Jordan Peterson pre-requisite reading

Start with the Greeks if you want to understand the philosophers he quotes.

Obviously you have to tackle the bible at some point.

He's not a modern academic philosopher, he's a psychologist that plays at philosophy.

If you don't think he's a pseud listen to him speak about economics,

>the guy hooks me in and i end up completely lost

that's cause when he's not talking about psychology he's talking about spooky nonsense

>t. atheist too stupid to realise his ignorance and unwilling to listen to different ideas.

>Seriously who fucking cares about what some one said on tumblr?

People care when those same people on tumblr are now writing the laws that apply to all of us.

But they aren't. Actual politicians are.

A good understanding of Jung is in order; I suggest Man and His Symbols, for the quickest introduction to Jung. Pick up a decent book that covers the basics of world religions, this is under the assumption that you don't already know about world religions. Have at least a fundamental understanding of philosophy; you should be able to name many philosophers, and explain what they thought. But you only need a rudimentary understanding of philosophy, it's just important to get references, so you aren't completely lost.

You think he realizes Orwell was a staunch socialist?

Not precisely true in Canada, human rights tribunals give guidance on how the law should be interpreted in Canada and they like to cite critical race theory when giving their recommendations.

>imply that i listened to his ideas since i evaluated them
>"unwilling to listen to different ideas"

typical peterson poster

>>t. atheist too stupid to realise his ignorance and unwilling to listen to different ideas.

Christians are just as frustrating with this. You get the least bit esoteric with discussion on scripture and they freak out on you and bail.

iceposters gtfo

>iceposters

What?

Yeah he even says that it was reasonable to have such an opinion back then because of how shitty work life was for people back then

Lol look I dont agree with or like SJWs and the whole sexuality is a spectrum meme but it really isnt a pressing issue and most of the anti-SJW circlejerk is just as bad.

did you even look at that image?

This

I like Peterson but here my main criticisms:

Thinks you MUST have children to live a fulfilling life. Apparently if a 19 year old says they don't want kids they're just too young to know what they want, yet a 19 year old who wants kids is mature enough to make the decision?

Thinks IQ is the biggest indicator of success in all aspects of life (other than physical pursuits). Yes there is strong correlation but he puts too much emphasis on it.

Believes SSRIs are useful to treat depression.

When asked how why he believes in religion he will go on and on about "stories" and how they have a moral and are metaphors but can't answer directly why we should believe they actually happened.

only got popular cause kids on the internet just love btfoing sjews

He's not saying you should believe literal readings of religious texts as historical events, he's saying religious ideas and practices serve an important role in establishing meaning.

So does most literature. There's meaning in Tolstoy's works, you can't turn it into a religion and claim God exists.

Sam Harris asks about this about one hour into their second podcast. As far as I can remember he didnt really have a good answer to this question.

why do we keep having threads about this light-weight faggot?

is he shilling Veeky Forums?

His basic problem is he thinks what's valuable to him is some sort of deep universal truth that applies for everyone.

He enjoys life having kids so kids must be a requisite for everyone to enjoy life.
He likes religion so he has to engage in some round-about justification why it's important for everyone even if they don't believe in it.
He doesn't like gender bending or postmodernism or the naive Marxists he meets on campus so they must be a grand dangerous threat to the foundations of society.

He has trouble thinking outside of his little frame of reference.

I think it's the /neo/pol crowd. The perception is that we're the /leftie/ board and need to be red-pilled by constant JPete and Final Solution threads. Which is even more odd because this is the most Jewish board (at least going by 2012/2013 NYC/London meetups) on the site probably.

I don't understand the hate of JP on Veeky Forums. Yeah he's a meme e-celeb but he isn't a pseud /pol/ meme. He's a professor that is very knowledgable in psychology, philosophy and theology. At least he's interesting enough to get decent discussions going on these topics.

I just finished reading Demons by Dosteovsky (not because Peterson recommends it) and he is literally what Shatov is in the book. At least some parts reminded me of the type of views he has.

