga and meditation.
just talk about redpilled shit and get alt-right kids to send you money, that's really what peterson does, he got his first taste of fame for simple tranny bashing, and then ran with it and started shilling anything and everything
Internet is not restricted to continent, stop making excuses.
Nobody is going to
Why? If it is so easy to do what Peterson does why am I reading excuses after excuses?
Are you sure you are using the word "shilling" correctly?
Connect Jung and Christianity to Yoga and meditation, idiot.
haven't you seen all the dumb shit peterson shills on his websites?
His website has links to his Youtube channel and book recommendations. For free. There's no SUPER MALE VITALITY ads that I can see.
Context is golden.
What does "verbal formulas perennially defeated by circumstance" mean?
The first time I heard this Peterson guy speak was in his interview with the google guy, but I respect anyone who trashes postmodernism and its figureheads like the subversive jew Derrida, so I'm definitely not against him.
shilling is a superfluous pejorative at this point, get with the times
Online version of narrative therapy, delivering for around $20 what therapists would change in the thousands of dollars for... You don't know what you're talking about.
Why don't you do it then?
He has put a link to his own project on his own website that is again not prerequisite to watching his Youtube channel with his lectures, interviews, and series in it. It's not like he is asking you to donate to Patreon, buy his program in order to watch his YT channel.
Though I do admit I do not know what use that entire thing is. Well nobody can be perfect!
this reads straight outta scientology
this guy is the next L. Ron Hubbard
This is kind of genius desu, if I'm unemployed after my post major, this is the kind of shitposting I'll resort to.
Why don't you do it then?
because i don't want to be a fucking youtube e-celeb, i have tried to talk other people into starting youtube channels produced and edited by me tho, but no one wants to be an alt-right assclown for cash
be Jordan Peterson
complain about postmodernism
complain about Lacan, Derrida, Foucault
never address any of their actual books or writing
What did he mean by this?
because I don't want 60k per month easy money.
The full future authoring exercise has 2 different stages, each with a number of steps.
In Stage 1, you will write generally about your goals.
In Stage 2, you will specify and clarify the nature of those goals, and begin to strategize.
We recommend that you complete the process over two or more separate days.
People who allow themselves some time to sleep when they are making important decisions appear to do a better job and to benefit more.
The entire exercise will require approximately two and a half hours.
On the first day, you might want to complete Stage 1.
On the second day, you could complete Stage 2.
You will need to concentrate and process what you are writing, so try to complete this exercise when you are feeling alert and relatively unrushed.
You will be asked to write down your private thoughts and feelings. Please type them directly into the box provided. At times, you may be asked to write non-stop, without regard for grammar or spelling. At other times, you may be asked to revise what you have written.
This exercise is meant to benefit YOU personally.
Everything you write will remain accessible only to you and those you designate as recipients.
The report you produce will summarize your personal goals and strategies.
You and your recipients, if any, will be emailed a copy of this report shortly after you complete the exercise.
During some sections, you will be asked to write for specified amounts of time. Please try your best to write for the amount of time specified (so, if it asks you to write for 1-2 minutes, please write continuously for at least 60 seconds).
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 2
During this exercise, you will be presented with a series of pages either providing you with information, or asking you to describe aspects of your personality and experiences.
You may proceed through the exercise by clicking the Next button.
You can go back to previous pages by clicking Previous.
Each time you click Next or Previous, the data you have entered on that page will be saved. You can also save your data while remaining on the same page by clicking Save. In addition, many of the pages where you are asked to write for longer periods of time will automatically save every minute or so.
You may quit the exercise any time by clicking Exit/Home or shutting down your browser. If the current page is a page you have been writing on, remember to click Save before exiting. The text that you entered on previous pages will have already been saved.
You can come back to the exercise later, and resume your work. All your previous work will be waiting for you, and will be taken to the last point in the exercise you had completed.
awesome man it's totally worth it to pay $14.95 (LIMITED TIME SUMMER SALE!) to write down my goals
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 3
On many pages, you will not be able to successfully click Next or Previous unless you have provided a minimum of necessary text. If you do not, you will receive an error message, and the text box in question will be highlighted in red.
Text boxes also have a maximum length. Pay attention, as you write, to the numbers above the text boxes. Numbers like [180 / 1000] indicate that you have typed 180 characters out of a maximum allowable of 1000. When you go over the maximum, the numbers above the text box become red. Clicking Next, Previous, or Save will result in an error message and you will not be able to proceed to the Next or Previous page. To resolve this, edit your text until the number of characters is less than or equal to the maximum. These limitations have been established so that you do not get stalled at any point in the process.
We do encourage you to write in some detail, however, subject to those limitations. Our research indicates that better results are obtained as the amount written by participants increases.
There is a progress bar in the top right portion of the screen, which displays the percentage of the exercise that you have already completed. If you hover over the bar with the mouse, you can see approximately how much time it will still take to complete the exercise.
You may use the Index to jump to any page you have already completed. Clicking the [Index] link will open the index. Clicking it again will close it. Remember to click Save to save any work on the current page before using the index to jump to another page.
After you have completed the exercise, you will be taken to a Summary page. You can use that page to email yourself a copy of your writing
Why? If it is so easy to do what Peterson does why am I reading excuses after excuses?
I'm saying this 100% non ironically but Peterson is a white male and I don't have that luxury. Peterson and to some degree Zizek attract 14 to 40 red pilled autists who want some "intellectual," be it politician, high profile journalist or cultural critics to dismantle SJWs or feminist or immigration crisis. If I was born white I'd be spouting red pilled shit out the ass.
The Ideal Future: Preliminary Notes and Thoughts
In this exercise you will begin to create a version, in writing, of your ideal future. William James, the great American psychologist, once remarked that he did not know what he thought until he had written his thoughts down. When he didn't know what to write, he wrote about anything that came to mind. Eventually, his ideas became focused and clarified.
