Jordan Peterson

Jej, you stupid cultie fuck.

>ad personam
to the trash you go.

150 IQ isn't that rare. 1 in 1200 or 1 in 2300 depending on which IQ test we're talking about. There are 15,000 people in Canada with higher IQs than 150, what makes it so unbelievable that Jordan could be one of them?

>marxist uni
Shut the FUCK up you fucking spastic

not an argument, sorry, I am right.

Did I offend the little cultie babby?

Take your meds schizo

>no opinion, no arguments, another ad personam
typical.
>>>/plebbdit/

>but IQ has no basis on how smart you
lol

>My IQ is in the range of 120-135, but this guy doesn't seem smarter than me.

My IQ is 98 but you seem even more retarded than I am.

It's true. Africans are literally just as smart as us, or smarter. Intelligence is relative. For example, go to Africa and see how long you survive. And if you die? Well then I guess two billion Africans are smarter than fucking white males. When you look at Africans you probably see something that I can't even comprehend, because you have racist eyes. When I look at Africans, I see doctors, engineers, scientists. But just as I can't comprehend what racists see, you can't comprehend what I see with an open heart and an open mind and an open mind. So yeah, fuck your IQ test. Africans are smarter than you and your Europhallogocentrism, deal with it.

>Africans are literally just as smart as us, or smarter. Intelligence is relative. For example, go to Africa and see how long you survive.

I don't get how you can type that and then follow it with the rest.

Spoken like a true racist. Whiteness is oppression, PoCness is freedom and culture and enlightenment. Even Jesus was an Arab.

I seriously dislike this person. He discusses topics he knows nothing about, like queer theory and gender identity. He says gender identity is not entirely subjective. Honestly, he doesn't even know what gender identity is. It is entirely subjective, by definition.Feminine identity is the felt absence of female body or body type. Of course the typical response of pseudo intellectuals like Peterson is to assert, effectively, that such a definition is incomprehensible to him and therefore does not exist in anyone. All males are absent of the female body, but only in a handful of effeminate homosexuals is such an absence actually felt. A comprehensive review of the brain structure research in transsexualism shows that sex dimorphic structures involved in body perception and a number of other functions are compromised in the feminine direction, and that this population has a distinct intersexual phenotype restricted to the brain. This is fairly well established. But he continues to define gender identity in a way that is completely inaccurate, and to attack his own projection fantasies. Pretty rich coming from a so called Jungian.

looks like we bagged another gender studies beast

lmao relativistic faggots have gone too far

>person
>per
>son

Um, excuse me? Are you insinuating that only males and people? Fuck you.

Back to /pol/ you go

Only relativism is absolute

You can tell he's never heard of Judith Butler

nice dogmatism

>Feminine identity is the felt absence of female body or body type.
So only non-transitioned trans women are real women? What kind of whacked out view is this?

Are people even given domain over their own experiences? Peterson is "critiquing" an object that is outside the domain of his immediate experience. If a person claims they taste colors or smell sounds, you have nothing to say about those experiences because they are outside your range. To claim that because such experiences are incomprehensible to you and illogical they therefore do not exist is they very heart and soul of dogmatism. The human psyche is vast and complicated. The structures governing experience often differ vastly between people, and compromise every known modality or combination thereof. People like Peterson do not posses the spirit of intellectual genius, which is the appreciation of the vast mystery of the world. But the spirit of the dogmatist, the spirit of the person that wishes to reduce the psychic life of others to the pale cardboard cutouts of his own impoverished ideology. His goofy blend of Jung, Christianity, evolutionary psychology, etc...

this is probably a low level joke that the onion already did better
youtube.com/watch?v=lpzVc7s-_e8

but in case it's not:
>It is entirely subjective
>sex dimorphic structures involved in body perception and a number of other functions are compromised in the feminine direction
>distinct intersexual phenotype restricted to the brain
>structures
>brain
>entirely subjective
it's one or the other, but not both, decide what you want to believe

you're presupposing that gender is purely a matter of internal experience, almost everyone disagrees with you -- even most radical feminists

so i stepped inside this projectile shell - can't tell how it happened, just had a strap in my hand, thought why not and gave it a yank and next thing i know i'm suspended in the atmosphere upside down and approaching anschluss - that's where the fuel cuts off - and... well it's happened already red setter and now the end appears to be approaching before i 150

I said gender identity, not gender.