...

Thumbnail looks like you highlighted something but it's actually just your phone shadow whoa

>Unironically wishing to end the billion year chain of reproduction that allowed you to exist because you're a faggot.

Children are the only way you can in some sense be immortal.

Might as well kill yourself if you actively choose to not continue your genes.

I used to be this insincere and idiotic until my brother and his wife died in a car accident leaving behind a seven-week old kid behind.

We've evolved past the more anima "continue ur genes" hedonism and learned to understand kinship networks. My life will not be unfulfilled because I choose to take care of the kid I have and not pop out another one for something so selfish as posterity.

>Children are the only way you can in some sense be immortal.
Everyone forgot about Newton because he didn't have kids?

If Newton didn't have kids then WHY did he have a cradle? riddle me this fuccboi

>children are the only way you can have eternal life
Enjoy Hell, pussy

That pic hits home to hard. I am everyone and noone.

example?

Has he ever mentioned jungian synchronicities? I'm curious what would be his comment on it.

I think he did when he was talking about pepe and kek.
It could be in his november(?) update video where he dons the frog hat from his indian friend where he mentions it, or one of his talks with people about kek/pepe metaphysics.

That pic is drawn by Winston Rowntree, he has a lot of enjoyable comics and graphic novels online that you may be interested in if that picture resonated with you.

peterson is babby's first edgy mediocre intellectual

Wow that is a crisp photograph. Phone?

Peterson used to be a goddamn socialist.

>When asked how why he believes in religion he will go on and on about "stories" and how they have a moral and are metaphors but can't answer directly why we should believe they actually happened.

He says that they never happened, although they are based in reality in that they are meta-stories.

I just tried to listen to his 'conversation' with Sam Harris. He starts by mocking French philosophers as unintelligible (fair enough) then spends two hours obfuscating the meaning of the word truth (if science creates the bomb, and the bomb kills us all, then the scientific truth of subatomic science is invalidated as truth must be grounded in moral expediency).

This sounds EXACTLY like the mumbo-jumbo French philosophers. Words don't mean what they mean and nobody knows anything. Profound stuff.

Sorry but if you arent a philosophy student/academic you shouldnt watch his videos. Its not for you

I read Maps of Meaning and it changed my views on religion. It doesn't require anything previous, although you can evaluate it better if you are read in the areas it draws from: psychology, cybernetics, cognitive science, neuroscience, phenomenology, history, religion/mythology, and so on (I think that's fairly exhaustive).

Thanks bud, i meant more that i'm like all of them, somehow no real person, just a combination of everything

His world view is tied to perception. We can look at things differently. Heck, objective reality is a subjective tool and nothing more. Worship it at your own peril.

> then the scientific truth of subatomic science is invalidated as truth
No, it invalidates our models.

Most people are to some degree like all of the goats, but most wouldn't recognize as much. Feeling like you're not a distinct person can be disorienting, but I think it's a good thing. The ego can stand in the way of meaningful introspection; with it out of the way, you can cultivate only those goats which you want to. It's almost like constructing a person where previously there was none.

Thanks man.
Feeling a little more depressed recently, like i don't belong anywhere.
No gaot really has a direct link to me, i feel alienated. Also i blame myself much more for my short comings than others.

>Believes SSRIs are useful to treat depression.
They've helped me a great deal, so go fuck yourself

he is a clinical psychologist anyway, his opinion is more valid than anyone here

>Thinks IQ is the biggest indicator of success in all aspects of life (other than physical pursuits). Yes there is strong correlation but he puts too much emphasis on it.
i'll keep trusting him on that until you link some studies that deny it

Well that's sort of the core of his philosophy though.

Someone can correct me if i'm wrong, because i've never read his stuff and only listened to him here and there, but Peterson's basic idea is that humans are a certain way and that's how they're supposed to be. He uses stuff like jungian archetypes as proof that the same traits show up over and over again across societies so there's something innate making them show up.