Brainstorm. Write whatever comes to mind. Don't worry too much about sentence construction, spelling, or grammar. There will be plenty of time to write polished sentences later. Avoid criticizing what you write. Premature criticism interferes with the creative process.
Imagining Your Ideal Future
You will start with some exercises of imagination that will help you warm up to the task of defining your future.
These will include 8 questions such as "what could you do better?", "what would you like to learn about?", "what habits would you like to improve?". After briefly answering these 8 questions, you will be asked to write for 15 minutes about your ideal future, without editing or criticism.
Let yourself daydream or fantasize. You are trying to put yourself into a state of reverie, which is a form of dream-like thinking that relies heavily on internal imagery. This kind of thinking allows all your different internal states of motivation and emotion to find their voice.
It might be best to concentrate on your future three to five years down the road, although you may have reasons to concentrate on a shorter or longer timespan (eighteen months to ten years).
1.1 One Thing You Could Do Better
If you could choose only one thing that you could do better, what would it be?
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.2. Things to Learn About
What would you like to learn more about, in the next six months? Two years? Five years?
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.3. Improve Your Habits
What habits would you like to improve?
-With friends and family?
-For your health?
-With regards to smoking/alcohol/drug use?
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.4. Your Social Life in the Future
Friends and associates are an important part of a meaningful, productive life. Take a moment to consider your social network. Think about the friends you might want to have, and the connections you might want to make. It is perfectly reasonable to choose friends and associates who are good for you. Describe your ideal social life.
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.5. Your Leisure Activity in the Future
Take a moment to consider the activities you would like to pursue outside of obligations such as work, family and school. The activities you choose should be worthwhile and personally meaningful.
Without a plan, people often default to whatever is easiest, such as television watching, and waste their private time. If you waste 4 hours a day, which is not uncommon, then you are wasting 1400 hours a year. That is equivalent to 35 40-hour work weeks, which is almost as much as the typical individual spends at his or her job every year.
If your time is worth $25 per hour, then you are wasting time worth $35,000 per year. Over a 50-year period, that is $1.8 million dollars, not counting interest or any increase in the value of your time as you develop.
Describe what your leisure life would be like, if it was set up to be genuinely productive and enjoyable.
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.6. Your Family Life in the Future
Take a moment to consider your home and family life. Peaceful, harmonious family life provides people with a sense of belonging, support for their ambitions, and reciprocal purpose. Describe what your ideal family would be like. You can write about your parents and siblings, or about your plans for your own partner, or about your children, if any – or about all of these. What kind of partner would be good for you? How could you improve your relationship with your parents or siblings?
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.7. Your Career in the Future
Much of what people find engaging in life is related to their careers. A good career provides security, status, interest, and the possibility of contributing to the community. Take a moment to consider your school or work careers, or both. Where do you want to be in six months? Two years? Five years? Why? What are you trying to accomplish?
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
1.8. Qualities You Admire
People you automatically admire have qualities that you would like to possess or imitate. Identifying those qualities can help you determine who it is that you want to be. Take a moment to think about the two or three people you most admire. Who are they? Which qualities do they possess that you wish you had?
Think and write for at least two minutes, then move on.
The Ideal Future: Complete Summary
Now you have written briefly about your future, and have had some time to consider more specific issues. This step gives you the chance to integrate all the things that you have just thought and wrote about.
Close your eyes. Daydream, if you can, and imagine your ideal future:
-Who do you want to be?
-What do you want to do?
-Where do you want to end up?
-Why do you want these things?
-How do you plan to achieve your goals?
-When will you put your plans into action?
-Write about the ideal future that you have just imagined for 15 minutes. Write continuously and try not to stop while you are writing. Don't worry about spelling or grammar. You will have an opportunity to fix your mistakes later.
Dream while you write, and don't stop. Write at least until the 15 minutes have passed. Be ambitious. Imagine a life that you would regard as honourable, exciting, productive, creative and decent.
Remember, you are writing only for yourself. Choose goals that you want to pursue for your own private reasons, not because someone else thinks that those goals are important. You don't want to live someone else's life. Include your deepest thoughts and feelings about all your personal goals.
A Future to Avoid: Complete Summary
You have now written about the future you would like to have. Clearly defining your future can help reduce the uncertainty in your life, and reduce the amount of negative emotion that you chronically experience, in consequence. This is good for your confidence and for your health. Having well-defined goals also increases your chances of experiencing positive emotion, as people experience most of their hope and joy and curiosity and engagement as a consequence of pursuing valued goals (and not, as people generally think, by attaining them).
It can also be very useful to deeply imagine the future you would like to avoid. You probably know people who have made very bad decisions, and who end up with a life that nobody would want. You also likely have weaknesses yourself. If you let those get out of control, then you might also end up with a miserable, painful life. Most people know how their life could go downhill if they let it.
Spend some time, now, thinking about what your life would be like if you failed to define or pursue your goals, if you let your bad habits get out of control, and if you ended up miserable, resentful and bitter. Imagine your life three to five years down the road, if you failed to stay on the path you know you should be on. Use your imagination. Draw on your knowledge of the anxiety and pain you have experienced in the path, when you have betrayed yourself.
Think about the people you know who have made bad decisions or remained indecisive, or who chronically deceive themselves or other people, or who let cynicism and anger dominate their lives. Where do you not want to be?
Dream while you write, and don't stop. Write at least until the 15 minutes have passed. Let yourself form a very clear picture of the undesirable future.
Stage 1: The Ideal Future: Preliminary Notes and Thoughts has been completed
Congratulations! You have now realized a vision of your ideal future, and outlined a future that is best avoided. You can use the summary of this vision to help you complete Stage 2 of the Ideal Future planning process.
This summary will help you with the next stages.
