>Listen to a podcast with Jordan Peterson >Have no idea what he is talking about >"Postmodernism" >"neo-marxists" >"Jungian" >wtf do these words even mean? >Open wikipedia on postmodernism >"postmodernism is typically defined by an attitude of skepticism, irony or distrust toward grand narratives, ideologies and various tenets of universalism, including objective notions of reason, human nature, social progress, moral universalism, absolute truth, and objective reality. Instead, it asserts that claims to knowledge and truth are products of social, historical or political discourses or interpretations, and are therefore contextual and constructed to varying degrees. Accordingly, postmodern thought is broadly characterized by tendencies to epistemology and moral relativism, pluralism, irreverence and self-referentiality" >Can't even understand the definition
Am I too much of a brainlet to take part in philosophy discussions? Should I just stick to anime and vidya?
tl;dr just become a christian again and oppose socialism and social liberalism
James Cooper
link some senpai.
I have 0 background in any of this kind of stuff. What are the prerequisites to being able to understand his lectures
Carter Stewart
Are you from a non-Western country, or lacking in an educational background? Serious question, you have to be pretty damn out of the loop to not at least graspingly catch references to Jung, Marx, etc. or understand what Postmodernism is
He has two courses, one on Personality and one on his book "Maps of meaning". Both are pretty comfy to watch.
The one on personality focuses more on psychology and the Big Five personality traits while the Maps of meaning one focuses on symbolism and Jungian philosophy.
nigga I spent my youth barely paying attention in school at all. I watched anime and played wow. Forgive me for trying to learn as an adult
Jeremiah Phillips
You know, you can't bloody well have a philosophical discussion if you've got no moral center or understanding of the Jungian archetypes insofar as they relate to the discussions. It's like, what the hell is going on when you're approaching the discussion like that, it's like, you can't expect everyone else to bloody well talk down to you, that's not it at aLL. You've got to be predicated on a moral center or you're just going to be low-resolution, how the HELL can we talk about it? This is exactly how the post-modernists approach things!
Hudson Johnson
Clean your room, buck-o!
Ethan Phillips
>Big Five god damn what a memelord. This guy must be rejoicing every day he breathes after being drug into this SJW nonsense
Seriously go start with the Greeks. The Republic by Plato. Even if someone sat down and explained all this stuff to you, it'd be a really weak pseud understanding of things. At least take comfort in the fact that Peterson is pretty low on the intellectual ladder. His conclusions could be reached by your average salaryman.
Lucas Gray
with maybe the exception of "epistemology" which I'll concede you may just have never come across, if you can't understand that wiki description then yea you just aren't capable of taking part in a discussion of philosophy.
I mean, you literally couldn't follow one, let alone take part in one.
Xavier Martinez
In my Western country, none of this is ever discussed in high school. If one was to take STEM or such at university, it's entirely possible they would never encounter Marx, Jung, etc.
They even removed Shakespeare from the school curriculum (even up to final year) and replaced it with "critical analysis of Twilight and The Hunger Games". I wish I was baiting.
Andrew Kelly
does the average person really know the terms >universalism >grand narratives >moral universalism >moral relativism >pluralism
Carson Reed
>>universalism Can be figured out when one removes "universe" from it's common scientific parlance >>grand narratives self explanatory >>moral universalism see above >>moral relativism absolutely self-explanatory >>pluralism probably not this one, but google and wikipedia exists
Jason Young
Peterson's Christianism is deeply heterodox though.
Daniel Allen
hetero-whaaaat?? uhhh in english nerd!!
Ayden Bell
whatever, the endpoint is the same, it's a means to an end of assuaging butthurt over social liberalism and a desire for obviously nonexistent transcendent meaning
Benjamin Wood
You haven't >A) Unpacked yourself >B) Sorted yourself out >C) Cleaned your room Do all these things and you'll get him
Jonathan Clark
Is everyone in this thread including OP being ironic
There aren't legitimate anti postmodernists here, are there?
Evan Ward
Just learn what the words mean. It's not hard.
Julian Myers
Its literally SHIT on a FUCKING CANVAS
Noah Lee
>There aren't legitimate anti postmodernists here, are there?
oh god, dfw didn't die for this
Zachary Hill
Peterson is rather socially liberal though.
Josiah Lopez
Got the first part right desu
Easton Barnes
...
Juan Wright
>bro religion is good ideology is bad
Xavier Scott
>Listen to a podcast with Jordan Peterson >Have no idea what he is talking about
Don't worry, he doesn't either.
