Jordan Peterson - Neo-classic views in 5 mins or less

Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average.
(2 votes)
Results 51 to 75 of 568

  1. Post
    #51
    bradc wrote:
    He specifically talks about the illusion of the father figure, and that the individual ultimately needs to answer most burning questions themselves. Rather than appealing to a father figure for approval, or answers.
    and yet he beleives in god.

  2. Post
    #52
    Bloody wrote:
    if you only believe that his fanbase comprises of misogynist alt rights then yeah , i do feel sad for you.
    I never said that. But the abuse she received online because of that interview was abhorrent (which Peterson called out).

    Tormenta wrote:
    I felt for Cathy Newman, she was trying to get a straight answer out of him and just got jibber jabber. These intellectuals operate on another plain, it's useless trying to engage them
    Odd, I felt for him, he'd try to answer her point and she'd rephrase it as "So what I'm hearing is that you hate women?" I get that she's meant to be confrontational in this role, but I would've preferred it if she'd let him finish a point without putting words in his mouth.

  3. Post
    #53
    Edward Diego wrote:
    Odd, I felt for him, he'd try to answer her point and she'd rephrase it as "So what I'm hearing is that you hate women?" I get that she's meant to be confrontational in this role, but I would've preferred it if she'd let him finish a point without putting words in his mouth.
    It seemed she was looking to get him to say something really controversial - essentially trap him into painting himself and a very negative way. That was her goal, and you could see it in her presentation/body language she was treating him like prey. Like a cop trying to squeeze out a confession using word tricks.

  4. Post
    #54
    bradc wrote:
    His main drive is more to do with personal responsibility/empowerment, and effort. He is a psychologist, after all.
    And funny enough that is the content I've enjoyed most.

    I switch off with the strange metaphysics and his own personal perception of truth... which oddly is extremely flexible (just like the post-modernists he rags on).
    Last edited by silvereye; 30th January 2018 at 11:10 am.

  5. Post
    #55
    Vulcan wrote:
    It seemed she was looking to get him to say something really controversial - essentially trap him into painting himself and a very negative way. That was her goal, and you could see it in her presentation/body language she was treating him like prey. Like a cop trying to squeeze out a confession using word tricks.
    Pretty much. Sadly this seems to be the way conversations are going nowadays. It's about automatically chanting an agenda and anyone who disagrees is taken down with dishonest straw-manning.

    When will people learn that the most effective mode of discussion is steel manning your opponents position. Help them out so you can get at least get an honest understanding of their view before criticising it. If the goal is to change someones mind then that is clearly a better strategy.

    I guess she's pandering to the outrage audience which is a cheaper and easier audience to engage.
    Last edited by silvereye; 30th January 2018 at 11:29 am.

  6. Post
    #56
    Unsettled wrote:
    and yet he beleives in god.
    I haven't heard him refer much to a literal God, and especially one that's telling you what to do.

    Good contribution.

  7. Post
    #57
    what is really amusing and serious is the followup to the interview. From claiming online harassment from the forums to the point they hired security for Newman even tho according to this

    https://hequal.wordpress.com/2018/01...mpression=true

    Cathy Newman followers aiming way more abuse than JP followers. And then you have stuff like this

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/...-a8170031.html

    which again is odd considering most of the abuse was from Newman readers. And you have Cathy Newman followers saying she should have punched him or slapped him https://tweetsave.com/__r_adair__/st...24903952957440 but even that was kinda tame ..and yet they immediately jumped in saying she was threatened, a victim etc etc

    than her own editor had to delete his own tweets about her brave and JP being aggressive and the head of communications went for the contempt calling JP "lobster guy "and then deleting it suddenly when he realized he could not stand by his own tweets. And now they are trying to brush this aside as the victim position is drawing more neutrals to the video and they realize how bad Newman was.

    quite a few other british press is jumping in boots and all into Newman tho and the whole polarizing left vs right argument is in full swing which is kinda sad as JPs message is being drowned out by this whole strawman noise

  8. Post
    #58
    Yeah I'm not taking a Wordpress blog as evidence dude, sorry.

  9. Post
    #59
    bradc wrote:
    I haven't heard him refer much to a literal God, and especially one that's telling you what to do.