Judith Butler is the best.

The nature of the experience (like experience generally) is entirely subjective. But no doubt the brain is responsible (in some as yet unknown manner) of determining at an abstract level the nature or structure of that experience. So it is not properly one or the other. But both in tandem. The phenomenology complements the neuroscience. Or rather determines it since in most cases we do not know what any particular section of brain corresponds to in human experience unless a person reports their experience.

this is my true beef with peterson, apart from his clinically retarded fans, he is somehow a jungian, and yet none of his other views are in the slightest compatible with jung.

you cant be a jungian and then sperg out on people for having a non-verifiable imagined identity for fuck sake. also he believes everybody's political views are pathological, apart from his own, which are just correct. he is honestly a god damn moron.

You jump to conclusions that aren't warranted from what I've said. Cis sexual persons almost invariably claim they have no experience of internal gender identity (that is identity via absence) so presumably in these people gender identity is garnered via the felt presence of their bodies.

aren't most teachers marxist?

>Africans are literally just as smart as us
i don't believe this

This have should be a consideration against construing gender identity along your lines, not for excluding cis people from gender identity. Go ask a cis woman if she identifies as a woman. She'll say yes.

kinda hard to pass an iq test when you havent even gone to school.

iq is determined by genetics

So gender identity = gender dysphoria?

no it isnt dumb fuck.

Wouldn't this be more of an identifying with rather than identifying as? If what is essential to female gender identity is a (felt) lack of female characteristics

In my view all heathy and intact psychic structures are necessarily out of range. You do not notice what is not meant, under ideal circumstances, to be noticed. It is only in states of disease, where those structures are broken or compromised that they become apparent in one fashion or another. There we catch a glimpse of the machinery the constructs or determines the nature of our experience. In this case, cis sexual persons are the ideal relation to their bodies, one that is uncomplicated and immediate. What "gender identity disorder" reveals is that this uncomplicated and immediate relation to one's body is an illusion. What you have is an immediate relation to your felt body (which is a phantom). In fact, as the psychoanalyst Paul Schilder speculated, perhaps the body itself is a phantom.

That's nice and all, but if you're using "gender identity" in a different way than 99% of the people who share your language, you're simply using it wrong

The term gender identity was initially coined in the context of intersex individuals. It's technical definition is the sense of oneself as psychologically male, female or non-binary. What you are referring to is properly thought of as biological sex. I identity as male because I have a penis, etc. That's the normative model. Certainly that is what 99% of people think. Transgender people adapt. You have no choice. That doesn't bother me. What bothers me is Peterson claiming that my inner world is non existent, or otherwise insignificant. It would be like me refusing to believe he experiences emotions. He might cry and wail and blah blah blah blah, but how do I know it isn't a clever act of mimicry? I demand evidence. I mean it's ridiculous.

Not quite. The identity is at variance with the physical sex. It is not the identity that is painful but the variance (and its social and sexual consequences).

WE
WUZ
KANGZ

I want you to seriously consider suicide.

nice Cartesian problematic bruh, how's the 17th century?

Unironically really like him. I know he became famous for that tranny stuff, but that's the least interesting thing he talks about. I have a BSc and MSc in Psychology and am currently doing a PhD, but I've never come across a lecturer who made me appreciate the subject as much as he did. At university I was taught that Freudian and Jungian psychology were important historically but pretty much nonsense, but having actually learned about them accurately, through Peterson, I can appreciate them much more now. I also appreciate religion far more too, even if I'm not quite fully religious myself.