This is where his support for religion and anti-poMo stance come from. He doesn't necessarily believe in God but thinks religion is the best guide to how humans are supposed to live. He dislikes PoMo stuff because relativism is the exact opposite of his core belief, which is that humans are born with a sort of "biological imprint" on how to act.

His belief in the universalism of his values isn't really something to be disagreed with, but rather a core axiom that needs to be disproved

Thanks for your shitty little anecdote.

Now, do you understand the concept of regression to the mean? Most people who are depressed recover without ANY help, there's no evidence that SSRIs help any more than literally doing nothing.

All double blind studies with proper control groups have proven that SSRIs are worthless.

Yes, but to be precise, he thinks mythology is a good guide to action, not exactly religion, especially not religion as a modern practice with "scientific" theories, shitty theology, and poor readings of myths (it's shitty because it takes the myths literally instead of reading them with archetypes and primitive cognition in mind).

i love how someone can talk so much out of their ass and be convinced of it

uh lol what sort of anti-GMO sites do you lurk on?

slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/07/ssris-much-more-than-you-wanted-to-know/
>If you are as depressed as the average person who participates in studies of antidepressants, you can expect an antidepressant to have an over-placebo-benefit with an effect size of 0.3 to 0.5. That's the equivalent of a diet pill that gives you an average weight loss of 9 to 14 pounds, or a growth hormone that makes you grow on average 0.8 to 1.4 inches.

Can you give me his email?

>religion is the best guide to how humans are supposed to live
>the universalism of his values isn't really something to be disagreed with, but rather a core axiom that needs to be disproved

His belief religion is the best guide for people to act is the best example of how misguided his universalism is. He sees religion doing good things in his own little life so he thinks it's universally good whilst ignoring the terrible shit it's causing elsewhere.

Pic related, it's a 16 year old boy who was beheaded for braking the sharia law to attend Friday prayers. I bet he was real glad the guy holding the machete had religion to tell them how to act.

I'm this user: And as I said there, he's not saying so much that religions as currently practiced are a good guide to action, but that myths are (this includes biblical stories, which are really just myths like any other).

The Bible contains the same shit, stories of non-believers being slaughtered etc.

1 Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' "

Those who kill in the name of religion can point to bible/quran stories to back them up, just like people who do good things can. And if we're only going to pay attention to only the stories in line with what is considered good today, why does it matter if they are from the bible or not if we can pick and choose?

His position is totally inconsistent, he works back from what he considers good and points to stories that back him up ignoring the rest.

Peterson does not interpret myths in a literal, simplistic manner. He's currently doing a series of talks explaining Biblical stories, so you can know how he'd interpret that stuff when he gets there.

youtube.com/playlist?list=PL22J3VaeABQD_IZs7y60I3lUrrFTzkpat

He doesn't advocate blindly following random shit in there anyways. For example, he thinks of the 10 Commandments as a more primitive form of morality than the kind presented in the Sermon on the Mount.

I'll kill myself after I kill you, faggot

Probably [email protected]
Source: Go to his school. He probably won't reply to you if you send him something out of the blue, most profs (especially busy ones) don't reply to anything except official course business. Even then they'll usually request for you to send it to a TA or visit them in office hours before you email them.

He keeps criticizing behavioral psychologist in his lectures, prefering the approach of phenomenology philosophers. He's pretty well read and a smart guy, but that doesn't mean he's right about everything. He brings interesting ideas to the table though, which mean he's worthy of some attention.

>and they like to cite critical race theory

Haha wow. Get back to tumblr, am I right? Did you think that human rights experts believe in 18th century race theory? Are you anti critical theory?

>Believes SSRIs are useful to treat depression.

So do most practicing psychiatrists.

>and how they have a moral and are metaphors

Peterson is not really worth discussing this much. He's really just a shittier Joseph Campbell. But please don't go on about Jungian myth theory without having read one page of Jung.