Stage 2: Specific Goal Identification: Introduction
In this stage, you will first be asked to define and personally title your overall future plan. Then, you will be asked to take your general plans for the ideal future and break them up into more specific goals. Each of these separate goals will also be given its own title. This step will help you clarify your goals.
Please specify a title and brief description for your ideal future as a whole. This can be as simple as "My Ideal Future," in both fields, or, if you have something more personal in mind, you can specify that. Imagine that you are both specifying and summarizing your ambitions with this title. This will help you remember what you are aiming for.
In later screens you can define, prioritize, and analyze specific goals.
well it's true if you go for the "academic white guy tells you what you already believe" angle like peterson and molyneaux etc. but you can also do things like "redpilled black guy tells the dirt on the black community that redpilled white guys knew all along" or "redpilled asian guy admits that white are superior to asians which redpilled white guys knew all along" or "redpilled gay guy complains that gays are annoying which redpilled white guys knew all along" or "redpilled muslims reveals that islam is a satanic cult which redpilled white guys knew all along" and so on and so forth, the key is not being a white guy, but telling white guys what they want to hear
Please break down your ideal future into 8 goals. You can re-word, re-write and organize the relevant material from Step 1 for your goal summaries, if you wish, or you can rely on your memory. The exercise allows you to specify a minimum of 6 goals, but people who identify 8 have better results with this exercise.
These specific goals can be from a number of different domains.
-A personal goal might be "I would like to be healthier."
-A career goal might be "I would like to be more interested in my job"
-A social goal might be "I would like to meet more people".
The summaries you write about each goal should be reasonably brief and memorable. Make sure that each goal summary includes nothing but the most important information. You will have 10-15 minutes for this part of the exercise. Feel free to revise and edit.
2.3. Prioritizing Your Goals
Please organize your goals. Give your most important goal a rank of 1, your next most important goal a rank of 2, and so on. You can use the update button at any time to to re-order the list.
[List them in order of importance]
[ Goal 1: Goal Title]
[ Goal 2: Goal Title]
[ Goal 3: Goal Title]
[ Goal 4: Goal Title]
[ Goal 5: Goal Title]
[ Goal 6: Goal Title]
[ Goal 7: Goal Title]
[ Goal 8: Goal Title]
2.4. Strategizing About Your Goals
Now you will be asked about the following elements or feature for each of the specific goals you have identified:
Evaluating Your Motives
-Considering the Broad Personal and Social Impact of Goals
-Considering the Detailed Strategies for Goal Attainment
-Identifying Potential Obstacles and their Solutions
-Monitoring Progress towards Desired Goals
Thus, the five pages that contain these elements or features will repeat until all your goals have been assessed.
[This section asks questions about each your goals (1-8) in the order you decided on in 2.3. Answer questions 2.4.1-2.4.5 for goal 1, then repeat for each goal]
2.4.1. Evaluating Your Motives
For this goal, you might want to consider issues such as the following:
-Do you truly believe that pursuing this goal is important?
-Would you feel ashamed, guilty or anxious if you didn't?
-Do you want to achieve this goal personally, or are you doing it to please someone else? (It is often a good thing to do something for someone else, but you should know when you are doing that.)
-Are you pursuing this goal because the situation that you find yourself in in seems to demand it?
-Is the pursuit of this goal enjoyable, stimulating or satisfying?
-Is this goal part of a deeply felt personal dream?
Please spend a minute or two writing down your reasons for pursuing this goal:
2.4.2. Considering the Broad Personal and Social Impact of Goals
Goals can have an impact beyond the obvious. Our specific personal goals are connected to larger, more important life goals. These higher-order goals reflect our most important ideals. The specific goal of spending more time studying or reading, for example, is a specific element of the more important goal of being a well-educated person. Achieving other specific goals, such as becoming more assertive, help us to move closer to our ideal self.
You will now be asked to write about what more globally important things might be affected by your attainment the goal listed below:
-How would disciplined success change the way that you see yourself?
-How would other parts of your personal life change, in consequence?
-How would this affect the way that others perceive you? (You might also consider fears of being successful. Sometimes people are afraid to succeed because of the responsibility this would entail. Sometimes they are afraid of even becoming conscious of their true goals, because then they would be aware when they fail. These are not good strategies.)
-How would attaining this goal affect the lives of the people around you?
-What broader beneficial social impact might your success have?
Please write a short description of how attaining this goal would change additional important aspects of your life, and the lives of others.
2.4.3. Considering the Detailed Strategies for Goal Attainment
Goals are related to lesser, smaller sub-goals and behaviors, as well as connected to higher-order, more important abstract goals. Sub-goals are easier to achieve, but are still fundamental to reaching our greater aspirations. Sub-goals can thus be thought of as strategies for greater goal achievement. Thinking about what specific things need to be done in order to achieve your goals allows you to create practical strategies for realizing your dreams. Please take some time to write about the concrete daily or weekly things you might do to further your goal. Deeply consider what particular behaviors this goal is built upon.
-Should you spend more time planning at school or at work?
-Do you need to spend more time with your friends, or your children?
-Do you need to discuss household chores with your roommates, partner or spouse?
-Specify when you are going to work on your goal. Specify how often. Specify where. Think hard about how you are going to implement your plans. Make your plans concrete.
Write down those concrete weekly or daily things you might do to further this goal.
2.4.4. Identifying Potential Obstacles and their Solutions
Thinking about achieving a goal is obviously easier than going out and getting it done. Many things related to the natural environment, the social group and the self can stand in your way. It is useful to anticipate these difficulties, so that you can plan to overcome them.
Consider your goal, once again. Write down all the potential obstacles you can think up. Write down ways to overcome these obstacles.
How might you interfere with your own plans? How can you ensure this won't happen? Sometimes change is threatening to people we know and love. Will the people you know help you, or interfere? How can you communicate with them, so that they will support you? Think of realistic and worst-case scenarios. What are your options? What are your alternative plans?