I wouldn't go so far as saying he's changed my life (yet), but I have started to move away from my existential crisis and that's thanks to him. I think lots of other guys in the 18-30 age range probably feel the same.

I have a tested IQ of 143 and Peterson is my thinker of choice. He tears apart post modernism and marxism like they are nothing

they are nothing tho

true

''Queer Theory'' is nothing but a politically correct form of religion, it has replaced christianity as the justification du jour of the modern western state. blue haired upper middle class kids who 'learned gay in college' (as per Bill Nye's and Rachel Bloom's Sex Junk, a defining text of queer theory) are the high priests of our secular theocracy.

>What bothers me is Peterson claiming that my inner world is non existent, or otherwise insignificant.

who gives a fuck about your 'inner world' and your 7 sets of made up pronouns that alternate based on your moods and the phases of the moon? It's all made up bullshit, just like your steven universe fursona. imo 'trans' is just a wacky teenage fad, much like emo/scene kids back in the 00s. It's all about wanting to stick out from the crowd.

I know a guy with an IQ around fucking 200 and the only place he seems more intelligent is that he can read all the lord of the rings books in little more than a weekend and that he is really great at math too, but if you talk with him about humanities he is about the same level as me maybe even lower (a bit above average) but maybe he doesn't have a great interest in those topics. And his understanding of music is simple and a bit plebeian even though he plays guitar. And his social intelligence is properly lower than mine. My point is that i know people i would rate more intelligent than him even though his IQ is properly the highest of the people i know - not to say that he isn't extremely bright.

broke: Freudianism
joke:Lacanianism
woke:Jungianism
bespoke:SCHIZOANALISIS

more like

broke:Jungianism
joke:Freudianism
woke:Platonism
bespoke: ARISTOTELIANISM

choke on a coke

Thing about that is it goes both ways. Who gives a fuck about YOUR inner world? The rest I'm not going to take seriously

A sobering reminder that i could always quit my day job to talk about shit I'm clueless about in terms i can't even define, but still live comfortably so long as im validating some dropout's resentment

no one, really knows what's going on in there and i honestly like it that way. it is people like YOU who want to broadcast their inane 'performative' natterings and force everyone recognize and respect such inanity, you want to get a fucking medal for your sonic OC donot steal aka your precious 'gender identity'. and I wont stand by that. no i wont

You've clearly never listened to him, given that one of his most important messages to dropouts is that they need to let go of their resentment, find jobs, and start on a journey of self-improvement

lmao

>no one, really knows what's going on in there and i honestly like it that way

Proceeds to tell me what's going on in there. Thank you for your opinion, and for standing up for Western civilization. But I don't fucking care lol.

...

Im doubtful it's 200 thatf be 1 in a billion. I'm OP, I'm an engineer but I'm a brainlet engineer. I know and work consistengly with guys that are 140+ and a few that are likely 160+ (so brilliant they are pioneering in the field) and the gap I sense between listening to them and listening to JP is enormous. JP seems more on my level. His verbal IQ I'm sure is high but he doesn't have that quick mind and logic Ive seen with truely smart people. JP also isn't pioneering he's just repeating shit other people have said bit explains it in a way a young male can relate to. I was just wondering if other people are finding this too.

iq is a bullshit measure created by jews, it measures autism while ignoring true intelligence, which is spiritual in nature.

queer/gender theory sounds like pure consumer ideology. It's all about the inviolable sacredness of the individual consumer, an atomised unit that exists separate from all social structures and whose sole purpose is 'self expression'.