Andrew Hernandez
I'm summarizing Peterson, not my own thoughts. A Great Awakening in response to the SJWs is a recipe for disaster.
I actually know many many people that would know very few of these, even at university. Most regular people aren't very confident at guessing at words either. Why are you trying to stamp on this kid anyway? Quit being a loser pal.
Liam Foster
>be jordan peterson >talk about postmodernisn >don't know what i'm talking about either
it's ok OP, just call the other side postmodernists and you win!
Landon Cox
>>>"Postmodernism" A system of values in which nothing has values and everything has to be debased so you know who can install new systems. >>"neo-marxists" You know who. >>"Jungian" A pervert who justified his perversions through a cult of personality based on mythology and dream interpretation.
Ryan Hall
>tfw anything other than post-modernism seems too dumb and faith based to be taken seriously
Luke Gutierrez
That's such a "real" picture. I've never seen a photo that so vividly encompasses emotions, or particularly an emotion, namely Francis's here.
Brody James
Is his book any good?
Tyler Brooks
Start with the Greeks, then read Gulag Archipelago
Angel Jones
Rome wasn't built in a day.
Don't lose heart. Start with the Greeks.
Jason Watson
I think the point is that you can infer a lot of information from the context in which the words are used.
Noah Hill
>Listening to Jordan "Meme" Peterson podcasts >wikipedia >Am I too much of a brainlet? Not necessarily, but you're starting off on the wrong foot. In order to understand philosophy, you need to actually read books, not just watch youtube videos and read the wikipedia page for posmodernism (lol). Also please don't fall for memes like Peterson.
Cooper Morales
>being so actually anti-intellectual that you insult someone for having the gall to assert that people can think for themselves
Landon Hernandez
Sounds like you have a messy room bucko
Jason Clark
How can you not know what moral relativism is? It literally explains itself. Are you 12 years old or brain damaged?
Eli Collins
Look, he did it again! He posted that meme again! The absolute madman.
Justin Morgan
Let me guess, you found Peterson through some rekt feminist and thug life youtube videos.
Bentley Wood
Post-modernists are just nihilists. That's all you need to know about them in relation to Peterson. Same thing with Neo-Marxists.
When he talks about Jung, he's talking about psychological archetypes, basically that some ideas or concepts are fundamental in the human mind and that's why they recur constantly in art, they are proof of a sort associated evolutionary significance.
That's basically all you need to know to understand Peterson.
Angel Price
Must be nice to make 400k p/y on Patreon on top of your real job just because autists will pay you $5 + tip a month to scream at them that they need to clean their room
Jaxon Nguyen
Jesus Christ how can you people buy this shit, this is evopsych tier bullshit.
Mason Harris
Relax user, you'll pick these things up eventually
Just read what you enjoy. Fuck the rest. It's all cancerous theory anyway. Learn from true masters like Dostoevsky and Nabokov. Leave the posers like Peterson for idiots.
Dominic Richardson
>he doesn't think Jungian archetypes exist they are a logical consequence of evolution
Cameron Cox
>they are a logical consequence of evolution
No, it's vague nonsense so poorly defined that they resist any clarification or rigor.
It's just more neo-kantian bullshit. The same as postmodernists.
People praise Peterson for attacking feminists all while he's explaining how to crystallize the dragon shadow of the other
Carson Ortiz
Anyone can learn, and you took the right steps by googling the definition of the words. Go further and google the definitions of what you didn't understand in that explanation, and then work your way back building your own understanding. Bring that understanding to discussion with others and learn from them how they see the same things.
Gabriel Ortiz
I really don't say this to be offensive, but the idea that archetypes like this exist is as apparent and manifest as 2+2=4 to the intelligent man. It's a direct result of evolutionary stressors developing across time. It's bizarre and abstract to think they aren't real, that's a break in causality itself. Maybe you're getting hung up on the ambiguities of how they are said to manifest or maybe the niceties of said manifestation, but it cannot be argued that these archetypes can be observed, that they exist.
Charles Butler
Congratulations, you already know more about postmodernism that Peterson himself.
I think he isn't worth wasting your time if you're interested in philosophy, but if you keep listeining to him, please research the things he talks about. He uses strawmans to an extreme, and uses strawman arguments without end.
Blake Baker
>god damn what a memelord. This guy must be rejoicing every day he breathes after being drug into this SJW nonsense What's your problem with the Big Five?