Write down potential obstacles to this goal, and specify the ways you might overcome them.
"redpilled black guy tells the dirt on the black community that redpilled white guys knew all along" or "redpilled asian guy admits that white are superior to asians which redpilled white guys knew all along" or "redpilled gay guy complains that gays are annoying which redpilled white guys knew all along" or "redpilled muslims reveals that islam is a satanic cult which redpilled white guys knew all along"
There are that many of those kind that are slightly as successful as Peterson my man.
2.4.5. Monitoring Progress towards Desired Goals
We need to know, concretely, whether or not we are progressing towards the attainment of valued goals. Of course, this is not an easy task. When we want to complete very specific tasks, feedback on our performance is relatively easy to monitor. However, if our goals are less short-term, this becomes a little more difficult.
You are now being asked to identify personal benchmarks that will allow you to evaluate your own performance.
-When would you like to achieve this goal? Be specific. Even if you have to revise a deadline later, it is still better to set one.
-What sorts of things will you accept as evidence that you are progressing towards your stated goal?
-How often are you going to monitor your own behavior?
-How will things in your life have to change, measurably, for you to feel satisfied in your progress?
-How can you ensure that you are neither pushing yourself too hard, and ensuring failure, or being too easy on yourself, and risking boredom and cynicism?
-Your benchmarks should be personal indicators of success. It doesn't matter what others may think defines progress towards your goal. Write down those accomplishments would truly indicate positive movement on your part. Feel free to write as much as you feel is necessary.
Write down how you might monitor your progress with regards to this goal.
2.5. Future Steps
People often worry themselves unproductively by constantly revisiting their goals, instead of concentrating on their attainment. It is easy to undermine yourself, by always questioning your aims and intentions. Am I doing the right thing? Have I chosen the correct goals? This leads to chronic worry, unproductive behavior, and lack of opportunity to learn.
-Now that you have set goals, it is best to concentrate on a daily or weekly basis on implementing the strategies you have devised for their attainment, instead of worrying about the goals themselves. It is just as important to stick to a plan, as it is to make a plan.
-If you implement your goals, even if they are not perfect, you will learn enough during the implementation phase to make better goals next time. As you continue to repeat the process, you will get wiser and wiser.
-Set aside some time every week or two - no more than ten or twenty minutes - to mentally review your performance. You will gather all sorts of useful information that you can use to reconsider your plans, down the road.
Researchers have found that if someone performs goal-setting tasks multiple times over a long period, there is a greater chance of health and productivity improvements.
As a result, you might wish to engage in this sort of exercise on a regular basis, every four, six, or twelve months, as your situation changes.
Your Ideal Future
Below is a copy of your Ideal Future including the essays you wrote during Stage 1 and the goal setting and analysis you performed during Stage 2.
[This is another printable page, with every single question as a header, and what you wrote as an answer]
You have completed the Future Authoring project.
that's because most of them aren't savvy enough about viral marketing, for example there is always at least one peterson thread on the front page, where as the "redpilled minority" channels are usually too cheap to hire a viral marketing firm to get them on all over reddit, Veeky Forums, imgur, whatever. you have to spend money to make money friend.
His argument as to why he isn't raking in 60k a month from "spouting redpilled shit" is because he is not "A FUCKING WHITE MALE".
Another excuse from you. A jew in a White House generated one of the strictest immigration policies favoring European whites at the age of 31, what's your excuse? Note that jews are not white by their own admission.
tfw can't even tell if this is being shitposted ironically or not
This might actually be a somewhat worthwhile adventure when I've failed to get noticed in academia or get a good enough teaching job and I'm literally one step away from commiting sudoku.
There are weak and anxious academic types
They are so conditioned because they are unable to transcend a heteronomous rule of conduct in their thinking and this creates anxiety because they can never quite get it right, the rules change, victim mentality and so on
To the rescue (sarcastic peterson) come Lacan, Foucalt and Derrida: You are indeed the victim, the formulas don't matter (except mine), it's all made up
From what I know about Peterson he is saying that the Frenchies conjure a pleasurable empowering chaos but of course it is destructive by nature hence his sarcasm.
I think it's a pretentious comment. Might as well have said "liking frenchies is for insecure losers on a power trip".
What the fucks his beef with Lacan
so have you actually read any of the literature you're deriding and can you form any sort of structured or informed refutation or do you just suck Peterson's cock aaaallll daaaaay looooong
ROFL this is gold! Hats off brother kekistani.
Letszermensch don't take risks.
I've read the classics of Frankfurt School (w/r/t my comment about cultural marxism).
structured or infomed refutation.
I've done so multiple times in Veeky Forums. If this thread is still up in about 2 hours (leaving to gym) I will write to you.
No, i read referring to your remark about the entirety of postmodernism being "thought cancer".
I love that he's shitposting on twitter all day.
@Garbage Can Lid
@Garbage Can Lid
That post-modern (diversity/multiculturalism) narratives seeks to implement cultural Marxist objectives can be demonstrated by reference to founding Frankfurt School theorist Herbert Marcuse's repurposing of the term tolerance.
In a 1965 ~ Marcuse defined tolerance as intolerance; said it can be implemented through undemocratic means to stop chauvinism (xenophobia), racism, discrimination; and should be extended to the left while denied to the right:
"The realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and
the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed."
"Surely, no government can be expected to foster its own subversion, but in a democracy such a right is vested in the
people (i.e. in the majority of the people). This means that the ways should not be blocked on which a subversive majority
could develop, and if they are blocked by organized repression and indoctrination, their reopening may require apparently
undemocratic means. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and
movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion,
or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc."
"Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from
the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: ... it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion
and propaganda, of deed as well as of word."
