Holy shit guys,it’s happening. Lacan v Jung, left v right, clash of the titans

>t. TERF

Yeah. Why even point it out?

They're the two most public intellectuals of the current year, coming from opposite schools of both psychology and politics. They surely mean something to one another.

>oh shit, Zizek wrote a piece on Peterson? Finally, a genuine no-nonsense critique of him from the other si-
>oh

ZIZEEEEEK YOU HAD ONE FUCKING SHOT BUT YOU JUST CHURNED OUT ANOTHER USELESS STINKPIECE
WHY AREN'T YOU GENUINELY ENGAGING WHAT HE'S SAID
I'D HATE YOU IF YOU WEREN'T SO HARD TO HATE

theknifemedia.com/world-news/spot-hit-piece-case-jordan-peterson/

He relies upon constant consumption of publicly. Key word: consumption. He's a literal embodiment of capitalism.

>you really phoned this in

what does this mean? Like he's a phony, or he had someone transcribe the article for him in a rush over the p hone? please tell me

not a piece on peterson. a piece that mentions peterson. learn to read, idiot

Read the title. It's written for leftists to wake up and deal with it. The left doesn't have any solutions and that's why this guy is able to be a father figure for so many so easily.

fucc its like godzilla v king kong, freddy v jason, britney v christina

Means low effort. Imagine calling someone to tell them that you love them. It's kinda like that.

Yeah
It mentions him in the title
And the subtitle
And the url
And five out of the eight paragraphs that form the piece
And the three that don't mention him are used to set up a point in the next paragraph that does
Filled with small quotes completely out of their contexts

Damn, you're probably right user... why am I so stupid...

Most of peterson's popularity doesn't even come from le father figure meme
I think the average person in the silent majority is much closer to him than any alternative

It had to sell well

Fair enough

someone pls make a poster like pic related

'feud of the pseuds'

Why is your spacing so irritating you faggot

That's exactly what I mean by father. There was a position open for a spokesman of the average Joe and he took it.

Gogol vs. Dostoevsky

i bet you think godel escher bach is about a mathematician, painter and a musician

For emphasis on the plurality of references to Peterson, followed by a double-space to clearly indicate that the list was over

It’s because you have a shrimp dick and you can’t deal with that emotionally so nonsensical things like line spacing actually trigger autistic rage and you lash out without understanding why. Don’t feel bad, it’s not your fault!

Now this is strange... surely they meant to list the tags as "leftism," "political correctness," and "critique"... but through some small whoopsie-daisy it appears they accidentally listen "Jordan Peterson" and "alt-right" instead... do you think they'll fix it soon?

In Russian Gogol, because he was a much better stylist. In translation Dostoevsky for sure. Dead Souls' dabbling with the national question (muh troika) is mere child's play compared to ol Dosto.

>zizek wrote those tags

It's literally nothing

I think that tags should be POSTMODERNISM ABSOLUTELY DISMANTLED BY AVERAGE JOE JORDAN PETERSON CULTURAL MARXIST SOYBOY ZIZEK DOING HEAVY DAMAGE CONTROL

Does Zizek use they/them pronouns?

So what you're saying is Zizek vs. Peterson depends on the platform the debate takes place?

>feud of the pseuds

>Zizek hardly even gives a shit about him
Why'd he just write an article about him then? Jordan's just responding to him, it's going to look really bad on Zizek if he doesn't respond back.

typical leftist brain, hyper-sensitive to dominance hierarchies and single-mindedly goes for the social status angle like some kind of lizard shooting his tongue at bugs
the guy has already written an article on him, he obviously cares

clean ur nose lol

He didn't really debate any of Petersons posts. He analysed why he's popular. I agree that it would look bad if he didn't respond since the last one who posts always wins.

Hey, remember that time Zizek literally plagiarized a nazi?

Points *

>I agree that it would look bad if he didn't respond since the last one who posts always wins.

Ahem.

Touché

What happened with these two?

I can't fucking believe he even TYPES "and so on"

Sam Harris spammed Chomsky's inbox with emails. Chomsky did literally nothing, so Harris published them all in a blog post to make him look like a coward. Chomsky continued doing aboslutely nothing.

Love it
What was Sam so hot and bothered about?

wtf I was just looking at JP's twitter because of this and your shitposting is a reality now

Morpheus is fighting Neo

...

The only good piece of journalism on Peterson is the recent CanadaLand podcast, which (surprisingly) ends up being quite scathing. Everything else is just hand wringing

be ready for utter decimation (again)

Russel Brandt? The muh oppression, muh power structure, muh consumerism, love and peace faggot? I've listen to him talk. He seems to be the type to like using big words improperly and talk like he's a good person by not judging other people. Doesn't responds to arguments and facts either but with muh feelings. A true leftist.

Might be a good podcast if Peterson blows him out of the water.

plebeian reactionary VS plebeian reactionary

Oh boy how riveting.

