It's ironic that I am repulsed by Jordan Peterson's "just be a Christian and believe in demons and dragons" advice when...

It's ironic that I am repulsed by Jordan Peterson's "just be a Christian and believe in demons and dragons" advice when I post this picture everyday and people recommend him to me.

I don't want to pretend to believe in dragons and God in order to stop being a lazy gfless person. Lots of people do just fine without them. Peterson is great for fighting pomo but he is doing it with his own brand of bullshit. "Truth depends on the result, so Christianity is true since it helps people." So it was true during the Spanish Inquisition? Or untrue then and true now? And why does he try to co-opt the word "truth" for this meaning? This is dishonest. Why doesn't he use "efficacy" or invent a word?

I simply hate the fucking pseudo intellectuals.

Other urls found in this thread:

lesswrong.com/lw/r/no_really_ive_deceived_myself/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I like his maps of meaning videos but him abusing psychological archetypes gets really annoying

>"Truth depends on the result, so Christianity is true since it helps people."
If he claims this, he doesn't actually believe in the faith, he just believes he believes in it, because he's figured there are benefits to that belief

lesswrong.com/lw/r/no_really_ive_deceived_myself/
>When this woman was in high school, she thought she was an atheist. But she decided, at that time, that she should act as if she believed in God. And then—she told me earnestly—over time, she came to really believe in God.

>So far as I can tell, she is completely wrong about that. Always throughout our conversation, she said, over and over, "I believe in God", never once, "There is a God." When I asked her why she was religious, she never once talked about the consequences of God existing, only about the consequences of believing in God. Never, "God will help me", always, "my belief in God helps me". When I put to her, "Someone who just wanted the truth and looked at our universe would not even invent God as a hypothesis," she agreed outright.

He never said to believe any of that literally you autist. It's allegorical. He's referencing myths that gave intricate clues to people on how to be your best self and reach "Enlightenment". He believes in God, but not literal demons or dragons.

Stop drinking flouride.

Don't EVER link that brainlet again.

DONT LINK TO ME OR MY BRAINLET EVER AGAIN

Nah, you're just retarded.

Is pic related true? Anyway Yudkowsky is very smart, he just happen to also be autistic and a cult leader, which is why he ofter say retarded things.

He's way of presenting rationnality is interesting.

>Someone who just wanted the truth and looked at our universe would not even invent God as a hypothesis
>Implying our ancestors weren't searching for truth
There's the catch my dude. If you have knowledge of the absolute universal objective truth, of course you don't believe in anything because you KNOW everything. We are very limited in that capacity and this "lol god can't exist checkmate theists" shit doesn't help anyone, it only tears things apart
>muh truth
Fuck off. as long as there are humans involved there is no such thing as objective truth to the individual

I would call you reddit but I don't want to get banned again for wrongthink
Peterson is a good guy, Nietzsche was right about everything, take your angsty and low IQ non-religious fundamentalism and fuck off back to whatever gutter you crawled out of.

>I don't like him therefore he's a pseudo-intellectual
He has more peer reviewed studies, works, and achievements than you can ever hope to have.

>He has more peer reviewed studies, works, and achievements than you can ever hope to have.
Related to his psychology work, yes. But that's not what most people know him from. He constantly tries to promote himself of a political and social philosopher, and part of that includes using his non-related qualifications to seem like an authority on various topics. Trying to make yourself out to be an authority on topics you're not qualified in is the definition of being a psued.

>Completely misunderstands the most basic premise of his statements
>Calls him or literally anyone else a pseudo intellectual

What he says is true, but here are a couple issues with his argument:

1) People with these types of "metabolic disprivileges" are extremely rare to the point where you may as well exclude them from reliability studies since results on them aren't results about the general population.

2) "starve yourself" as a weight loss tip is a massive fucking strawman seeing as no actual public health authority outside of China has recommended this for anything, and yes, you're more likely to lose muscle than fat on starvation.

3) Stomach stapling, amphetamines and intentional contraction of stage II colon cancer would all be completely reliable under his criteria.

4) discounting diet and exercise because it doesn't work on something like 0.01% of the population is dumb. The reason why it appears not to be an effective method is because people think they can just diet for a few months, lose the weight then go back to normal and keep the weight off, when in reality weight loss is a lifelong commitment to changing your entire lifestyle. Calories in being less than calories out always means weight loss eventually. It's not just nutrition, it's thermodynamics.

The whole post boggles my noggin.

Jordan Peterson is an imbecilic numbskull who's good at trolling tumblr faggots. Don't take anything else he says seriously.

>I would call you reddit but I don't want to get banned again for wrongthink

But that is calling him Reddit.

+1

/Thread

>+1
This isn't reddit.

That is pretty bullshit. That said, I don't know if 'fake it till you make it' works for materialists, and as a hard polytheist I'd be really curious in seeing if it does. The gods have helped me a lot, but I don't think I was ever really a materialist. Even when I identified as an 'atheist' I was just a dystheist in disguise. Do any of you guys have experience with it working?

For me, I'm pretty sure being raised a Charismatic Christian instilled faith at a young age, and while I blundered into polytheism by complete accident I don't know if I could've formed a real relationship with the gods without that mustard seed if you will.

That said even i it works I would be against this guy, I'd much rather have more materialist atheists than Abrahamics running around.

>This isn't reddit.
Veeky Forums is basically the hideaway of /leftypol/ faggots aka plebbit cancer so no surprise here

Hi /r/TheDonald

This post only illustrates that you haven't even watched his lectures or listened to his talks.

No one who have actually watched his lectures could possibly end up with a retarded utilitarian conclusion to what he's saying like that.

QED

desu oneefam I'm just pointing out that the Right and the Left are both prone to being leddit cancer. I will admit I tried to use that site for porn once, and it's so poorly designed it can't even be used for that. There is exactly one subleddit of worth, Askhistorians.