It is through such post-modern constructs that interoperable narratives are established among various left-wing groups as well as between them and Isla mist groups at all levels. For example, from the 2001 Conference of Foreign Ministers at Bamako, Mali, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) declared its commitment to fight racism and xenophobia and then declared lslamophobia a "contemporary form of racism"
In this context, the World Conference urges all states ... take all necessary measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance
and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
particularly against Islam
Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance which display an increasing trend, in their most subtle and
contemporary forms, constitute a violation of human rights. 3. Contemporary forms of racism are based on discrimination and
disparagement on a cultural, rather than biological basis. In this content, the increasing trend of lslamophobia, as a distinct form of
xenophobia in non-Muslim societies is very alarming.
Awaiting your reply sincerely, gymguy.
You guys really don't think there's a connection between people who have difficulty expression themselves and the prevalence of a type of thought that insists that expression is impossible?
Sorry but the only link(s) you've made between postmodernism and what this one guy has said is notably poor. You've used post-modern only as an adjective, referring to 'narratives' and 'constructs'.
Do not compare depraved jews and good-intentioned gentiles on this website, please.
Not an argument.
No shit, because I'm not responding to an argument.
So you have nothing to say when you are called out. Empty leftist, many such cases, sad.
I have nothing to say to a post that doesn't address what I was saying. If I imply the Frankfurt school and postmodernism aren't the same thing, the correct response isn't to detail one Frankfurt theorist and add in the term 'post-modernism' as an unexplained afterthought.
Whichever one of you is arguing that the Frankfurt School is not related to postmodernism is wrong. Both postmodernism and cultural Marxism are jewish ideologies designed to deconstruct white societies and invert western norms. They represent the opposite of western societies and its values because of their jewish nature.
Western norms invert themselves because of the philosophy they are based on. Either these inversions are natural to Greek-derived philosophy, or white people need to be more accurate in their hunt for truth. Either way the Jews only strengthen this white philosophy by pointing these things out. If white thought is so fragile that it collapses in accordance with its own premises then it is probably better in the long search for truth that it collapses, because it cannot be said to be based on the truth.
I don't know why you people have such pessimism when it comes to white thinking.
Move out of fantasy land, Shlomo. Western philosophical norms have been based around seeking truth and meaning for millennia, 50 years of jewish postmodern Marxism telling kids those things don't exist doesn't imply fragility or affirm anything else beyond the fact that we've learned to never let jews influence our institutions or inhabit our societies post the coming expulsion.
people are actually trying to argue with someone that believes an entire cultural movement is a jewish conspiracy
never change Veeky Forums
Yes sure they have been based around seeking truth and meaning but like I said, either the inversions are natural to Greek-derived philosophy or white people need to be more accurate in that hunt for truth.
Cultural movements are advanced by academic elites, and the academic elite in post-WASP/WW2 American institutions the last 50 years have been largely jewish. Did you intend to make an argument or merely present your personal lack of knowledge regarding the topic?
The inversions of western philosophy/society/ideals are products of the jewish rise in cultural influence. Jews define themselves in opposition to their host society, so our culture has come to reflect that transition. I agree our culture needs to be stronger, but we have to kick these jews out for the 360th time first. Priorities, user.
In the post-war world modernism was the artistic movement being pushed by academic Jews but this was countered by a bunch of ex-military white American artists now known as minimalists who introduced post-modern ideas of art.
Not really true. Jews, and particularly for this discussion jews involved in the publishing industry, were pushing postmodern/nihilist/anti-social ideas before or around WWII, but jews were at that time not influential in academia whatsoever, so the counter-culture they had been attempting to create through the institutions they controlled didn't actually evolve until the 60s.
No, the inversions are the products of the Western texts (by which we are able to share the knowledge) themselves. Regardless of what whites intend when they write, their magical (perhaps pagan) thinking doesn't make things existing in an ideal state are true. We have reality to contend with, even if a hunt for meaning and truth points to things that don't physically exist.
Greenberg's modernism was the sole paradigm of thinking about visual art to critics and artists in the 50s and 60s. The New York school wasn't counter-culture, it was the culture. The actual counter-culture came from whites like the minimalists.
I will point you to a book titled "Moses the Egyptian" which highlights how jews were kicked out of Egypt for creating anti-cultures, something Egyptologist Jan Assmann calls "normative inversion." Jewish "culture" is and has always been the inversion of their host society's culture and this is well-documented, so you aren't going to present a convincing argument that our current judaized system of western culture is actually western in any way, because it's not. European people strive for meaning and truth; the jewish inversion of that is stated quite clearly through the postmodern ideals that contend that truth is unobtainable and all meaning is subjective, no?
Not everything you dislike is a Jewish plot you fucking /pol/-poster. The frankfurt school was a reaction to the atrocities of ww2, and it's mostly oriented toward understanding and critiquing "fascist" thought. The reason it's cancer is just that it missed the mark and unwittingly managed to actually make authoritarian, anti-democratic ideas appealing again under the guise of "fighting fascism".
More like /pol/, my dude is a literal red pilled Peterson cockmongler.
But Greenberg's modernism wasn't really modernism, was it? We're talking about New York jews who were trying very intentionally to change culture here. I would, however, like to know more about this white minimalist counter-culture you speak of. Care to link me?
That was my post and I've never posted on pol so please stop assuming more than you should. The Frankfurt School was comprised of jews who wore out their welcome in Germany and found an ethnic welcome at Colombia University among other jews. Their work is the most archetypal example of subversive jewish behavior, and is important work for all whites to understand when trying to understand jewish anti-white cultural machinations.
academics create kafkaesque philosophies
academics get trapped by those same kafkaesque philosophies
Lacan/Derrida/Foucalt warn of the above
Well meaning is quite subjective since signifiers do not have a one-to-one relationship with the signified, as Saussure had established, and the existentialists would argue that truth is unobtainable.
I came from gym and sad to see no responses!
Jews came to America in 3 waves.
