I can't help but notice that there's a lot of hate for Jordan Peterson on /lit. Why is that...

Veeky Forums wants him to learn what postmodernism means and to call them SJWs like everyone else since postmodernism is a different thing with a large impact on literature and philosophy and is mostly about being afraid of actual robots not being afraid of /r9k/.

admitted, actual robots might be less likely to kill us than /r9k/ but that still doesn't mean we need to change the definition of postmodernism.

his followers take legitimate correction poorly, and it's likely because most of their exposure to education has been SJWs, bad definitions, and unabashedly nihilistic overarrogant rhetoric, so they think it's okay to use those same processes in argument against those things.

unfortunately for Veeky Forums, all postmodernism readers have weapons grade autism and the endurance of a blind man running at the special olympics when it comes to infinitely regressing notations, cross references, and narrative deceptions, and some of them read books where the footnotes have endnotes, so the likelihood of anons not responding with intricate semantic arguments and responding with the SJW shit Peterson fags want to hear and argue with is so slim it'll be long past September before it dies off Veeky Forums, and even then he'll be showing up as an oblique reference in sci-fi novels about Jungian robot love and death cults well into 2078 .

His adherents are obnoxious. They come to Veeky Forums to shit on things that JP told them are bad, even though they've never read these things. They are filled with resentment against a world which hasn't delivered on it's promises. JP has given them the SJW bogeyman as a scapegoat for this disappointment.

JP fans are no better than SJWs. They're virtue signalling autists that structure their life around a philosophy they barely understand. It's group-think. It's exactly what JP warns against, but somehow his fans don't realize they are becoming what they despise.

TLDR: It'd be really nice if I could make a thread about Baudrillard with out people virtue signalling that they are better than postmodernism.

he's sam harris tier

read anything, ANYTHING, anything else that's touted here (Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, James Joyce, etc,, etc ) and you will see why Peterson is utter shit

what you aren't getting is that he knows a few key terms enough to be intelligent and full "young guys who are trying to get a grasp on their lives" like you instead of actually going out and Being Lit for yourself

Part of it is that youre making this thread and not just posting in the already existing jbp thread.

*fool

He is a spooked bitch, his followers are also spooked holier than thu bitches

Because it's embarrassing that we apparently still "need" people like him to encourage people to use their brains.

Also, and this is most important, he should be discussed exclusively on and not Veeky Forums because everyone talks about his "philosophy", not his books.

Hes a really decent starting point for bitter nihilistic manbabies who genuinely want to better themselves and break their commie conditioning, but good god his philosophy is nothing if not vastly incomplete

I appreciate the irony.

What irks me about Peterson is

>his categorical dismissal of certain political positions right off the bat without honest intellectual exploration

>his black and white thinking

>his capitalisation on this whole skeptic community bullshit

>his pathetic self-help lectures which are thinly veiled indoctrinations for impressionable young men (like yourself)

>his cult of pseuds

You think he helped you, and now you are following his teaching, which are amateurish philosoophical posturing that you will one day recognize as bullshit (and that day you'll revert to your original situation).

To answer your question: he is intellectually dishonest everytime he talks about philosophy, literature and history. His insights are pathetic for anyone with an undergrad education. He is another Harris, a pseudo-intellectual who has concocted a series of statements that pander to a certain audience, and he won't EVER justify them. So you think that people complaining about his anti-pomo nonsense are a new thing? These critics have been there since day 1, and since day 1 he has not even once proved his competence and knowledge.
This is, by the way, the trick of public pseudo-intellectuals: talk about your theories as if you are summarizing them, and never EVER work them out concretely, and never EVER debate with actual academics that may disagree with you. This is also why you see them only debating with youtube talking heads and random protesters/youtube users.

>>his pathetic self-help lectures which are thinly veiled indoctrinations for impressionable young men (like yourself)
This. Whenever I see people calling them "lectures" I immediatly shiver. It immediatly becomes evident to me that they have never either attended an actual uni course or picked a book that was worth reading. You don't even need an education to spot his bullshits, you just have to listen to him and think for a second about what he is saying, and more i portantly, what he is doing and what has he selected for his lectures.
It is absolutely obvious that they are meant to be motivational sessions for students and nothing more.

I wonder how many people studied his youtube videos in the same way I've studied Kant. What a tragedy.

because memes are fucking annoying

Because his main target audience doesn't understand half the shit he says and he either doesn't notice or doesn't care.