I'll admit I find leftpol much more acceptable that actual pol though.

>There is exactly one subleddit of worth, Askhistorians.
Personally I think plebbit is much better for requests because if you create a thread on any large Veeky Forums board to request something (eg where can I find this etc) it gets very easily buried but other than that I agree, I don't like the usability of the site and the upboating shit is disgusting

I like /pol/ better because leftypol is too much of the same in my opinion. Granted, /pol/ also has its usual inhabitants but the diversity of the threads and topics is really much better on /pol/

Also it's more fun to shit on /pol/ than on leftypol kek

Better, but slower. It's definitely better for searching for previous discussions about a subject, though.

That's true

>I don't want to pretend to believe in dragons and God in order to stop being a lazy gfless person
man, what the fuck are you saying

Every so often I see something posted about a youtube nuphilosopher or clickbait using bizarre convoluted lingo. It's getting worse and worse.

I think the point to what hes saying about believing in god and slaying demons and dragons, is that you need to look at your life as a story. Of which you are the main character and the author.

Look at your life in terms of gospel, and literature.

Construct your own mythos.

>Jus bee urself!

>So it was true during the Spanish Inquisition?
I'm sure he has an explanation for this, but I'm similarly wondering what he thinks of the more questionable stories in the bible. For instance the hardening of the Pharao's heart in exodus and other things. That's why I'm looking forward to see how he'll tackle it in his bible series and I hope he doesn't use obscurantism to just go off topic for 15minutes until he gets back to his point where he jokingly says "where was I" .

I also don't get how he keeps sayig, "It's old, it's very OLD" as though it's definitely a good thing since it's old. Then I have to wonder how cultures like the aztec who practiced human sacrifice for a long time, would that be a good thing then?

Don't expect consistency from a postmodernist.

>metabolic disprivilege

i really hope this post is disingenuous

If not kill yourself

>It's ironic that I am repulsed by Jordan Peterson's "just be a Christian and believe in demons and dragons" advice when I post this picture everyday and people recommend him to me.

I think Peterson is a freud-dependent hack but this sentence pisses me off. You start as a question but dont end with an interrogation mark and you clearly dont know what ironic means; you're the same sort of pseud he is.

>Lots of people do just fine without them. Peterson is great for fighting pomo but he is doing it with his own brand of bullshit.
His position is that not only are people not doing fine, but that doing fine is setting the bar very low. Also, our whole culture has used myth and legend to collapse very important wisdom (not opinion) down into easily digestible little stories to guide itself forward. By throwing all of that useful stuff out it has lost it's way.
In the late 60s and early 70s, activists went around art schools smashing the old models used to practise life drawing. By the late 80s they were returning to the old methods because they had all as a group lost the ability to draw at all.
Culturally, pomo is the same thing, getting free of culture is like jumping out of an airplane. We're trying to build a new airplane in free fall and it's not "doing fine".

>i will delete comments suggesting diet or exercise
mfw

yet he makes himself out to be the most anti-post modernist out there so how do you explain that?

I think he redefines things to make them suit his world view. For instance he talks about "religious substructures" being fundamental and true, yet lots of religions out there have some whacky out there shit that is not defensable or seemingly "true" at all so I don't understand how he can defend that without cherrypicking.

Peterson doesn't actually know what postmodernism is. He just uses it as a catch-all boogeyman term for things he doesn't like. Like most people on this board.

>intentional contraction of stage II colon cancer would all be completely reliable under his criteria.
>implying it's not
I've had nothing but chemo and kfc for the last month and i'm nnhnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnfgh

>implying religions are born of seeking truth and not comforting lies or useful propagnada

>215 leafbucks

What did he mean by this?

Because its from a limited printing. He has it up for free on his site in pdf form

It's another "I don't understand the argument but instead of investigating further I'm just going to get mad"- thread.

He's a 21st century L. Ron Hubbard

>"Truth depends on the result, so Christianity is true since it helps people.
technically, you never know, in the long run christianity might cause the extinction of the human race, we would never know and then christianity would have been false all along according to Perterson's silly redefinitions of truth and falsehood
>So it was true during the Spanish Inquisition?
they could not have known, in the long run, if their flavor of christianity was true or not
we cannot know in the long run if any of our practices is true or not
the best we can do is assume that practices we recognize and rationalize as virtuous are good enough if they maintain social and individual well-being
>believe in demons and dragons
he believes in the allegorical meaning of those concepts: great unknowns and sometimes unknownable things in the world that could ruin your life if you unpreparedly stumble across them (addiction, abandonment, poverty, violence, etc.)
that being said, i didn't imagine people in 2017 would actually need to be reminded by a canadian psycologist uploading his lectures into YouTube to fucking discipline themselves and set goals for their life, his advice on those points is good
his belief in god is also, likely, allegorical
>he doesn't actually believe in the faith
>he's figured there are benefits to that belief
pretty much
more like, be a better version of yourself by figuring out who you are, setting goals affine to your personality, struggling to achieve or reformulate those goals, and transform yourself every step of the process

You have a very shallow interpretation on his ideas of religion, it's not just about "believe in god if you want your life to be good", it's about understanding how religion and faith works, how it affects your life, your brain.

He was an atheist and changed his mind, he's not 100% christian per se, but he has a deep understanding of what christianity means for humanity.

I don't have nearly as much knowledge as he has so I would suggest looking deeper into his understanding of the matter instead of coming up with such a simple and vague conclusion as you did

Jordan is struggling with the reality that God exists, and until that struggle ends with its rightful conclusion, that God exists and is far more important than we are, his advice regarding spiritual matters is nothing but his own shallow opinion, most times wrong.

But at least he's struggling with it.

DOOOS BULT