Each wave uses particular approach/philosophy to succeed/achieve power
1800's EastEuro jews arrive and become merchants
1900's jews are Azkenashi/German and become bankers/use banking
20th Century Jews use Progressivist philosophies to achieve power/Frankfurt school/etc. etc.
Who does he try to appeal to the entry tier /fit/ fag personal development crowd?
What matters is the striving for truth and meaning, whether or not they are obtainable. These are European values/qualities. Jewish atomization as a means to take advantage of and distort those concepts is something we must strive to rid ourselves of, mentally and physically, by discouraging jewish postmodernism/Marxism/nihilism and removing jews from our societies.
Looks like these "poltards" are many.
What are you actually trying to achieve with that screencap my little /pol/tard?
poltards are not as many as google results.
thus his influence is more than "poltards"
why does peterson trigger lit so ridiculously much?
I love you man. Thank you very much for this.
Basically this comes down to a philosophical problem. Even if you classify that type of thought as Jewish, why bother thinking about it in cultural terms? Again, it's not like this is a conspiracy. People are shaped by their cultural roots, and the life choices they make and the philosophies they develop follow certain patterns. That, plus modern political climate which punishes you for coming off as anti-semitic is why you get Jews in positions of power, and why they generally use that power in accordance with the philosophies that have the closest cultural proximity to them, which is why you see them pushing for social control rather than for giving people more freedom to make their own choices.
What does he have against Lacan? He wasn't even a post-modernist.
He doesn't seem to have much understanding of a lot of the French thinkers he writes about.
It is commonly accepted as the 'Modernism' with a capital M, as in the culmination of all avant-garde painting from the previous century, but given the 'pluralism' of the seventies there is 'inclusive' and 'exclusive' modernisms. Regardless, Abstract Expressionism, which Greenberg supported, was the main form of critically-relevant painting in America (since the art world was focused on New York) for the decades following the end of the war. The kind of works that gave precedent to performance art, body art, conceptual art, etc. -- what we consider postmodern -- were a kind of artistic reclamation of art from academic formalism, created by Americans to distance themselves from the European traditions and to create objects that simply were what they were or emphasised people's relationships to the volume of the works. I thought it was interesting that three main minimalists (Judd, Flavin, Morris) all studied art history and all served in the military in some sort of technical capacity (mostly as engineers).
In breaking with the tradition of painting and using industrial materials it's more an American movement rather than a 'white' one since it largely eschews the European tradition (but still uses the institutions and theory that qualify art that had been developed around European art).
And obviously since one of the major minimalist exhibitions was in the Jewish Museum it's not like a white breaking-free of the Jewish art world but it's an interesting note.
poltards are the common denominator of the people he influences.
search two incredibly common names
lots of results
All intellectual battlegrounds between rivalling philosophies that leads to decisions about how we organize ourselves as a society are ideologically subversive and conspiratorial then. Or maybe you should stop thinking in power dynamics so much.
You can have ideological changes without it being subversion of core values.
but marxist couldn't into it. So now you have a mess named modern France, Germany and Sweden
But when Derrida reads Western texts and points out how when a white writer inscribes his thoughts he his constrained in this expression by the structures of language, and as a result ends up contradicting the text, this to me seems like the sort of necessary step to take in order to refine that search for truth. If the white philosopher is muddled by things outside his control and this negatively impacts his work, then doesn't the correct thing to do become looking closely at those structures? Logocentrism doesn't suggest to me that the logos doesn't exist, just that in striving for truth and meaning it can become misplaced, due to the way structures of language or our own mental fallibility can direct us to make concessions we are not aware of making. And Derrida very much belongs to this tradition, and he aligns himself as such. He says that leaping outside of this tradition or breaking it down is not the answer, since the history of Western texts gives structure to the way we think. Deconstruction to him means something almost entirely different to what it means to the people who push multiculturalism or whatever the American interpretation is.
Maybe there are a lot of Jews making a lot of decisions that affect Europeans in undesirable ways. I can't acknowledge that and then jump to the conclusion that all Jews are in on it based on their mental illnesses, their religious texts, their behavioural evolution or whatever. If I did that I would be making the same mistakes that have hindered Western thought all these centuries; looking for the logos in places it is not.
complain about toddler having a temper tantrum and throwing literal feces at the walls and inciting other nearby toddlers to do the same
never address the toddler's coloring book scribblings
b-b-but the dialectic
Thank you, I'm aware of minimalism, but I enjoyed reading your post. Good information. There is always history to be explored and we take for granted how much was going on at times, but as someone who harks on, and to many's chagrin, about the jewish problem on here, I see these movements through a different lens.
The kind of works that gave precedent to performance art, body art, conceptual art, etc. -- what we consider postmodern -- were a kind of artistic reclamation of art from academic formalism, created by Americans to distance themselves from the European traditions and to create objects that simply were what they were or emphasised people's relationships to the volume of the works.
There were newspapers and other entities encouraging this, as there is an entrenched jewish academia encouraging diversity and gender madness today, and though we can appreciate these things as they are, we can also view them as a cultural unraveling created by outside agitators who were never interested in our betterment and were actually stifling movements that could have been more meaningful by doing more than sending us on hedonistic adventures and encouraging us to break off from the past instead of continuing its greatness and growing closer to our brethren in Europe. It was that manufacturered distance that morally allowed us to go over there during WWII and kill 60 million of our cousins then come back to tell our grandchildren to worship 6 million jews.
So, you're a pussy who is only willing to acknowledge the value of going outside of ones fundamental intellectual framework then.
