What does Veeky Forums think about jordan b peterson?

what does Veeky Forums think about jordan b peterson?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=FaKl4yO8HAA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

dunno, never heard of him

Literally who?

I think he was a typical Christian who was introduced to Nietzsche and had his whole worldview torn to shreds so as a defence mechanism his mind was open to believing in anything that would revive his faith in Christianity and that happened to be literally redefining the definition of truth through pragmatism.

Pretentious meme man
Wannabe apologeticist
One-note
Oh, and not related to literature so saged

I haven't read anything of his and only know about him vaguely because of the controversy he started, so I'll take something off his wikipedia page and ask something of people who have read him:

>I wrote a book, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, on the topic, which explores how ideologies hijack language and belief. As a result of my studies, I have come to believe that Marxism is a murderous ideology. I believe its practitioners in modern universities should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to promote such vicious, untenable and anti-human ideas, and for indoctrinating their students with these beliefs. I am therefore not going to mouth Marxist words. That would make me a puppet of the radical left, and that is not going to happen. Period.

Does he posit, in this Maps of Meaning book, that there exists or can exist a language devoid of ideological influence? In rejecting the language of one ideology, you must also subscribe to the language of another. There is literally nothing wrong with re-framing language to suit your ideological needs. Everyone does it, whether they acknowledge it or not. He himself ends up employing the same tactic in favor of his own ideology. There is no escaping it. All you can do is understand it.

I personally love his lectures and videos; they're so interesting to me. I find myself agreeing with a lot of what he believes, except for his idea of "truth" when he talked with Sam Harris.

He can get a little too "new age" with his interpretations of religious texts on some occasions though.

Ah yes, the ideology of the oppressive king, the, and, but.

Has he named the jew yet?

An eminently limited bourgeois thinker.

he'd be better if he learnt what postmodernism means, but i think he's afraid of calling SJWs by the name SJW too often for fear of being dismissed as a memester. ironically this has made him a bigger memester, and easier to attack for the same reasons that people attack SJWs.

you can't really expect Veeky Forums to laugh at SJWs for getting the meaning of postmodernism wrong or misunderstanding continental philosophy, and then to not laugh at a guy who sounds like Kermit doing the same thing.

most of the people who want to shill him are super easy to trigger like SJWs, and easier to troll than Veeky Forums and it's pretty easy to troll Veeky Forums.

it does make me sad for Canada that he's actually a professor, because usually when we get someone so easy to pick apart from youtube presented to us, it's not their job to research but just some pretentious cunt with a 2.2 BA and a webcam broadcasting idiocy from their bedroom. it's like if someone told me that the betterthanfood retard had a professorship in Canada. i get that same sinking feeling.

I watched one of his lectures on Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche and found it quite shallow, which is fine as part of an introductory psychology course but didn't make me want to explore his work further.

I watched a lecture of his where he talked about the chaos of the ungodly way of life many people subscribe to and he mentioned that Raskolnikov committed the murder because he needed money and everything is permitted when there is no God. He couldn't have missed the point more. Holy shit this man claimed to have read Nietzsche. I think he should stick to basic life advice on how to unNEET oneself.

His philosophy falls apart at the center. The whole "sort yourself out" and "clean your room thing" is meaningless. Jung knew that knowing yourself and becoming your potential took extreme struggle and courage, but Peterson replaces this with platitudes that serve as no real guidance. Still, I have respect for the man, but he should be an intro to Jung at best.

He has a 45 video on neechee, it's fairly in depth. all off of one paragraph too.

He's a clinical psychologist, so the whole "sort yourself out" thing is likely more first-aid for wrecked people than an infallible compass bearing

Here is his top ten books list for you assholes to tear apart and call shallow

1. Brave New World – Aldous Huxley
2. 1984 – George Orwell
3. Road To Wigan Pier – George Orwell
4. Crime And Punishment – Fyodor Dostoevsky
5. Demons – Fyodor Dostoevsky
6. Beyond Good And Evil – Friedrich Nietzsche
7. Ordinary Men – Christopher Browning
8. The Painted Bird – Jerzy Kosinski
9. The Rape of Nanking – Iris Chang
10. Gulag Archipelago (Vol. 1, Vol. 2, & Vol. 3) – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Peterson is a fantastic speaker, his writing is very clunky in Maps of Meaning though, and he's always getting sidetracked in his lectures.

Being able to speak extemporaneously works against him, as at the end of a class he has a dozen slides that he never gets to.

As far as his politics go, he's got highly organized and intelligent arguments, and he's the best antidote to male cuckoldry that I've ever seen, in that he encourages people to rise up and accept suffering willingly.