He has some interesting stuff to say. But he seems determined to almost exclusively argue with impressionable college students. When engaging in conversations with people who know what the fuck he is talking about and point out issues or weaknesses in his reasoning, he literally dismisses all of that with "it works for me, so it's fine".
So in short, this:

Yes, you are a fool.

Because the amount of quasi intellectual vermin he attracts to Veeky Forums is unparalleled. Almost can't have Pynchon thread without some sperg going DONT YOU KNOW THATS POMO AND THATS LITERALLY COMMULISM AND ITS DEGENERATE CLEAN YOUR ROOM. Fucking annoying.

>But he seems determined to almost exclusively argue with impressionable college students
He's not arguing at a undergraduate level, his cintents are directed to people with absolutely no formal education. If you know the first thing about Nietzsche or Dostoevsky, then Peterson's contents are useless.

It's endlessly annoying but it's a necessary phase. Most of the people who seem most in need of his message of responsibility and structure are young men, and young men tend to become exceedingly obnoxious when they fancy themselves as knowing something that others don't. I think it's analogous to the essential phase of nihilism most youths go through and hopefully find a way to move past

Crossboarders from /leftypol/ that raid this place. Easiest way to deal with them is to respond to their criticisms by asking for them to explain their position. Use pointed questions, they'll collapse pretty easily. They are too stupid to actually defend their positions and use a bunch of empty statements and non arguments.. Here are some examples:

>He is intellectually dishonest everytime he talks about philosophy, literature and history
This guy doesn't actually go on to explain how it is he is intellectually dishonest. He doesn't provide examples either.
>His insights are pathetic for anyone with an undergrad education
Doesn't explain what he means by "pathetic" or offer reasoning as to why it is "pathetic" this is a classic non argument.
>He is another Harris, a pseudo-intellectual who has concocted a series of statements that pander to a certain audience, and he won't EVER justify them.
The "pseudo-intellectual" leftypol tell. Not an argument, and literally not even true considering he's a published academic at the UoT which is ranked number 2 in the world at his own program. Accuses him of pandering but doesn't specify which statements are pandering, and who they are pandering to, or why those statements are factually incorrect.
>So you think that people complaining about his anti-pomo nonsense are a new thing? These critics have been there since day 1, and since day 1 he has not even once proved his competence and knowledge.
Claims he hasn't proved his competence, of course this is an unfalsifiable claim. To him proving his competence can mean basically anything, even just outright advocating Marxism.
>talk about your theories as if you are summarizing them, and never EVER work them out concretely, and never EVER debate with actual academics that may disagree with you. This is also why you see them only debating with youtube talking heads and random protesters/youtube users
Here he makes another baseless claim, coupled with a claim that is actually falsifiable, you can actually try to argue against this. You can example point out the times that Peterson has challenged leftist academics to debates and received no response, and post the videos where he has debated other academics.

All in all a post with a bunch of words, but no real content, just a bunch of non arguments and baseless claims. Also, did you notice how the guy posting this seems to actually accuse Peterson of a lot of the things he does himself? Remember, leftists ALWAYS project.

>implying I'll make an effort to further explain simple points to someone should have understood them by now and is not willing to do so anyway

I hope you suffer a non-lethal bullet wound and recover at a decent pace

Petersonfags of today ar the Harrisonfags of yesterday.

Harrison?

>Further explain
You didn't explain at all. You rattled off a bunch of buzzwords like "intellectually dishonest" and "pseudo intellectual" without actually offering any arguments. You made a grand total of one argument at the very end of your post, but the evidence that supported your claim was false. I never expected you to of course, but you're a fine example of the kind of person that OP should look out for. Of course if he's asking these questions he probably can't critically analyze posts anyway but maybe this will serve as a lesson.

In my experience, most of the leftists on this board fall into this sort of pattern, you just can't be intimidated by their long posts written in an aggressive confident tone. Realize that it's all bluster and you can dismantle their posts without ever actually having to make an argument yourself.

you need to turn on your brain while listening to him talking. you'll probably understand

reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/6n6rhg/why_are_jordan_petersons_philosophical_opinions/

Not an argument.

no other way

Have you ever listened to the episode of the Sam Harris podcast where Jordan Peterson is the guest. It is absolutely unbearable.

Jordan keeps going on and on about his godforsaken archives even when the question does not call for it.