Baby you are a firework, come on let your colors burn-- Katy Perry

ew

trans 'women' may suffer from body disphoria, but that doesn't mean they are entitled to appropriate femenine identities which were designed by men to oppress women. wearing stereotypically feminine clothes and demanding to be referred to as a 'woman' is no different from a white person wearing blackface and demanding to be and demanding to be referred to as a 'nigger'

Nice spelling idiot. Gender identities were designed by men? Really? Which men? Who invented them and how do you "invent" a gender identity? How do you "invent" a felt bodily absence? You clearly don't know what gender identity is. But this is amusing. I assume you think that men invented gender and that men are the root of all evil. Poor little victim.... Did you know that the brain is genetically constructed, and that the brain provides the abstract blueprint determining behavior, including sexual behavior, which is the product of countless instances in sexual selection? No impossible. Men must have invented that too. Why be reasonable when you can just blame men.

Prove that you're not feigning all of your emotions at any given moment, then I might listen to your argument

I know a guy who's been tested as a kid and as a teenager and got something like over 155 IQ. he went to a special school and got into an Ivy League at 16 to study Linguistics and Philosophy. he is a really normal guy and not the stereotypical awkward or autistic trainwreck you would expect, just really bright and with a vast vocabulary.

No one over 125 will ever give a figure for their IQ.
digits

In that video he said it was 145

@10068824
>he doesn't even know what gender identity is. It is entirely subjective, by definition
>sex dimorphic structures
>of other functions are compromised in the feminine direction
>a distinct intersexual phenotype restricted to the brain

is this really high-effort bait? not giving you another (You)

>Being this wrapped up in iq levels
Peasant thinking.

Whoa... so this is the power.. of Jordan Peterson's intellect

You posted a thread like this on r9k. Same pic and everything. Are you actually JP or what?

I am a fan of his in general btw, but his assumption that all dimensions of human competition can be unified in a single Dominance Hierarchy instead of remaining compartmentalised is just facile.

>boomers.jpg

>a fan of his
>browse /r9k/
i see you've really put his teaching into practice

No he doesn't. He said it was in excess of 150 when he had it tested in his youth and then he talks about how IQ declines with age. He never states his current IQ.

You can tell the people who have never done higher education and don't know the frustrations of PDFs.

>I know a guy with an IQ around fucking 200

No you don't, an IQ of 190 is 1 in 100,000,000. Even an IQ of 175 is around 1 in 1,000,000 on the Stanford-Binet scale. I highly doubt you will ever meet anyone in your life with an IQ near that, let alone "know a guy".

Maybe I browse for research purposes.

It hurts living in a society where most people don't realise this.

Well articulated, user.

I binged on him hard last year when the SJW nonsense was flaring up. He was a place of solace back then. And an excellent alternative to low-grade anti-SJW speakers like Milo that everyone was flocking to. But after a few months I quit him cold turkey for some reason. I think it was a mix of him harping on the same exact points ad nauseum, and this subtle thing I began to notice where he would infuse his speeches with emotion in places where his arguments were weak. I think he's actually quite manipulative in that way, but probably not intentionally. Also his fan base somehow became exclusively lost, sheltered young men that spent the preceding 2 years brainwashing themselves with far Right propaganda. He also just doesn't come off very intelligent to me. He's so repetitive and stubborn. He reminds me more of the dumb people I've met in life than the smart ones. The only thing that indicates his 150+ IQ is his success as a researcher and his verbal skills. Outside of that I find him pretty unstimulating.

>Centrist
>mentions flawed arguments without identifying them
>criticises manner more than content
>ad hominems JP's supporter base

Ur a useless cunt mate

Good post

Didn't mean to trigger you my dude. Just answering the OP. If you're a devotee of JBP just keep on listening to him and following that path. Though I will say that if my opinions of him shake your faith so badly you just HAD to come after me, maybe there's something in what I wrote that you believe is true but can't admit it to yourself.

>It is entirely subjective, by definition.
However, there are statistical majorities of identities, which implies that there is more than just subjective preference at work.

Not the person you're replying to, haven't posted in this thread at all, but I don't understand the "identity" aspect of this. If your identity is at variance with your physical sex, what is that like? I don't understand what this actually means in terms of the lived experience.

Given how quick he was at monetizing the controversy I'd say he has pretty high JQ (Jewish Quotient)