Be honest, you just shit on him because you don't understand Jung and you've never read his works

>I mainly ignore the threads about him as they're not Veeky Forums related.

He's an author, has an upcoming self help book (which kind of devalues him), discusses Nietzche, Jung, and other authors. He is just as Veeky Forums as Sam Harris pleb.

>this underage bait
Again, fuck off and kys.

>I'm too lazy to read
>I'll just watch this YouTube clip instead
>Wow that user called me out for being a drooling illiterate? He is baiting!!!
Get a grip.

Peterson shares many of the same beliefs about morality and ethics with plenty of young readers who are always blasted with leftist, humanist ideology. It's nice to hear a different voice but he needs to write more works to gain a bigger audience, maybe try fiction. That's why Houellebecq is experiencing a rise in popularity again.

Fuck off with the peterson threads. I like him, but this just shits on the board. Discussions about him are never interesting and do not relate to literature.

You are the problem of which you speak, your post is dripping with irony.

There's nothing ironic in his reply, stop bumping your shitty bait thread and die.

There's no Irony. I sincerely want you and all the philosophy posters to fuck off to your proper boards.

Needs to be a proper philosophy board

I'm quite intrigued by this guy. I've listened to both of his three hour Joe Rogan podcasts, both of His Sam Harris Podcasts (The first one being a two hour argument on an axiom for 'truth'), a substantial amount of his Youtube videos, and have skimmed a pdf of Maps of Meaning and have slotted it in to my to read pile.

I can understand why Veeky Forums and other corners of the intent are heralding him as the new Messiah for his stance against SJW's, gender pronouns and the c-16 legislation, and his dislike of new-atheism.

My only criticism of him is the way he deliberately misrepresents postmodernism. I have no bias or desire to defend postmodernism, I was just curious as to why he is doing this. The more exposure to him I had, the more evident it became. For instance, throughout both Rogan podcasts, he belittles postmodernism at least fifty times, yet the only substantial criticism in those six hours was:

"Postmodernism doesn't care about the constraints of reality at all, all they do is say you can interpret the world however you want," and:

"They have an infinite number of ways to look at a finite set of objects; an infinite number of ways to interpret the world, and their next conclusion is that there is no right way so you can do it any old way. This is a vision problem the postmodernists have."

He then grouped Derrida, Foucault, Marx, Otherkin, feminists, leftists, and SJW's together as one handy strawman to attack and began a tangent about leftists playing identity politics.

I agree with Peterson on a tremendous amount, but it became clear that what he disliked, in addition to the various groups and people mentioned, was basic relativism. Of course, the postmodernists don't believe that all subjective notions about reality, no matter how ludicrous, are equal. Their lean towards materialism gives them a Bayesian model from which to rank the truth probability of a claim. It's a similar method to the workings of empiricism. But Peterson needs to claim that they are basking in a swamp of absolute relativism so he can very carefully sweep under the carpet the idea that he does not have objectivity. He then uses his counterfeit triumph against postmodernism as a pedestal to dismiss subjectivity, and after doing those two things, he is free to pluck the logos from thin air and pretend the cunning ideology he is about to create, and dismissal of every group he dislikes, has axiomatic grounding.

What he is doing is very clever, and I agree with him on most individual issues or remain neutral. I just find it unfortunate that he can't just say he hates relativism of all stripes. He hates cultural relativism, and, for lack of a better term, 'leftist identity politics' so much that he pretends that Foucault and Derrida, even Korzybski, held the belief that every subjective opinion is operating on equal footing because he needs them as an enemy for his anti-left stance and for the various manifestations he wants to create from Hebrew mythology.

Jung would approve of my messy room. Making a mess in his room like a child is why Freud first started having suspicions that Jung was completely mad, and I can spot a Freudian falseflagger from less than five hundred responses on /b/. NOU Read Jung, you arrogant numpty.

>Veeky Forums - History and HUMANITIES

good post

DUDE DREAMS LMAO

his cringey head shots don't help. How anyone can take photos like this and be serious about it can only be interpreted as lack of self of awareness.

He keeps popping up on this board very often, as much as I keep telling myself "Literally who?" whenever I see him.

Best assessment I've read of Peterson so far

quality post my man

wish Veeky Forums was consistently this good

...

frozen is not a positive message for girls. its a positive message for radical feminist authoritarians

Not good enough

LITERALLY HOW?!

If you want to read Joseph Campbell why not just read Joseph Campbell.

Why not both?

>Magic will fix everything
>Other people will fix everything for you
>Man and woman coming together is not relevant

If you can tell me how it's positive i'll tell you how it isn't.

Star Wars slippery slope fags pls go

"Married University Professor, Jordan B. Peterson, who recently made headlines for his opposition to a Senate hearing concerning gender pronouns, was arrested in his hotel room early Wednesday morning after being on what one witness described as a, "three day bender of coke and trannies." Prof. Peterson, allegedly in the company of three MtoF transsexuals and one frogkin, procured thirty-seven grams of cocaine and embarked upon a three day rampage in the Sheraton Marriott Hotel.

