Hey kid

No.

His political ideas are meme-tier but his grasp on mythology is very solid.

Yes.

contrarian detected

Because?

His ideas are great but he's very unfair to thinkers he doesn't like (Marx and Post-structuralists, the latter of whom he considers indistinguishable from Postmodernists which is incorrect), and a little too easy on the flaws of thinkers he does like (whitewashing over Nietzsche's anti-religious and individualistic ideas in order to make him more Jungian)

Other than that he's a top lad and I'm happy he's blown up the way he has. He's the best thing to happen to the alt right, and if they actually listen to him, it'll do their movement a world of good.

prefer pic related tho

the weather in toronto is either miserably cold or humid and hot (and the entire province lacks air conditioning). in the winter you have 8 hours of sunlight and in the summer you have almost 18. there's only a few months a year in which it's possible to feel untroubled by the constant flux of nature.

basically in the winter you are depressed and in the summer you are manic, if you have any sort of connection to the natural world at all

Jungian in current year. Uses shitty utility bound definition of truth, custom tailored to justify his memery. Weak and boring memery overall - the only reason he's known and discussed is because of his videos on SJWs and Pepe the Meme. Rarely provides anything interesting in debates mostly resorting to incredibly vague obfuscatory language and namedropping some past greats.

>whitewashing over Nietzsche's anti-religious and individualistic ideas in order to make him more Jungian

Well, you could argue that Nietzsche's Übermensch is actually his attempt at generating an archetype. Which is what Jung believed.

Whether or not that is true, it's certainly an interesting take on it.

Also, he actually says that the postmodernists do have something correct in their theory. If you value and categorize something, you are putting it into a hierarchy that necessitates you devaluing other things.

The problem is that the postmodern critique does not produce anything. It's just deconstructive nihilism.

>the only reason he's known and discussed is because of his videos on SJWs and Pepe the Meme.

I don't think that's true though. I like him more for his other ideas than his adamant stance against SJWs.

In fact, I found this interview where this picture is from before the whole SJW debacle even started.

Also:

>uses shitty utility bound definition of truth

What's shitty about it though? Pragmatism is a legit and coherent philosophy.

Peterson is an alt right figure? or he is claimed by some of its members?

Sadler is not redpilled, my man, but he is GOAT youtube philosopher; although he is more of a scholar than an actual philosopher, which might explain why he's better than the scurrilous hacks who are posted here so often.

The alt-right just like him because he is against a specific law in Canada that is tangentially related to social justice.

I'm almost certain that he himself wouldn't consider himself on the right. I think he's more center, or center-left, because he has said that he was a member of the NDP in Canada for 20 years(which are social-democrats).

he's a christian humanist but he knows deep down his mission has failed and the the promise of eternal life is a white lie, that SJWism is only the first thing he's began to address among a million problems of society and that humanity is just biological fuel for the transhuman elite

Where do I start with him?

closeted transwomyn

Fair enough, good point. I grew up in Ontario but I've never lived in Toronto. Fuck the climate here.

Watch this all the way through.

youtube.com/watch?v=07Ys4tQPRis&

No.

He's a product of the very thing he criticises.

>hur dur Tolstoy and Christianity, now along me to collect my 15000 dollar paycheck from my youtube video kiddies online

>yfw you realize traditionalists like Peterson have suppressed their shadow feminine for thousands of years so it incarnates as statism, child molestation, and SJWism

>traditionalists like Peterson

>I vigorously study and practice traditonal religions, mythologies, and cultures and integrate this into my beliefs and practices as a core feature of my personality and public image but its silly to call me a traditionalist

Sure, and I'd agree with that, but that's the Post-Structuralist critique. There were structuralist thinkers who came before them and it's a little unfair to group in a whole bunch of thinkers who were not saying that at all (Levi-Strauss etc.)

And I understand and agree with that interpretation of the ubermensch. I just think he also treats Nietzsche proclamation of the Death of God as an unambiguously tragic statement, rather than something that Nietzsche thought was something that was both a danger and an opportunity.

But like I say, I really do like Peterson and those are minor issues. Has he ever said anything about Kierkegaard?

It is full of multi-cultural endorsing cucks

I could be wrong about this but don't traditionalists not seek to integrate those old patterns of belief with the new, instead simply rejecting the new and seeking a return to the old?

he keeps red pill in his mouth but can't bring himself to swallow it

>Has he ever said anything about Kierkegaard?

He certainly has. Look up his personality lectures on Youtube. He talks about Kierkegaard there.

This

Ontario is god's country and the weather is amazing and not nearly as miserable as you make it sound.

>rejecting the new

Well considering that's exactly why Peterson is famous, you're correct, regardless of whether you like the acceptance of trans/queer and feminist culture its certainly a /new/ pattern.