>Brave New World and 1984 are his favourite books
>thinks Frozen isn't art because it's 'political propaganda'

>daily reminder Jung hated Jungians
You know, if he were an avid Jungian, like you find avid Reichians, he'd be a lot more fun. Instead of "sort yourself out" he could be saying things like "when did you last built a fort?", and instead of "clean your room" he could be saying things like "have you thought about totem poles?"

He really should stick away from philosophy, because it's the largest source of second hand embarrassment for him and it's not his discipline. If he spent more time on Jung he could move past being just an intro source, but he's not going to be another Campbell or invent a new Star Wars because he's distracted by youtube fame.

boujee

how???

>"of course he won't slay the dragon, he is the sacrifice! Regardless, the dragon is also his father and damn, you don't want to open that can of worm."
>"but please, don't inject your ideology in your speeches!"

It's funny how Peterson does not trust any sort of analysis of society (especially if Marxist), while being fine with indoctrinating your students on how you think the world literally and mythologically works.
He's willing to go as far as telling you how to manage your perception of truth (the most structural advice one can give you), how society should work, what is wrong and what is right, what is moral and what is not. How is this not indoctrination?

I think his ideas are bullshit, and he's a pseudo intellectual. He's one of those people who impress others because they're familiar with a lot of philosophers and books. There's differences in intelligence, obviously. I think Jordan Peterson is intelligent in his linguistic ability, and probably his recall, but I don't think his ideas are impressive at all. He is a Christian, and his ideas about the dominance hierarchy and "the archetypal hero" just sound like /pol/ red pill nonsense. I enjoyed reading Sam Harris deconstruct their debate, he showed how big of a charlatan Peterson is.

Probably the worst meme that Veeky Forums has obsessed over by far, and that's counting Zizek, DFW and Stirner.

Are you jewish?

yeah, at least the girl who didn't read postmodernism and wanted to talk about it showed her feet. he's somewhere lower on the scale than that, and she was so low as to be off the scale.

i think it's the opposite, i think his pessimist view of humanity is more deeply rooted than just reading n, he doesn't think people can fix things though their own agency and organizational ability, it's a miracle we haven't nuked ourselves yet etc, but he has a family and is emotionally invested in the future so he desperately clings to any hope he can find and religion is the most likely vessel though which he thinks it could happen.

>but he has a family and is emotionally invested in the future so he desperately clings to any hope he can find and religion is the most likely vessel though which he thinks it could happen.

He has a family and is emotionally invested in the future, so he decided to become a public charlatan for 50k$/mo. He is costantly talking about inserting yourself in power hierarchies: he clearly knows that without those money her daughter may end up in the streets, especially considering how society is evolving.

I am atheist.

>inserting yourself in power hierarchies
in a literary or literal sense

I was inquiring about your race. So are you jewish?

Canada is a non-entity. It barely exists.

Wants to salvage the human experience at the expense of reality. Tries to go 'life over truth' in a Nietzschean way but somehow thinks Christianity and Jung are the way to do it. Moderately interesting hybrid ideology.

I think it's a futile effort though, and desu I consider myself increasingly on the side of truth than on the side of humanity.

i already felt sad for it for being known for Atwood.

didn't he get called out for praising Solzhenitsyn after providing this definition?

He renounced Christianity before encountering Nietzsche.

When Peterson refers to ideology, he means those ways of viewing the world which only acknowledge one part of an archetype.

Nihilism is the most repugnant meme on this planet.

what wrong with his daughter?

Op is a faggot

>thinking Peterson pockets that money

youtube.com/watch?v=FaKl4yO8HAA

Only to anthropocentric snowflakes.

>he still thinks he can exclude mind from world

What makes you think so?

I like him. Waking up people to c*ltural m*rxism.

are you joking? he basically dances around the fact that he keeps all the money. hes using the money to invest in his capital to become even richer.

Think what?

True. Canada day here consisted of Japanese drumming, a turban fitting station, various ethnic food vendors, belly dancing etc.. Its really just a big Agora for circle-jerking around the credo of the globalized modern era.

>saint peterson

At no point does he pocket the money. The guy's already got a three figure income anyway.

That I think I can exclude 'mind from the world'.

>he is a Christian

no dear

Well it's just a hypothesis about your implicitly expressed views, though you might not even be aware of it.

My real point is that I don't see how a world picture can be complete while excluding the subjective, where meaning lies. And denying that meaning is part of subjectivity is even harder to defend.

hes pocketing the money as investments

Gonna need some supporting evidence there.

The confusion is often about which flavour of nihilism people imagine they're discussing.