"Ze was in a manic state from the moment Ze checked in," recalled xir Tracy, the hotel's receptionist. "Ze was shouting about Harry Potter and a basilisk then began poking patrons with a stick, threatening to 'burn their deadwood' if they didn't tell Zim where the postmodernists were hiding." One guest claims xe then saw Peterson inserting the nozzle of a blue fire extinguisher into the front of zis trousers and a cloud of foam erupting from around his ankles.

The trouble really started later that night when hotel staff were called to his room by the neighboring guests. "I've never seen anything like it," said Xyr Richards, one of the hotel's room service technicians. "Peterson was naked with zis head on the floor and both legs on the bed. A frogkin wearing fishing waders had inserted his entire arm [CLICK TO READ FULL ARTICLE]"

torontosun.com/2017/05/27/disgraced-professor-in-drug-fueled-orgy

i fucking knew it

top fucking kek

I'm farmiliar with Jung and his influences on this man but at the same time I have a hard time legitimizing a person who believes in any analytical-psychology theory that intently.
It's neat stuff to know and understand, but to make it gospel is pretty autistic and, in my opinion, close-minded.
There's something about his self-assuredness that makes me feel like he's sort of an overly educated child trapped in man's body.
I have a feeling he only just recently, or at least past the age of 20, learned how to communicate non-autistically with others.

It's why I'm interested in him but don't really respect him the way i know i would had he been more charismatic.

>I have a hard time legitimizing a person who believes in any analytical-psychology theory that intently.

Mind explaining why?

It's just an annoying way to live in the world.
Turns people into neurotic machines with forced natural states that, while arguably logical, do not reflect the real chaotic non-linear way their personalities operate in the 5% of life these types choose to ignore.
It's neat stuff to know/apply but the way this guy tosses around the terms as like definitive, palpable concepts and not just abstract explanations really just makes me cringe.

>visit /christian/ out of curiosity
>open a Jordan Peterson thread
>/christian/ has more intelligent scrutiny of Peterson in one thread with 4 replies than Veeky Forums has had in over a hundred

wait, 4chin has a Christian board now? What letter is it?

fuck off

This is brilliant. I've only watched the JRE podcast but I kinda noticed the same thing, that sth was very wrong, but I couldn't put my finger on what it was exactly. but you said it perfectly.

And his Joe Rogan podcast. OMG, that bit where he says "have you heard about kek? The postmodernists have this whole thing now called the republic of kekistan and their leader is a frog." Joe pulls up know your meme and looks at pepe and says wtf is going on? Then Peterson says "It's chaos. postmodernists love chaos and hate truth. and they have a frog leader because it represents fluid gender. frogs can change sex from male to female, and these SJWs need that. Frogs also have a change from tadpole to frog representing gender surgery." and gives this whole ridiculous analysis of pepe and the word kek which is korean and other Veeky Forums memes, and claims theyre all a conspiracy for leftist postmodern feminist marxists.

Now this is some good criticism. Not like the marxist retards here who claim a monopoly on philosophy then throw shit at you for not being a commie.

this really belongs in or

I shit on him because atheistic Christianity is horrific.
If there is one thing one ought to be sincere about, it is their religion. He's one of the worst things my province has produced -- a meme conservative.

Fuck off /pol/

lol

>I shit on him because atheistic Christianity is horrific
He doesn't have the atheism though. Just watch his Biblical series. As others have said ITT, he tiptoes around objectivity/subjectivity with the stealth of a ninja and hates to give straight answers. He is a full believer in the Christian God though. Often he uses postmodern logic and says "we only have a description of reality, not reality itself, so we cannot exclude that there are numerous things way beyond our comprehension." before bashing the evil feminists from tumblr for allegedly saying something similar

>He is a full believer in the Christian God though
no he isn't. he considers god to just be the highest value that humans have constructed and chooses christianity over other religions just because it expresses good/evil more thoroughly than other religions in its myths

He is an atheist, atheistic Christianity is 'symbolic Christianity'.

Can you link me to that bit? That sounds hilarious.

>radical feminists
>liking Frozen

I know you don't know enough to be embarrassed yet, but maybe you'll get there one day.

He has had meetings with god during his psilocybin trips and probably wants to believe it more than he argues fore, because intellectually he cannot fully accept it.

pseudery for pseuds

had Badiou for example said what kermit said in pic related, there would be already an army of mongrels chanting SOKAL PAPER, SOKAL PAPER or some shit like that

Stop worrying about pseud vs patrician and focus on actual discussion, and maybe girls will talk to you.

8ch

i wish we could talk about jung more. but lit doesnt read prophecy

one of the worst ones i've seen. try harder.