Not only does Peterson reject the archetypes generated by progressives and socialists, he also rejects Nietzsche's self-creating Ubermensch, perhaps coincidentally he's never spoken about the dangers of transhumanism, likely because he's still dealing with the cultural shock of the 60s as if that were the most pressing issue at hand.

I find also funny that Peterson virtue signals as a humanist but rejects socialism in an era (total automation, 40% youth unemployment, 80% youth underemployment), where collectivist structures may be the only thing that keeps humanity intact in another hundred years.

Peterson isn't "rejecting the new".

He is objecting to being forced by the state to use specific words.

This just happens to be the gender pronoun issue.

I have no doubt in my mind, that if Canada that created a law that said you had to address someone as "sir" or "ma'am" in public, he would object to that too.

Also, he was a Social democrat, and is as far as I know, still a Social democrat, as he has said in an interview that he was a member of the NDP in Canada for 20 years.

Now of course, social democrats are seen as useful idiots by socialists and communists, but that does not mean that he is a traditionalist and a right-winger.

Pleb detected.

>He is objecting to being forced by the state to use specific words.

I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about his rejection of postmodernism and socialism, which are the only /new/ games in town that isn't a repackaging of older traditions.

>Peterson isn't "rejecting the new".

Please read my previous post, and if you haven't listened to his non-controversy related lectures enough to understand what I'm talking about then we don't have much to discuss.

He doesn't reject postmodernism entirely. Read this post

he stared the abyss too much

attempting to reconcile bits and pieces of postmodernism (which parts has Peterson accepted?) with previous traditions does not separate Peterson from being a traditionalist

He rejects the end result of postmodernism and associates it with Marxism because they've both left nothing but failures in their wake. The point is that neither of them are new or useful anymore even if they're touted as such by fools who don't know the history of these movements to the point of thinking they've never been tried in just the right way.

>He rejects the end result of postmodernism

which is?

>associates it with Marxism because they've both left nothing but failures in their wake

the internet and personal computers were developed by state funding and hippiest of hippies

>The point is that neither of them are new or useful anymore

What's your plan if you are made completely irrelevant or non-competitive by automation?

He isnt, they just love him. Which is good because if anyone can talk them out of thinking fascism is good its him.

Petersonfags are an embarrassment to this board. He's reddit as fuck. Brainlet philosophy.

sam harris is the reddit
jordan is /our guy/

he has tasted life and knows that his repetition of life is a mild lie to keep the real memory away from him and the monster of the abyss that lurks down below Pinocchio

b2r, brainlet

Marxism and state funded research are not the same thing. If you guys would actuslly listen to this guys lectures youd know that peterson is not some libertarian anarchist free market worshipper. He regularly states that leftist ideas of welfare and progressivism have their place.

Do you ever stop and think, man, I sure hope I used an equal number of parenthesis on both sides of the word, better check that so it's right. Then you count the parenthesis on the left side and the ones on the right side and feel a bit better about yourself when you add a missing parenthesis on the right side, because that's the one you write last.

Good times.

Stop pretending to hate everything to feel smart. Its so fucking transparent.

What's wrong with getting paid for your work you communist faggot?

stop projecting senpai. People on this board point out thread after thread why peterson is for plebs. At this point i can shitpost at petersonfags without much effort. His followers and he himself have already been exposed as a pseud.

>Marxism and state funded research are not the same thing

state funded /implementation/, the inventions and mathematics that companies like Microsoft, Facebook, and Google have built their capital on were almost entirely subsidized by taxpayers.

My question still remains unanswered, exactly what features of postmodernism has Peterson successfully integrated into his beliefs (not beating up gays and having a neoliberal standard of welfare is hardly postmodern)?

The end result of postmodernism is a set of self-defeating, self-destructive principles with no backbone in anything sustainable in the long term or even meaningful in a trasient sense because postmodernism on its own is a means without a logical or symbolic end.

Peterson is a reactionary, his answer to postmodernism is to undo postmodernism. His assimilation of truth and archetypes, are essentially a strategy to eliminate the complexities of existance, to create a simple order, give clear answers.

That's why it's so appealing to angsty /pol/tards or guilt-ridden right-wingers, who don't want to admit they're rightwingers.

holy shit, that comma, placement, , I don,t think, you understand what, ',' are used, for,

You're using a lot of resources to transmit a lot of words but saying very little how very postmodern of you.

I think, you just can't keep up, with my postmodernist syntax.

That's exactly the point though. It's a deliberately wasteful ideology.

It genuinely makes me sad that people like you exist. It's not just that the other guy is obviously right about you, it's that all that hate and insecurity inside of you make you badmouth someone who isn't just a lot smarter than you but who is actually doing incredibly important work to help people and society.