You know, the act of transforming a cultures core values that isn't conspiratorial if people simply transition to a new set of ideas because they find them to be more believable than the old ones. The advent of christendom, the enlightenment and postmodernity all have that in common. I don't find the conclusions postmodern philosophers have come to believable, but they did serve an important purpose in putting enlightenment thought into perspective. After two world wars most intellectuals weren't able to believe in the power of reason to transform the world into a better place anymore, which is why they tried to find ways of explaining it in terms of power dynamics, social structure, memetics and so on, but the fact that those models exist and can be argued against is exactly the premise that needed to be fulfilled for someone to be able to justify their belief that the pursuit of the truth is a noble enterprise. When your position ceases to be believable another faction comes in and state their case, which you can then attempt to refute and revivify and transform your ideas in the process. You can't hold on to the present forever, that's just the way dialectic thought works.
I meant unwilling of course, my bad.
This is a thoughtful and thought-provoking post cutting the edge of objectivity. I appreciate it. And I would have heartily agreed in my naive days of yore ... but I have learned too much about jewish behavior since then to do so honestly. Jews do not have benevolent intentions here, they have adopted and promoted many of these ideas primarily because they negatively affect white society and culture. It is true that Derrida seems kind of tempered in our present environment, but it's important to understand how jews operate, and that jews like Derrida are so celebrated in academia today because they provided a stepping stone for jews in higher positions to use to further disrupt goyim society through the atomization and inversion of traditional European values. I'm not saying our culture is beyond criticism, but that allowing jewish outsiders to be our critics and cultural overseers has been disastrous.
though we can appreciate these things as they are, we can also view them as a cultural unraveling created by outside agitators who were never interested in our betterment and were actually stifling movements that could have been more meaningful
Interesting that you say they could have been more meaningful and they can be appreciated -- I never expected it. Because they are humanist and thus essentially European ideas? Just the execution is lacking by what we could probably both agree are "outside forces"
its proof that men are something lesser when a man such as Peterson is seen as egotistic, He is what all men had in terms of an average attitude. Today it is literally the difference between being chad or not, having just the basic understand of self image and charisma Peterson has, which by the by was considered nerdy and dorky 2 decades ago. You are the problem.
If Jews are at the forefront of gender fluidity and other silly concepts, why is it that two of the most prominent intellectuals who argue against blank slatism, Steven Pinker and Simon Baron-Cohen, are Jews?
I'd replace "humanist" with Faustian. European peoples are going to create meaningful artistic movements whatever time period or environment we're in because it's a part of our nature. I can still enjoy the enjoy 60s music while understanding that was the peak of the boomer generation's break with their own past and immersion into the new progressive religion that extends to today ... but I feel something better and more meaningful would have come about had the then just blossoming MSM and cultural institutions at the time been controlled by European Americans with a greater appreciation of their past and not jews intentionally promoting hedonism, drug use, and degeneracy through them while advancing the illusion that they were creating a utopia based on love.
Become a Le based negro/poc
M8 there is a huge market in minorities/women who pander to red-pillers. Lauren Southern for example.
t. ssri riddled professor
Don't encourage him.
abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo ablooabloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo ablooabloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo ablooabloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo abloo what gives
I'm pretty sure Foucault has a much higher "impact rating". Actually, he's probably one of the most cited scholars in the humanities. So you can't use that argument unless you're willing to concede Foucault's god status.
What's that got to do with my point? I was only arguing against the description of peterson as a self-help guru, it's not accurate. I wouldn't describe Foucault that way either.
Foucault? How many years are you going on 19, bud? You jewish or still eating their shabbos shit cereal because the box says 'tastes great!' on the side?
are you high? weed is bad for you
I'm no expert on Foucault but isn't his whole deal about looking through history for instances where we might have been happier? I never really though of him as the word soup guy Peterson is hinting at.
He kindof is. In a sense Foucault plays word games and tries to label things and separate people with words and anyone who pretty much disagrees with him is a "problematic" and this was intentional. He ascribes people to something called the problematic and you become a problematic or apart of the problematic generally if you disagree with what he says or promote ideas that differ from his worldview.
But post-modernism is utterly fucking vacuous, though. I hope you aren't reading Pynchon for his qualitative insights on metaphysics. That wasn't what I got out of any of his books.
Foucault plays word games and tries to label things and separate people with words
What? I thought it was the literal opposite. The guy didn't even believe in gay people because he thought it was just a label.
I've actually met graduated psychologists who share, to some extent, peterson's views.
I'm pretty sure his beliefs are genuine, and also psychology majors splurt out pseuds by the dozen, to the point where I'm starting to doubt about the legitimacy of it.
Sooner or later, pundits will talk about psychology with the same contempt they currently look at economics.
Psychology does churn out pseuds but having similar beliefs as peterson does not make you a pseud. Having those beliefs with none of the scholarship behind them does.
inb4 peterson doesn't have scholarship
He fucking does.
Having those views regardless of scholarship makes you a pseud.
He's like the Deepak Chopra of MRAs
This post is so delirious I love it. I like how it can't even refer to structuralism even tangentially, to any degree, not even mention, and instead, instantly jumps out to the jews.
Why are these people in lit, of all places.
to any degree, not even mention, and instead,
Why are these people in lit
Was your post a joke? You can't even write straight ... and you think you have the IQ to grasp the JQ?
order ain't free. the boon of gold coms at the cost of facing the dragon of chaos. michael foucault aka "FUCKO" is not my philosopher. he is postmodernist constructionist and probably neomarxist as well :DD. CAIN AND ABEL not gender unicorn OK. praise truth.
What circumstance tho?
This is a very ambiguous post.
Peterson is a psychologist, not a philosopher.
yeah he's not a philosopher, he just LARPs as one
Jordan Peterson's tone is indistinguishable from that of the kind of posts you'd find on /r/iamverysmart. He appears to view himself as an authority figure, a source of the paternal wisdom he thinks his followers desperately need, and yet he always seems so hopelessly naive.
It's called a Messiah Complex
Eh, Peterson is his own therapist.
The fact that he's not an expert on pomo isn't really relevant to what else he says.
what else DOES he say that isn't just self-help101?