>Might be a good podcast if Peterson blows him out of the water.
learn your fucking history, fool. peterson already lost to brand a long time ago, he's coming back i guess to lick the dogshit of brand's boots (or maybe just to cry while he watches brand jackhammer katie perry in his messy room). fuck you i won't clean my room. fuck you i won't do what you tell me. fuck you i won't clean my room. fuck you i won't do what you tell me. fuck you i won't do what you tell me. fuck you i won't do what you tell me

>The muh oppression, muh power structure, muh consumerism, love and peace faggot?

In other words "the facts faggot".

i wish i came from a country/culture where people with differing views can get together for a fierce heated debate and still have a laff afterwards

>Marxist hippy talking points are facts

>Peterson fan

Amerifats ruined politics

Neo-marxist actually. Also, Non-French identifying anglos OUT. You're not smart enough to comprehend you analytic apes.

Europoor top 100000 universities dont teach the joys of contention

one more for good measure

i'm sure he would, because why not. but peterson also says he'll use them - he just doesn't think the law should compel him to do that, a point on which zizek agrees - he's very vocal about leftists using foucaultian analyses to make very anti-foucaultian demands like arbitrate accepted gender categories

As usual.
>Muscular Jihadis

I swear, his fascination with jihadi right-wing extremist Islam makes me think
>the Harris doth protest too much.

I think he's secretly always had a hard boner for these dusky musky men of action as they ploughed through America's consciousness following 9/11; a latent trigger of the phallic fantasies, adulation and homo-fascination wrapped in the most American of blankets of propaganda; the Hollywood Movie , the machine that influences young supple minds in a drench of salt-and sugar brain fluid once recounted as a tale for young Sam - specifically, "Rambo 3."

A confused lust of Stallone and the noble mujahideen smiting enemeies and holding onto the last remnants of righteous jubilant justice, has filled Sam with longing, adulation, thirst, hate, affection and regret that he will never meet nor reach such levels of Testosterone.
Thus the object of his affection must be demeaned and destroyed; the thought of never meeting is too painful for him to convey to himself and so it's very essence must be vanquished in regular stats, theories, podcasts, talks and unanswered e-mails to more knowledgeable people.

Either that or some beau left him for a hirsute Christian Arab who Sam erroneously mistook for an extremist Muslim.

>blah blah blah he doesn't care even though he wrote an article about him
Is this the power of leftist thought? Literally sounding like middle school children

>This, too, goes back many years, and Prof. MacDonald traces in considerable detail the sustained Jewish pro-immigration effort. Israel Zangwill, author of the eponymous 1908 play The Melting Pot,was of the view that “[t]here is only one way to World Peace, and that is the absolute abolition of passports, visas, frontiers, custom houses . . .” He was nevertheless an ardent Zionist and disapproved of Jewish intermarriage.

hahaha that is where mde got the name from, nice

Zizek is a neo-reactionary. That much is obvious. Petersonfags have even adopted "*sniff* pure ideoloy" as a way to defend their stupidity.

oh god, multiculturalism in sweden was introduced as a concept by a jew named david schwarz in the 60s. is this all really a conspiracy? has anyone read culture of critique?

>phoned it in
Would he preferred zizek screwed him harder

The CIA worked with Saudi Arabia to spread jihadism in order to counter the communist threat. Communist threat is over now but you still have a rapid bulldog that you raised to kill the soviet bulldog left to deal with. Sammie is right though. Islam is a threat to the western ideals of democracy and free speech. What he doesn't understand is that you have to provide a viable alternative that can incorporates violence in order for its adherence to be able to defend themselves from the spread of Islam. Islam blew the fuck out of the Buddhist and it rampage across India, Bangladesh, until it stop in Myanmar thanks to "violent" Buddhists. Shit must be seen in evolutionary terms.

I haven't bothered keeping up with either of these people, what are good quality introductions and summations for both of them?

I don't care really but this happening seems to /comfy/ to miss, and I'd like to cultivate some emotional investment of some sort.

Sauce? I'd enjoy this because I dislike both of them, but if Peterson really got BTFO by the hipster actor guy, he is really a bottom tier psued and Veeky Forums is doomed.

>CanadaLand
>Jesse Benjamin Brown is a Canadian journalist as well as media and tech entrepreneur
sounds like some high brow shit my dude

...

Well he should, and i like zizek but you cant ignore the currents and peterson is taking it by storm so to speak

lmaooooooooo this is incredible

peterson looks like the villain from the first klonoa game

Both of your definitions of "thriving" presuppose an amount of public exposure or "publicity." If they didn't thrive, there would be no publicity. Literally a pack of circular thinking simpletons.

>Sammie is right though.
He isn't. He ignores all other major issues to focus on one particular interpretation of Islam that has direct ties to the issues he calls trivial
>Islam
Which strand? All of it? A good chunk of it? As opposed to good ol' Christianity in it's George Bush incarnation? Gosh darnett he's such a lovable god-fearing helper.
>is a threat to the western ideals of democracy
It is as one strand. Yet the west created Saudi Arabia and yet have it's economy inextricably linked to their own.

