CLEAN

I am so sick of seeing JP everywhere. Of all the figures that are mentioned frequently on this board, he is by far the worst and most annoying.

Fuck the haters user, we both know that literature is a form of Art, and all the rest is Genre-Fiction bullshit (and if Art requires intention, then no Genre-fiction writer can ever 'accidentally' produce Art/Literature).

Keep up the good fight.

I give him $50 a month because of people like you.

Clean your room.

>tells me I should clean my room
>has all of zero (0) arguments why

Petersons academic career in a nutshell

How can you claim to have solutions for global economies user, when you dont even have solutions for your room?

I like my room dirty. It asserts my personal dominion over my living space.
Weakshit betacucks like Peterson couldn't understand that

>personal dominion over my dirty room
The nature of chaos is that it is uncontrollable. you have dont have dominion over your room if it is chaotic, an 'organised mess' is an oxymoron.

clean your room

You dont have to give up famalan, cleaning your room is the first step to taking back control of your life.

Wrong, I as a being am chaotic, but chaotic in a personal sense. My mess is my mess, anyone could clean my room in an identical way but no one could mess it in quite the way I do

kek

...

I really need to clean my bathroom, it is past the disgusting point where I don't know where to piss anymore because it's too dirty even to be pissed.

The level of butthurt required to make this really speaks volumes.

they're right tho

No... not really.

What is the point of 'cleaning' . I can understand the point of cleaning grime and bacteria away, for hygiene purposes and so things are icky. But what's wrong with having a 'messy' room? What's the point in arbitrarily moving things around into some sort of supposedly more organised style? As long as you can find things, isn't it just an aesthetic preference?

JP has always struck me as one of those slightly autistic, fastidious anal people who believe everyone should share the same values and preferences as themselves. This only strengthens my opinion.

He clearly doesn't understand pomo philosophy, and he does blame everything on pomo, endlessly, even though in reality pomo philosophy has almost zero influence on the world and is mostly impotent.

Claiming Frozen is propaganda is retarded. And Sam Harris, a hack himself, not even an academic, btfo'd JP.

I don't see what's wrong with it.

Well if it doesn't bother you, it doesn't bother you.

But if it does bother you, you should do something about it, instead of tucking it away, that's his point.

He does understand pomo philosophy.

Pomo philosophy isn't this impenetrable ivory tower that people just can't understand without studying for 20 years.

Even I have read parts of Of Grammatology by Derrida as part of my philosophy education and Peterson's take on it isn't wrong.

Does it bother anyone else that Peterson tells others to "sort themselves out" yet he himself is still not a vegan and is in fact decidedly against veganism?

Vegans are so unsorted they have become one with the messy room itself.

Someone asked him what he thought about Veganism and he quoted something out of the bible pretty much saying, what comes out of your mouth is more important than what you put in or something like that

Lion King is a wholesome story of a lion cub taking responsibility and disposing of a murderous tyrant.

Frozen is Mary Sue crap about a special snowflake princess with uber magical powers.

Pomo is untermensch tier philosophy and he isn't misrepresenting it at all, cutting down to it's core values while removing the fluff propoganda and emotional manipulation doesn't make it wrong or dishonest.

Veganism is just a bourgeois liberal invention.

Notice that every single vegan person is about as weak in their character as their eating habits.

Nobody is saying its impenetrable, far the opposite we're saying Peterson is a spastic moron.
Go on describe concisely what Peterson's take on Derrida even is. Because I have not once even seen him make any sort of cogent reference to his work outside of naming his as a boogieman

>what comes out of your mouth is more important than what you put in or something like that

Sounds like something someone would say before sucking a black cock

>Pomo philosophy isn't this impenetrable ivory tower that people just can't understand without studying for 20 years.

I didn't say it was. But he doesn't have a great grasp of it, and he doesn't have a great grasp on Marxism either. Or perhaps he does, but he doesn't appear to.

youtube.com/watch?v=naWWzn2fxWc

>Frozen is Mary Sue crap about a special snowflake princess with uber magical powers.

That's pretty much what all Disney movies are about. It doesn't make them propaganda.

That's what the new ones are after they were bought out by Jews.

Old Disney movies had actual stories and morals. Like Lion King.