Sam being the edgy fedora lord that he is, asks Jordan a few simple questions about his belief in God, and every time he responds with pure babble and he can't even stay on topic.

When he speaks publicly he often casually asserts various facts and datapoints that no one can source, he uses terms like "postmodernism" in really nebulous and nonstandard ways that make it difficult to pin down what it is he is saying.

I have no clue about his writing but, his ideas seem poorly formulated.

On a personal note I find the way he puts emphasis on his words when speaking really annoying.

archetypes not archives

How does Peterson trigger Veeky Forums so much?

Peterson has said he'll accept any debate request that's offered. You guys, can probably even as a collective, make a video essay against one of his thesis/arguments or suggest your own and he will reply to it if it can be put on Youtube.

Why don't you guys do that if you want to BTFO of him? Wouldn't be hard to organize.

Jordan was making brilliant points in that podcast, albeit not perfectly clearly because he clearly hadn't had much experience entertaining those thoughts outloud. It wasn't really until I learned about IQ and the process by which it was designed that I realized just how useful his notion of pragmatism as a useful tool in epistemology is. He isn't asking what truth is, he's asking what would be most useful to collectively define truth as.

I think most of us have no problem with Peterson, he can do his thing, give his lectures, have his opinions, w/e. I really don't care.

The problem is board culture and his obnoxious fans. You can't make a thread about anyone french or remotely 'post-modern' without it turning into a shit show of virtue signalling trolls inspired by peterson and other frog-twitter celebrities.

What are you on about? His obnoxious fans? Board culture? 99% of the time I see anything JP in Veeky Forums, it is a thread started by OP shitting on him and rest following.

>t it turning into a shit show of virtue signalling trolls inspired by peterson and other frog-twitter celebrities.
and when they didn't do that, they "virtue signaled" about democrats and liberals led by another (modern) thinker or about religion, it's the same phenomenon that has always been about.

but still a reply/debate against Peterson would be nice so these threads could stfu forever.

I'm pretty sure that's never happened.

Sure, the anti-peterson threads are also annoying. For all of /pol/'s faults, I actually like it's rule about 'no low effort/low quality threads'. A thread that is started just to shit on Stephen King or Jordan Peterson or Derrida or Hitler or Chinua Achebe or whoever- these threads aren't increasing the quality of Veeky Forums. They're bait, and generally the OP has never read the author in question.

Maybe you haven't noticed the obnoxious JP fans because they don't often cite JP directly. They'll show up in a thread about some continental philosophy and start spewing nonsense about 'neo-marxism' and SJWs and how all french philosophers are communists and other such nonsense. It clogs up threads, it discourages people from talking about thing they're interested in.

Don't fall for the /pol/ boogeyman, it's Veeky Forums posters making the threads majority of the time. /pol/ has very few Peterson threads in comparison.

You can bitch about cultural marxism and SJWs, it's a real phenomena.

Yeah, this poster is spot on. I've never read Pynchon, but this exact same thing happens in every Baudrillard thread. Amazingly, it never happens in threads about lesser known continental philosophers, since JP doesn't name drop them.

>cultural marxism
that dont exist, get it in your thick skull

>Don't fall for the /pol/ boogeyman, it's Veeky Forums posters making the threads majority of the time. /pol/ has very few Peterson threads in comparison.
Wasn't saying that JP is popular on /pol/, I don't have a good idea of what's popular on /pol/. I just like the spirit of the stickied post about 'no low quality threads'. I don't even know if it's followed or not, but it's a good rule.

>You can bitch about cultural marxism and SJWs, it's a real phenomena.
Yeah, and people can go do that on /pol/ or /soc/ or in Jordan Peterson threads, whatever. Keep it out of my Baudrillard, Lyotard, Debord and Nick Land threads. It's off-topic, it's irrelevant. Further, its always the same refrain. None of the JP fan boys have ever actually read the author's im listing, they have nothing SPECIFIC to say about them. They just have JP's opinion of 'Neo-Marxism' and somehow feel they need to repeat him everywhere they go.

proof?

He's pandering to people who haven't read a lick of the thinkers he talks about. He does a good job of dumbing down their ideas into something retard frogposters can understand. He's good at it, and making bank doing so, and I respect him for that, but he's spammed so often it gets grating.

It describes perfectly the phenomenon happening in the West and among it's own people.