But one bad word about a writer you like or a religion you dislike and you go full contrarian.

That's the problem of the machine age, not postmodernism you/humans are a deliberately wasteful ideology.

upvote desu
>you badmouth someone who isn't just a lot smarter than you but who is actually doing incredibly important work to help people and society.
lmfao

Transhumanists are just furries with a robot fetish instead of an animal one.

Transhumanists are going to turn your children into meaty legos m8

That's just a fantasy of theirs (yours?) In reality they're just going to be the weird kids who eat lunch alone once the novelty of all these innovations fades.

Garbage time is running out, friend.

not an argument

You do realise shilling Christianity whilst being paid literally 15000 a month and simultaneously being a university professor (part of the establishment) makes you a charlatan, correct?

>criticism wealth = communism

Are all Peterson fans brainlets ;^)?

If you had any idea....

youtu.be/1gdpyzwOOYY

There is a legal argument to be made about whether professors should be entitled to the proceeds of their lectures via youtube etc.
But that's a huge grey area and most professors do way worse without any criticism. You're also an idiot if you think he started putting his lectures online to get money.

I don't see anything at all wrong with asking for voluntary donations. I also don't know what being part of the establishment has to do with anything. Or why it's a problem when a professor doesn't teach that everything about Christianity is terrible.

I really don't get why anyone would have a problem with him. You don't need to follow any of his stuff on mythology or religion, we all know it's not exactly an objective field.

In what way is he "shilling Christianity" ?

Stupidest thing I've ever heard.

>proceeds
>youtube
Good joke.

Not sure what you mean but maybe I used the wrong word, not my first language.

He is a shill for Christianity. Not a true Christian.

He is like the other right-wing charlatans. He sees Christianity as a vice for other things, he uses it to give himself an identity he doesn't have.

By being religious he's oppressing innocent atheists in his vicinity, just by existing.

I mean that youtubing is a terrible way to make money.

>I mean that youtubing is a terrible way to make money.

patreon.com/jordanbpeterson

>17,000

what are you trying to prove? that's his patreon. he may have 17000 backers because of his youtube videos, but it's still his patreon that is making him money, not his youtube account.

My friend, you're really not a smart person. I don't think you should keep seeking argument swith people.
Also
>like the other right-wing charlatans
He's left-of-centre.

Ah, well that was my point.

You realise patreon isn't youtube, right? And if people are voluntarily donating to this man because they appreciate his content, or his fight against a fucked up law, or just want to support someone at risk of losing his job for sticking to his principles, then what exactly is wrong with that?

>make a thread with nothing but a pic of an intellectual celeb and a meme phrase
>100+ posts

>My friend, you're really not a smart person.

Not an argument.

Also,
>My friend

Back to you go

At least harris can articulate ideas without instantly sperging out

>At least harris can articulate ideas without instantly sperging out

Veeky Forums is filled with post-structualist/postmodern/critical theorists
it's only natural they would stormpost anything related to him, because he discredits their whole ideology.

The only thing Peterson discredits is the people who idolize him.

>love his lectures on psychology, religon, existentialism, etc
>accidentally stumbled onto one of his political videos
>unironically uses terms like "cultural marxism"
>believes marxism is just as bad as fascism
>rants about "muh evul sjws taking over uni!"
>thinks post modernists are in some sort of conspiracy
Woops

>>Not an argument.
>
>Also,
>>My friend
>
>Back to you go
none of this is an argument fucking faggot

t. guy who hasn't studied the history of philosophy

Peterson is a post-modernist himself. He just doesn't like to admit it.

Neither was your post.

In other words,

stop shilling for reddit

>Stop point out I'm a redditor

In other words,

youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY

Has anyone else seen his most recent video?
It spooked me out when I first saw it. Looks like he's pretty much gone off the deep end.

I'm honestly curious what your background is because while one can find flaws in the first lectures you mention, I have no idea how you could listen to the latter ones and not find them convincing.

>unironically uses terms like "cultural marxism"
Frankfurt school etc. weren't secretive about taking the now-redundant economic marxism and applying the class warefare on culture.

>believes marxism is just as bad as fascism
And he explains in great detail why, while knowing a lot more about Marxist systems than you.

>rants about "muh evul sjws taking over uni!"
He rants about it because they literally want to fire him over criticising a law that can put you in jail for refusing to acknowledge another person as a squirrelkin.

And I'm not just trying to argue, I really want to know the people who are blind to these things.

Just to clear it up, those posts aren't made by the guy you were talking to earlier. I tried to be friendly with you despite thinking you're an idiot so I stopped bothering when you insisted on being edgy.

He's been kind of losing it in general since it all started, it's really taking a toll on him. In early discussions he was always calm and collected, now he's always irritated. I'd be too though if I was going through that shit.