Wrong. Frozen is not empowering for little girls. It's propaganda.

>Go on describe concisely what Peterson's take on Derrida even is.

Essentially the frame problem, and that semiotic signs always refer to other signs and never any real object or subject, basically relativizing any frame of reference.

You're confused. You think that because he doesn't bow to their holy veracity he doesn't understand them. This is not the case. They're just shit ideologies.

>tells people to sort themselves out
>is on antidepressants and tries self therapy using Jungian esotericism
Why should I believe he has solutions when he's fucked up himself?

6/10

>Derrida is right.
>But humans choose meaning based on what's useful.

What?

>and he doesn't have a great grasp on Marxism

He does have a grasp on it, but I do indeed sometimes fear that he has read people critical of Marxism as an introduction to it, instead of reading the source material instead.

Because fucked up people are the ones who seek solutions, and despite dealing with long term depression he's incredibly successful being a high end academic teacher and published author. He's also displayed incredible courage and dignity these past few months in standing up to the Comtario government and progressive circle jerks in academia. That's not relevant to his intellectual work but it's still noteworthy.

>I give him $50 a month because of people like you.

Care to expand on that?

I didn't say it was empowering. How is it propaganda in any way? What political ideology is it trying to promote?

youtube.com/watch?v=WyHTEIAYQlQ

No. He literally misunderstands them.

My problem with him, as in this video, is that he rejects ideas without actually offering counterarguments. I don't know if that's just because he doesn't see a point in doing it in popular media, if he saves counter arguments for books or papers or whatever, but he never rebuts anything. Just says its wrong.

Explain.

How so? Maybe bring some actual criticism to bear instead of just blatantly saying he's wrong and expecting everybody to agree with you.

Well there's really no way to "rebut" nihilism.

If you're going to say that society only exists to destroy individuals and oppress people, that is a statement about values, and there's literally no way to argue people out of their values.

Veganism has been around for a long time it just wasn't always called that obviously
yeah believe it or not "keto" wasn't around thousands of years ago either that doesn't mean nobody ate a diet like that until someone came up with a name for it

One of the ideological motifs in Frozen, is that the classic idea of the sleeping beauty that needs a prince to wake her is old fashion and absurd. And that there are alternative ways of traveling through life, that don't need the subjugation that Frozen seems to entail.

>I like my room dirty. It asserts my personal dominion over my living space.
You are deluding yourself because you couldn't ever compete in society's dominance hierarchy.

literally lower than lobsters

He didn't reject an idea, he rejected a criticism. Because of that the "counterargument" is merely to continue on with civilization as is while discarding Derrida's crap ideology.

I know it's been around for a long time, especially in India among the Jains.

But the point I was trying to make is that veganism in the West is almost always an upper-class phenomenon where people have yet another morally justified reason to hate on lower-class people who enjoy a barbeque after going to church on Sunday.

Low C uncivilized cuck detected. Sort yourself out bucko.

this is just illogical reasoning though

if an upper class person does something good for the wrong reasons they still did something good

I mean if a rich person somehow cured cancer tomorrow just so they could feel morally superior are you really going to be that one person who stands up and shames them?

This is what modern "education" does to you, something that dumb would never occur to a normal person, it takes schooling.

>to continue on with civilization as is while discarding Derrida's crap ideology.

No. You obviously haven't read Derrida..

Derrida's writing in no way prescribes any way of changing society. His philosophy is solely about how meaning is made and how society functions. It isn't prescriptive.

And JP's "rejection" here didn't seem justified in any convincing way. I'm not even a fan of Derrida, in fact I don't agree with Derrida and I find him a pompous git, but this wasn't a valid way of dismissing him.

Cleaning your room is actually pretty sound advice. It's a good start to self-improvement. If you're going to be a pig with no standards and you need to come up with excuses even with cleaning your room, you might as well save the time and kill yourself

>If you're going to say that society only exists to destroy individuals and oppress people, that is a statement about values, and there's literally no way to argue people out of their values.

Derrida argues this. And there are indeed counter-arguments to such a position. What you're saying doesn't really make much sense.

The whole idea of nihilism is built upon certain premises to reach its conclusion, just like any other argument. There are plenty of arguments against nihilism.