Most of the "JP spam" in Veeky Forums is literally, threads shitting on him (from the past 3 months that I can recall). There is not even spam about him in /pol/ my man. This is a weird construct here.

proof that it exist? protip: charts made my autists are not proof

>lol show me where the last unicorn was killed
>lol thought so fagt

>buhuhuh a statue that no one gives a fuck is a proof of a international conspiracy and not just mob mentality
wew

The common folk are actually terrible. The superior man keeps aloof from them because he knows this instinctually.

deliver any evidence or at least arguments for your claims

>No one gives a fuck about.
Yet, angry mob is there to get it down, spitting on it, taking pride in destroying historical artefact.

>Mob mentality
Oh yes, now we are getting somewhere. It's nationwide, it's funded by based George Soros (he funds and hires protestors at political rallies, he FUNDED people in Charlesville).

you are the one saying that it exist, the burden of proof is on you mongoloid

I didn't say it exists, I asked for arguments for its proclaimed nonexistence

>Most of the "JP spam" in Veeky Forums is literally, threads shitting on him (from the past 3 months that I can recall). There is not even spam about him in /pol/ my man. This is a weird construct here.

I think this might be a matter of perspective. Most JP threads could very well be anti-JP threads. I tend to ignore threads that his picture in the OP.

But within other threads, specifically about Continental Philosophy (or Pynchon as another poster mentioned) are often spammed with JP mimicry.

Now, I don't read the Pynchon threads (never read him), so I wasn't aware that this was a problem in the Pynchon threads. Do you read threads about continental philosophy? There might be a similar problem of perspective.

Regardless, the amount is irrelevant. We could generate some statistics, but it doesn't change the feelings. People are annoyed by JP fans shitting up their threads. JP fans are annoyed by threads attacking him. Neither are helpful.

Like, I don't like JP. I don't like Harry Potter either. But I don't make threads about these things, and ignore threads made about them.

The reason I'm posting in this thread is because OP wants to understand why people dislike JP and where the animosity is coming from.

What more proof do you need than entire nations such as Germoney and France endangering their own peoples and cultures by destroying them (Macron: There is no France culture & State: flooding the country with non-assimiliating, diametrically opposed individuals of same hostile collective)

but what you describe is not hating JP but hating, shitposters.

the thing is, unlike Harry Potter JP is relevant beyond teenage fan culture. in fact, he is quite dangerous

JP is just harry potter for numales, its what pol is to tumblr

>but what you describe is not hating JP but hating, shitposters.
sure. I think there is a lot of false equivalence between JP and his fans.

I'm not trying to justify any of this, just provide a schema for where the emotions come from. I think if the JP posters stopped shitting up other threads, and the anti-jp posters stopped making threads (and shitting up JP threads? I haven't looked in many of them), then we'd all be in a better spot.

Same logic applies to other writers. the anti-Stephen King threads are just baffling to me. Why would anyone hate him enough to shitpost about him? And yet these low quality threads are made on a daily basis.

high quality shitpost. I like the format.

Nick Land is just The Avengers for jews. It's what Donald Trump is to McDonalds.

that is ontological correct, thought

>is there something I'm not getting
He became famous by disrespecting students and, I don't know why,didn't lose his job. Some people loved that so they eat up anything he shits out.

Them being 'self help' doesn't preclude them being lectures. Arguably philosophy SHOULD be about how to most optimally function, and abstracting to a degree where that purpose is lost sight of is frivolous.

critique peterson's reading list.

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
11. Man’s Search for Meaning – Viktor Frankl
12. Modern Man in Search of A Soul – Carl Jung
13. Maps Of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief – Jordan B. Peterson
14. A History of Religious Ideas (Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3) – Mircea Eliade
15. Affective Neuroscience – Jaak Panksepp

>rape of Nanking
Literally didn't happen, so the whole list is compromised by the request to indulge in Western propaganda.

Stop posting about this person

why?

jordanbpeterson.com/2017/03/great-books/

this is bigger

>Them being 'self help' doesn't preclude them being lectures. Arguably philosophy SHOULD be about how to most optimally function, and abstracting to a degree where that purpose is lost sight of is frivolous.

That's certainly an argument that can be made, but its a limited definition. Nothing wrong with being frivolous either!