You mean plutocracy as in American finance, lobbyists and general crony capitalism masquerading as a democracy.
> and free speech.
Have you seen how the western media machine works and what they plan to propose for Veeky Forums and the internet?

Literally gonna be a more fun version of China.
America Inc.

Sam Harris:
>Imagine a world of either Dick Cheney or ISIS/Daesh Islam? Which is worse? Therefore, all matters pertaining to any connection between the two are redundant because ISIS are worse and that's why I'm right to focus on right-wing extremist Islam doctrine above all else as if I'm the re-incarnation of Christian Missionaries in the 1800s and nothing else feeds into a particular starnd of Islam

he's a neuro-scientist, a decent man and atheist but he's an educated fool who knows far less about the subject he thinks he has most knowledge about precisely because his primary audience knows even less than he does about Islam.

if he took the Dawkins angle I'd respect him more.

You made Peterson look like he's in drag which makes this even funnier considering his views on trans.

You absolute madmen - fucking class that.

>one particular interpretation of Islam
>Which strand? All of it? A good chunk of it?
This defense is always horseshit. There's always the rhetorical backdoor of claiming that someone's judgment of an abstract construct like a religion is always just a particular interpretation that shouldn't be counted on to predicate practical responses on. It's always there. And it's always used. And it's never productive. Fuck you.

>presuppose an amount of public exposure or "publicity."
No?

That's an actual picture of him from his daughter's instagram. She wanted to put make-up on him and he played along
Also he's never said anything against male to female/vice versa transgender people. He's just argued against gender being a spectrum, and gender being completely independent of sex

>ABLOO BLOO BLOO

Haha Peterson defenseforce activated.

What a fucking dumpster fire of a debate. Destiny-tier.

Who would win: lobster or cocaine?

Slavoj Zizek: Lacanian Hegelian pseudo-communist philosopher personality from Slovenia. Notable for his nervous ticks while being filmed—constant sniffing, nose rubbing, and shirt tugging—and his thick lateral lisp. Known for his provocative philosophy and tangential pattern of speech.
Best introductory material: The Pervert's Guide to Cinema and/or its sequel, The Pervert's Guide to Ideology.

Jordan B Peterson: Jungian, Nietzschian, Darwinian clinical personality psychologist at the University of Toronto. Notable for Kermit-like voice and tough-love-father manner of speaking. Known for opposition to Canadian Bill C-16, outspoken views against Marxism and the social justice movement, association with the alt-right although he condemns them and calls himself a classical liberal.
Best introductory material, 2015 Maps of Meaning lecture series, Maps of Meaning by Jordan Peterson, his Joe Rogan Interviews

I like how when someone mentions Islam someone else always has to go “b-b-but c-Christianity is bad too!” As if anyone actually thinks Christianity isn’t rife with problems as well.

>Kamikaze missions and Tamil Tiger suicide bombings were the sole result of doctrine - nothing more - and nothing else - in 3 2 1...

>This defense is always horseshit.

It's not a defence. never was.
it's highlighting Harris's lack of nous. He simply latches onto one politically manufactured brand of Islam (of significance) and doesn't even seek to dismantle it wholly. As a supposed academic he should know better.

>There's always the rhetorical backdoor of claiming that someone's judgment of an abstract construct like a religion is always just a particular interpretation that shouldn't be counted on to predicate practical responses on.

No. I never said that. in fact i would say the opposite.
There is a specific interpretation and it should indeed be practical to count on a predicated response.
It is not abstract for the millions slaughtered under it's watch.
But that slaughter, that watch, that strand of Islam isn't somehow "inevitable." It never was, and never has been. Just ask the other Muslims slaughtered.
I mean it is for Harris, but then he doesn't really speak or read other languages or have an interest in the subject he preaches.

Ask him why such rampant Jihadism and suicide attacks were not practiced in the days of Colonialism?

But Harris's argument is:
>look these nutters. This their book. Look it be bad. Look these people are insane. It's this book that's made them this. look they tell you themselves. I'm gonna ignore history, politics, etc and focus on these crazy men and their interpretation of the book

Fine; then what of their other protestations?
He then proceeds to ignore practically every economic and socio-political points these Jihadis make.

>It's always there. And it's always used.

Because ISIS in doctrine, speak and represent a billion+ people, right? Somehow someway?
Do Maoism and Communism represent the consequences of Atheism?
Or Pol Pot?
Does the Catholic Church and their edicts represent all Christians?

Hierarchy is bad and oppressive and a social construct guys, so lets reduce all value to status in the hierarchy and then just even everyone out from within that framework.

But Harris isn't saying Christianity is wholly defined in the English speaking world as doctrine led Priests bumming kids.

You could make an argument that neo-conservative imperialism is a manifestation of the nature of Christian intolerance and violence. Would that be fair?
It would be the Harris thing to do.

Lobster on cocaine as they team up

Wait, is phoning it in not a good thing? I thought it meant like hit perfectly.

and this is the literature board

Nice stats, this new wave of internet bloodsports has been exciting

Sizemore will shit on Peterson but each side will go off and believe that they won thanks to IDEOLOGY