I see now problem with someone saying 'x means something to me', it's the externalising of meaning that i take issue with.

if you watch the money he is blatantly talking about purchasing capital for his business you are so dumb user

Peterson enlightened me about my oedipal mother.

if you watch the video*

The problem is that people like nihilists and existentialists take that fact (that meaning is not external) and run with it like it has some huge significance. It doesn't entail "The Universe is meaningless," because that statement itself has no semantic meaning.

Him saying he's putting money into his "business", whatever that's supposed to mean, which he will allegedly pocket the money from, seems very odd with him saying that he doesn't want to spend the money on himself.

That slave morality

I can see how it still has huge significance to those from a religious background. People who grow up irreligious are basically existential nihilists by default.

>I can see how it still has huge significance to those from a religious background.

Well, yes

>People who grow up irreligious are basically existential nihilists by default.

It depends on how you define those terms. I'm not religious in a traditional sense but I do not identify with those philosophies.

im just saying, if i was swindling people out of their money for a "good cause" thats the first thing i would do, to use the money for my own personal gain and make it "appear" like as if im doing something selfless. its jewy tactics. And whats stopping me from lying about the return my investments give back? No one knows, only me. They will see the "proof" about my Samaritan investments, but only i know whats really going on.

and then i will pocket the money.

Given what I know about Peterson, I would take him at his word.

>he's already got a three figure income anyway
oh user. MY SWEET SUMMER CHILD!

you don't know him, not even personally. and im taking him at his word too, he's blatantly telling you he is investing his money in causes you are interested in, for his own personal gain - which he plans on. hes mocking you.

I just love the thinking proles.
>monkey mad
>monkey smash

and then he will pocket the money, be aware his investments return can double from his initial investment in just two years. I have a feeling that money won't be going anywhere but his bank account.

Not an argument.

I'm pretty sure that he's not blatantly saying that and I'm pretty sure you are contradicting yourself in claiming to have access to his character while not knowing him personally while I don't have access to his character because I don't know him personally.

k we will see his net worth in 2 years. if he is worth more than 2 million, which exceeds a 100k a month patreon, then we can start asking where the money is coming from.

and im gonna be laughing my ass off when people find out he has been investing in wallstreet.

You're wrong. He impresses others because his ideas are feudalistic. The 20th century bloodbath spoiled the minds of its intellectuals. Peterson's depiction of the Marxist post-modern uprising remains the most rational argument against that ideology's effectiveness. His ideas don't "seem" impressive because they're the same ones presented between the lines of religious texts, the lines you don't wish to follow. Simply because he observes christian principles, not a bad idea btw, doesn't exclude him from being correct. Long story short, clean your room.

Ok then, bucko

I think this is a troll post.

Yeah, we all know that proles and plebs outsource their thinking.

its not because i believe what the "troll" says. its all rhetoric i normally think about in my daily life, because im not retarded. if you think any of the things jordan says are profound, its because you never took a second from your fucking life to actually ponder something that actually matters. thats why i dont find anything he says interesting, its all things ive made observations about, done research, or went out to experience my findings. its all about finding answers, and instead of you finding your own answers, you let him find them for you. and you like it. No one will listen to me if i start talking about what he talks about. Because of our age differences, people would rather listen to someone old about wisdom than someone young. but if i cite him as my source, them people will start agreeing with me. and yes ive done experiments to test this exact event out.

>its all rhetoric i normally think about in my daily life
>posting on an eritrean knitting forum
yeah, let me doubt that

but it is i talk about this kind of stuff to my brother all the time, and he just tells me to shut up but when someone with credibility says it its 100%

and the ideas themselves arent that profound, the fact you think his ideas are profound tells you the state about yourself and other youth

Sounds like you're simplifying him to "seeking meaning", which every teen has done.

He was raised Christian, then became an atheist, then read Nietzsche, then read Jung, then became Christian again. But not a hokus pokus Christian.

but look where you are at now, you still are in shock and awe at the things jordan peterson says. just because you were once a teen doesnt mean you learned something.

His interactions with Kek make me think that there is a whole lot of magical thinking and beliefs that he has, but is too smart to show.
I mean, his audience is full of brainwashed atheists who have religion and faith as trigger words.

are you perchance suggesting that atheism isn't the only intellectually defensible position in regards to god in so far as god is defined in the traditional way?

he does you can literally see it on the sunshine list

OH MY SWEET SUMMMER CHILD WHEN WILL YOU REALIZE THAT PEOPLE WILL INHERENTLY NEVER BE HAPPY NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY MAKE, THEREFORE CITING THAT HE MAKES 6 FIGURES IS NOTHING BECAUSE HE CAN EASILY GROW TO WANT EVEN MORE AND YOU ARE NAIVE FOR THINKING OTHERWISE.

harder.