Not /pol/. You fuck off.

>Thanks for proving me right, his psychology books don't just disappear because you haven't read them

You didn't post about his books, moron.

I imagine philosophers of old would have a similar approach to deciphering memes

They didn't turn into literature either.

He talks about kek, kekistan, and postmodernism but he doesn't word it like that.
He specifically mentions the kekistani boys and talks about Kek being outside of a category like transgenders because kek is symbolized as male and female.
I don't think his analysis is is ridiculous either. You can be dishonest and misquote him on things, because people aren't going to go through a 3 hour podcast but whatever man.

Amazing refutation. I bet your brain feels massive.

I was seeing his "we only have a description of reality, not reality itself" was phenomologist logic

HAHHAHAHAHHAAHA. This is pure fucking gold!

Behold, boys and girls, Jordan Peterson discusses Veeky Forums memes; from Pepe the frog to the God Kek.

youtube.com/watch?v=t10KhJKDjdg

Skip to 3:10

"Oh, Kek is a mythological country that's ruled by chaos, by the God Ke,k who's a frog as it turns out. . . "

yeah this isnt what he said

That segment is right above you

>Behold, boys and girls, Jordan Peterson discusses Veeky Forums memes; from Pepe the frog to the God Kek.
It became a reddit meme long ago

He's talking about some twitter/youtube meme, it's its own thing now completely separate from /pol/.

Memes are just simpler archetypes.
It's not really a surprise that Jordan Peterson would start talking about metaphysics of Frogs and the mythology of Kek when those are the things that he's heavily interested in, metaphysics, mythology, archetypes.

Posts like make me feel old and out of place here.

I am probably older than most people here, but I wonder if it's me or is this place becoming more like reddit.

>threatening to 'burn their deadwood' if they didn't tell Zim where the postmodernists were hiding

holy shit, did i just have an extraordinary kek

Oh man those pictures are disgusting.
And why do they blur out the trannies faces but not Petersons?

>philosophy is in humanities

...

You dishonest fuck. Quote him correctly or do not quote him at all.

It's not just you man

Trips confirm he is Earth's saviour

Postmodernists don't care about honesty or coherence.

youtube.com/watch?v=c_C3vZM4DZQ

Who shits on him?

Jordan helped me out with my situation...

Maxwell?

>>It's neat stuff to know/apply but the way this guy tosses around the terms as like definitive, palpable concepts and not just abstract explanations really just makes me cringe.

exactly. seeing jungianism as anything but heuristic is stunting

underrated post

>I was seeing his "we only have a description of reality, not reality itself" was phenomologist logic

That sounds more like it was lifted straight out of general semantics, a philosophical area Peterson detests as much as postmodernism. GS was responsible for the famous "Ceci n'est pas une pip" pipe image and the often quoted, "The map is not the territory."

A very basic introductory excerpt from General Semantics:

"While Aristotle wrote that a true definition gives the essence of the thing defined (in Greek to ti ên einai, literally "the what it was to be"), general semantics denies the existence of such an 'essence'.

It is always possible to give a description of empirical facts, but such descriptions remain just that -- descriptions -- which necessarily leave out many aspects of the objective, microscopic, and submicroscopic events they describe.

Language, natural or otherwise (including the language called 'mathematics') can be used to describe the taste of an orange, but one cannot give the taste of the orange using language alone. The content of all knowledge is structure, so that language (in general) and science and mathematics (in particular) can provide people with a structural 'map' of empirical facts, but there can be no 'identity', only structural similarity, between the language (map) and the empirical facts as lived through and observed by people as humans-in-environments (including doctrinal and linguistic environments)."

You can probably see why Peterson hates General Semantics so much.

not if you left it messy until you were a grown manchild

this

this

>Implying gender is binary instead of a fluid spectrum of culturally programmed gender values
>Not respecting this spectrum, clutching two outdated categories to your chest like a infant, and crying when your ideology is shattered and you are told to grow up and call people by harmless pronouns that place them wherever they subjectively feel they belong on the spectrum.
Never go full Peterson

Are you seriously implying that magic fixing shit in a childrens movie is somehow a feminist plot to destroy western civilization?

PFFFHAHAHAHAH

>he thinks Jung was 7 when Freud kicked him out
Jung was probably much older than you when he started his work independent of Freud.
>messy until you were a grown manchild
you reaally haven't read even the basics of Jung have you? valuing one shadow above another kind of ignores the whole point of having them.
come to think of it, it's particularly hilarious that this Peterson fellow seems to be known for thinking individual genders are singular and being a Jungian. everyone is parts both is a basic precept explained in most any work on Jung.

...

>Psychology is a fake science
t. Pic related
>Peterson is a sophist faggot
He is literally arguing against sophism to the point where it becomes repetitive and boring
>Get that non-Veeky Forums dogshit off my board
Do you say the same of all "what do you think of X published author?" threads?