Not all philosophy is aimed at the individual, or even 'the social body'. Some of it is purely historical, and has no bearing on 'the today'.Philosophy can be purely speculative, about futures that may or may never come to pass. Philosophy can be purely passive observation, with no 'plan' to be implemented. The idea that philosophy must be 'useful' is just a utilitarian demand.

Now, Psychology does have such demands. It has to serve the mental health of the individual. Peterson is a psychologist primarily, so I doesn't surprise me that he'd take a utilitarian view of things.

Here's some nice philosophy from Baudrillard. Nothing you can 'do' with it. It isn't useful

>Don't fall for the /pol/ boogeyman
>cultural marxism is real
too obvious, you can't put both in the same post, spread it around a little
goddammit, have you learned nothing from goebbels

>cultural marxism and SJWs, it's a real phenomena.

>I didn't say it exists

When you need to spend 5 or 6 posts just to prove to them that they actually said something it's clear talking to frogposters is a futile effort.

Except it describes the SJW, PC and anti-White, anti-West movements within West itself perfectly user.

but whatever, it's dishonest and anti-intellectual to flat out deny something without arguments as you do. Hope you don't take pride in it.

>anti-White, anti-West movements
are you even trying to prove you're not a frogkike?

There are more than 1 poster ITT, you fucking dumbshit redditor.

This is better, the whole "I'm a reasonable person, let's debate using arguments" shtick is a good fit for Veeky Forums.
I don't read literature though, only genre fiction so where the brainiacs may feel compelled to engage in an intellectual exchange with you I'm of the belief that it's ultimately useless since folks like you are natural faultlines in tolerance and democracy (the paradox of tolerance - tolerating the intolerant eventually leads to the victory of intolerance, democracy - an antidemocratic group can win democratic elections and realize antidemocratic measures).

>taking seriously some random fag that talks like a puppet frog
yeah, no

>leads to the victory of intolerance.

Soon.

Doesn't matter retard, in that case you inserted yourself into an existing conversation and want to treat your point of insertion as the beginning when it is obviously a continuation of the previous convo - which began with the claim I quoted.

Besides, you prove positive, not negative, claims.

Yes, it matters, as none the less you kept putting words into peoples mouths and that is rude.
>Besides, you prove positive, not negative, claims.

Doesn't work with God though :v)

Wow, 5-10% muslim population tops (besides Bulgaria which already has a noted muslim population), what a true invasion

Indeed that is a huge invasion. It has already created no go zones for natives in their country.

>Doesn't work with God though :v)
What? Yes it does, believers have to prove God exists?

its not direct hate. trans people hate him out of the bat because they actually need his philosophy the most and he represents their father that shames them for cutting their dicks off. mostly though its disgust from people who see how retarded pop culture education is and having him be heralded as a savior is evident of how far gone people are.

Assuming you mean Harris, that's a big upgrade, desu.

Actually, youtube celebs are pop culture.

exactly my point, he is on youtube. first time the meme people ever identified with an old philosopher guy who they usually ignore at uni.

>quite annoying and loud

How do you register volume over a messageboard?

>his categorical dismissal of certain political positions
postmodern social justice commits itself to ideologies and assertions without any intellectual explorations in the first place - not to mention outright refuses to have them through moralistic branding of "isms"
>We need more women in tech
>Why?
>you're asking why? you sexist!
is an example of the usual dialogue

>black and white thinking
examine his ideas better

>his capitalisation on this whole skeptic community bullshit
he didn't expect himself to blow up, he originally was trying to make a minor point and when he saw his academic position becoming threatened he decided to attract attention to secure himself.

>his pathetic self-help lectures which are thinly veiled indoctrinations
not every opinion you disagree with is an indoctrination

>cult of pseuds
name one well known intellectual figure without a cult of pseuds

like peterson himself you're building straw men and knocking them down

he's criticizing teenagers on deviantart and tumblr but admitting that would make him look like a fool (a college professor fighting against a blue haired teen on the internet lol) so he's cloaking that in a bigger movement (postmodernism) which he also doesn't know shit about

I don't hate Peterson I just don't think he's doing much beyond stating the obvious, with bias, in most cases.

There's definitely something to the father issues thing though. I was just watching Guardians of the Galaxy 2 out of boredom and it happens to be about an absent father. You know what else is popular? Rick & Morty. You know what was popular before that? Adventure Time. What are the father figures like in these?

xplain how he doesn't understand post modernism

no

so you have no argument ?