>I don't agree with Derrida and find him a pompous git, but I hate Jordan Peterson so fucking much that I'm still going to defend Derrida against him

Really shows Veeky Forums contrarianism to a tee.

I think Peterson is actually just deeply scared of the possibility that life has no meaning. His outlooks on life seem to be a reaction against existential crises.

Cleaning is an organizing and comforting thing. It is a way of asserting meaning in a cruel, meaningless world

>Really shows Veeky Forums contrarianism to a tee.

A bad argument is a bad argument. There are good reasons for not agreeing with pomo, but its stupid just to go "its shit because of course its shit and I don't like it because its shit."

He says that peoples sense of meaningful engagement is actually a psycho physiological reflex that orients us between chaos and order through life.
youtube.com/watch?v=hHb67iP56h8
5:40

>The whole idea of nihilism is built upon certain premises to reach its conclusion, just like any other argument. There are plenty of arguments against nihilism.

Which doesn't in any way, shape or form mean you're going to convince people.

>"its shit because of course its shit and I don't like it because its shit."

Which is never what Peterson says.

>I think Peterson is actually just deeply scared of the possibility that life has no meaning

And you aren't?

I'm talking about his one specific counterpoint, not a criticism of all of Derrida's works. You seem very confused. Maybe you should sort yourself out desu.

>Which is never what Peterson says.

He doesn't adequately give a reason for what's wrong with it in that video.

No.

Well, somehow I don't believe you.

Get this teenager shit out of here.

He literally says that the idea that society exists to marginalize and oppress is wrong, because the gains of technology and wealth obviously counteracts the individuals loss of identity and socialization.

I mean, pay fucking attention.

He has like 500 hours of stuff online. I think it's actually in his credit that he doesn't repeat the same shit over and over... But he's a pragmatist. For him, essentially, the problems with pomo are teleological not foundational, it's about what the philosophy moves humanity towards. This is ALWAYS value judgement, because no one can objectively say what humans should be doing as a whole. So if you don't agree with the value, you don't agree. I see it as a dichotomy between striving for broad truth or striving for individual freedom.

Don't worry user one day you'll grow out of that "life has le no meaning" phase. Maybe you'll even get a gf :^)

Most people get over their existential crises, user. It doesn't matter if life has no meaning. It's irrelevant.

Good post.

I have one m8. I didn't claim life has no meaning, anyway.

>Most people get over their existential crises, user. It doesn't matter if life has no meaning. It's irrelevant.

How the fuck do you think people get over their existential crisis exactly?

How is that a) not empowering to little girls and b)propaganda

I thought that the big message of the story was that the love of your family trumps a 30 sec relationship. Not that men are bad/unnecessary.

That veganism itself is morally good is questionable at best.

>Derrida was correct but we should ignore him anyway because it makes me cry

>He literally says that the idea that society exists to marginalize and oppress is wrong, because the gains of technology and wealth obviously counteracts the individuals loss of identity and socialization.
>I mean, pay fucking attention.

Thats a stupid non sequitor, if people are being oppressed and marginalized for some alleged greater good they're still being oppressed and marginalized.

>Even when someone is actually critiquing someone legitimately they are wrong

Fuck off seriously. None of you in this thread has supplied ANY arguments against what Peterson is saying except whining about his person, or saying he is misinterpreting Derrida.

Fucking make arguments yourselves or fuck off.

>reading comprehension

Thats literally what you just said
Society is not oppressive because oppression is necessary to make money and iphones

Everyone's just critiquing Peterson's critique. He literally just give sreasons for disagreeing things that are almost no better than "I don't like it"

>How the fuck do you think people get over their existential crisis exactly?

By either learning to not care that life has no meaning, or finding their own meaning in life.

Read some philosophy.

Not that's not what I said. I said "COUNTERACTS".

You can google the definition of that word if you want to, but I hope for your sake that you have enough IQ to know what that word means.

Dude oppression isn't like a loan at a bank, you can't just pay them back later and claim it never happened.

How does one begin "sorting themselves out"?

You give him money to buy into his self help course

No, but a small amount of oppression and marginalization at the expense of the individual has made us wealthier and more technologically advanced in the last 100 years than the combined history of humanity and is the reason you can shitpost on this Austrian strudelmaking forum.

start by going back to redd.it