But Molyneux wasn't good enough. No they needed Harris to mumble soothing platitudes about how they aren't racist or whatever. Now who's this new nigga? Are we gonna stand for this? I pine for the days when we could all gather around the unifying warmth of an AmazingAtheist video. 144p shot of hot candlewax on his genitals. It's all gotten so complicated with all this Jung and Aristotle. Can't we go back to stalking female game developers?

It isn't a question. This board think Peterson is a pseud (and he is), but half of the posters here don't even know how to engage his arguments

Literature can only derive meaning from another source. It is a signifier, not the signified. What Peterson is talking about is the transcendental-signified that was exorcised by Derrida.

how the fuck is that not relevant to what's happening in society today? If you'd live in the same city than him you'd understand how fucked up the situation and the it needs to be addressed somehow; it's very real,

Tolstoy was deeply religious bro

he has a reading list on his website

that's the same fucking thing, do you realize your brother is the most similar genetic entity to yourself hat exists?
you're still allowing your genes to pass on the next generation, and your feelings to take care of the child are nothing more than the result of evolution too; you have desirable genes that make the possibility of the next generation to mature higher through that feel of nurture so it just makes sense that the next branch on your genetic tree will be able to reproduce and continue the cycle too; it's a small misstep only.

7 Plus

If this came from a Frenchman, you would tons, tons of people chanting SO-KAL PA-PER, SO-KAL PA-PER but since it's LE BASED REKT SJW ANTIPOMO MAN, he's free to spout shit outside his expertise area, most of his fanbase is too uneducated to notice anyway.

Nietzsche, Eliade, Jung, Hillman, Guenon to start with.
Foucault is a no no.

>His basic problem is he thinks what's valuable to him is some sort of deep universal truth that applies for everyone.

Ok, now you have to explain me three things:

1. How is your claim that Peterson applies his personal perspective on valuable things to others weaken his arguments. Even if it was true that he recommends certain things just because he likes them (which I doubt), how does this contribute to show that his positions are not true? The fact that certain philosophical positions are a result of a personal inclination/bias is NOT an argument against them. It does not add anything to the fact that they are true or not.

2. What gave you confirmation that the way he lives his life is the source of his beliefs and not vice versa. Why is it not possible that his life choices - having kids, fighting postmodernism, studying religions - are the result of his beliefs and not the cause of it?

3. How is it not true for everyone that what they consider to be the truth is not universally applied to everyone else. In fact, the point of something being true is to be true in general, otherwise it is just an opinion. Truth is by definition universal. What Peterson does in this context is not different from what everyone else does.

>i'll keep trusting him on that until you link some studies that deny it

>intellectually dishonest
so you have no arguements against what he says

yeah people are aware is this supposed to be a gotta ya moment or something for commie faggots

>Thinks you MUST have children to live a fulfilling life.
this is true if you are not going to have children kill yourself and free up resources for people who will

thats nice how many newton tier people do you have on Veeky Forums not many so have kids and sort yourselves out

> then he starts talking about the balancing our minds on cosmic planes and the soul being turned into an anti-soul due to foucaltian post-pre-archaeomodernist algorithms and I end up completely lost

When he talks shit like that then it's always metaphorical. He isn't actually a spiritualist, at least not in his arguments. Most of his stuff is just rehashed Jung, so read him.

he said on the JRE podcast that he tries to reply to most of his emails but he doesn't have enough time

Your brother shares genes with you dumbass.

Helping your families kids is fairly effective at propagating your own genes. Humanity works at the level of the survival of genes, not the survival of your personal bloodline.

This whole post reads like a smuggie comic.

Every single one of those criticisms is retarded though, you should seriously sort yourself out. By the looks of it you seem to have an opinion based on nothing other than your perceived intellectualism.

Also commies please leave Veeky Forums. :^)

Same lol I was about to sperg at the guy for
>highlighting novels

>Believes SSRIs are useful to treat depression.

There is tons of evidence to support his position you faggot.