You just proved my point.
Also, he's a clinical psychologist. His whole job is to help people with their life.
well you didn't answer the question
What else does he say? He talks about a lot of topics: mythology, political psychology, psychoanalytic theory, personality theory, etc.
Is that a good answer?
yeah cool thanks
Sort yourself out.
I was never unsorted
Makes sense to me, desu senpai.
nah, it's cause they're randos on youtube/twitter
peterson has respectability, he's a professor and not the kind that got fired 10 years ago for promoting "race realism" and now can't get a job but an active member of the academic community
and that's what the far-ish right craves, someone with mainstream appeal and mainstream acceptance, people who don't have swastikas tattooed on their neck and shit
to petersonfags: I'm not saying he's racist and I don't believe he's racist
but whether he likes it or not most of his audience is there for trannybashing, cultural marxism bullshit and similar crap
he can write as many books as he wants on myths and maps of meaning, it's transgenders and "the fall of western civilization" that are bringing in the big buck(o)s
fard on my dick
came here to post this
Someone with time on their hands needs to make the virgin anglo-"psychologist" [peterson]/the chad french theorist [lacan]
Well, I just read the sep article on derrida ad I have not a single fucking clue what it's talking about
I literally cannot understand it
awful lot of jews...
I don't think it's "far-right" people that make up the bulk, or are even the most prominent portion, of his viewer base. He appeals, at most, to a reactionary impulse, not a fascist one imo
other way around
Jesus Christ he didn't actually post that did he? I actually liked his maps of meaning lecture, but I guess he really is a bit of a nutcase.
If he actually did what he preaches and plunged into the abyss head on he'd have realized long ago that you don't have to become a subjectivist just because there's no such thing as certain knowledge. I'm willing to bet now that he has never read Hegel because he associates him with Marxism.
as he has said many times his real beef is with Derrida's deconstructionism, but if he called him out by name too often by name he would have to actually read him and make a substantive critique, so instead he retreats to a vague critique of postmodernism.
He means: Ideologically possessed individuals who cannot face up to the failure of their ideologies embrace obscurantism, ressentiment, and excuse making.
phallagocentrism? ugh... are you serious? i'm actually scared right now...
Just upload a .txt instead of making 50 posts
So, like Peterson himself?
So to understand postmodernism he recommends reading a polemic against postmodernism. How about reading some actual postmodernist literature?
No you're not.
low energy response desu
Veeky Forums, if you're going to be this uninformed, at least try to be less snide. Peterson has stated more than once that postmodernism critiques are powerful and must be taken seriously but that they are ONLY HALF-RIGHT. They're all freedom at the cost of order. But you faggots always have to take it too far, don't you? When any attempt to ever push back against the pomo-Marxist-gender-studies advance guard is hysterically condemned and resisted as if it was genocide, Peterson is a godsend. If you're not a useful idiot that doesn't understand what you're doing, you're actively helping to steer this plane into the ground. So fuck you.
Or maybe Veeky Forums is just triggered because his verbal intelligence is probably one in 10 million and the odds aren't good that a single person on this board can equal that
LACAN DERRIDA FOUCAULT
CAN YOU IMAGINE A BETTER TEAM?!?!?!
Robert Anton Wilson
When the fuck did Veeky Forums start getting so obsessed about jews? I've been here for a couple of years now and it just seems to hit me that i can't find any root for all the jew hate
lit has been relatively spared from /pol/'s retardation
something about books that aren't the turner diaries must turn them off
other boards haven't been that lucky
I do all that without a named ideology, multiple warring identities and goals...
Peterson has stated more than once that postmodernism critiques are powerful and must be taken seriously but that they are ONLY HALF-RIGHT. They're all freedom at the cost of order.
Stop doing this, user. You don't realise how bad it hurts your credibility and contentions
dedicating your life to one philosopher
Ultimate sign of a pseud.
That's all monetized now, so it's really hard on the social justice types because if they come out and protest me then my Patreon account grows. And there's nothing that irritates radical leftists more than someone making money. And so I'm the first person I know who's been able to monetize SJW protests.
really makes you think
Peterson's retarded opinions is indicative of what happens under totalitarian thought systems, which is what the western university system will eventually morph into. Czeslaw Milosz has talked about this under Stalinism. The smartest academics and intellectuals are rarely the ones that dissent. What smart people are good at is post-hoc rationalizations for the bad stuff around them, so they are less likely to dissent because they'll quibble about what is happening (and intellectual quibbling is high status among the group). So you get the mid-tier and low-tier brainlets like Peterson as the one's dissenting against the system. It's unfortunate, but that is the way it is.
JBP IS GOD
I've been compiling hundreds of Veeky Forums Peterson posts this past few months and will email them to him soon.
He will be genuinely interested
Huh, so you are saying you can correctly critizice someone's work without acknowledging the faults and consequences in the specific frame of said work, without quoting even? Well, this philosophy business sure is easy.
No, makes plenty of sense. Perfectly explains American academia "dissent" as well. Majority of American academic dissent in the last 60 years is parroting what the elites and large foundations (like the Rockefeller and Ford foundations) were pushing and funding anyway. Also explains stuff like McCarthyism. High IQ smart people that Veeky Forums worship are basically always in agreement with power or being played as puppets, while it is the dumbasses, yokels, and proles that dissent (and usually squashed in the long term).
please post it here, and his response too if he reads it. i wished he dropped by and and posted sometime
If they are truly aware and intelligent, they aren't docile out of narrow rationalisation but self interest, quite naturally. There are plenty of highly intelligent and acclaimed figures who took radical and counter-authority views, to state what you have like some social rule is absurd.
Most post modern philosophers realized that as well you moron
If they are truly aware and intelligent
There are plenty of highly intelligent and acclaimed figures
Expecting anyone here to actually read
The 1900's and the 20th century are the same thing, you fucking retard.