    Good contribution.
    No he's very quiet about any specifics in his beleifs, apart from saying there is a god.

  10. Post
    #60
    I don't even see him being specific about that. So if you've a point, it's lost.


  11. Post
    #62
    Again, what was your point? It doesn't look like he advocates or believes in the sort of typified, Judeo-Christian god that ascribes or measures morality. In fact it looks like he's trying to avoid promotion of God, to avoid people putting him in a box. Like you tried to do.

  12. Post
    #63
    I don't know if he has a literal belief in God, or if he is perhaps looking to more of an intellectual conservatism which stresses the importance of continuity in culture. Its clear he rejects the idea that religion is solely a patriarchal structure meant to oppress women and justify racism and imperialism, and instead sees it as an important component of Western democratic traditions. You're right that he certainly doesn't proselytize for a religion, but I think its more likely than not that he is himself a religious person.

    Taking any subsequent backlash from either side out of the equation, I think Newman did make herself look like a bit of a fool in that interview. An interviewer's job is to coax answers out of their subject and to ask tough questions, but her interview style was completely over the top. She played right into his hands, really. The thing Peterson rails against the most is the exact line of rhetoric that Newman employed, and it only served to make her look like a grotesque caricature of the worst aspects of the position she was ostensibly defending. Anyone watching Peterson's videos can see that, despite what his critics might say, he is an intelligent, articulate, and serious person. Instead of treating him as such and actually drilling down into what he was saying, Newman treated him like he was some lightweight hack. It might have worked in interviewing the normal shrill crowd on either side of the debate, but in this case it was inappropriate and did not serve her well.

  13. Post
    #64
    azarat - completely agree with your assessment there.

  14. Post
    #65
    bradc wrote:
    Again, what was your point? It doesn't look like he advocates or believes in the sort of typified, Judeo-Christian god that ascribes or measures morality. In fact it looks like he's trying to avoid promotion of God, to avoid people putting him in a box. Like you tried to do.
    Yeah nasty of me isn't it, lol, hes a clinical psychologist, putting people in boxes, is what he does.

  15. Post
    #66
    It's fine when it's remotely accurate.

    Fantastic contributions.

  16. Post
    #67
    glad you approve, means a lot.

  17. Post
    #68
    In absence of an emotionally intelligent conversation at least we can reinforce your ego.

  18. Post
    #69
    Edward Diego wrote:
    Odd, I felt for him, he'd try to answer her point and she'd rephrase it as "So what I'm hearing is that you hate women?" I get that she's meant to be confrontational in this role, but I would've preferred it if she'd let him finish a point without putting words in his mouth.
    I think she was trying to summarise his intellectual arguments into ones more easily appreciated by the average viewer.

  19. Post
    #70
    bradc wrote:
    In absence of an emotionally intelligent conversation at least we can reinforce your ego.
    it's not needed, I have the metaphysical framework of moralistic ideals based on christianity to lean on.

  20. Post
    #71
    Like a rat hitting a button to get a pellet...

  21. Post
    #72
    Tormenta wrote:
    I think she was trying to summarise his intellectual arguments into ones more easily appreciated by the average viewer.
    That's not at all what she was doing, or if it is then she should seriously reconsider her interviewing style. I don't think it serves anyone to assume that an audience is ignorant or can't make sense of what was, in my opinion, a well-articulated argument. In his public lectures and interviews, Peterson does not employ technical jargon and takes care to make sure that he is precise and easy to understand. If anything, an interviewer should be striving for clarity and not intentionally obfuscating an argument with specious and hyperbolic summaries.

    Plus its a half hour interview on BBC 4. BBC 4's remit says:

    "BBC Four's primary role is to reflect a range of UK and international arts, music and culture. It should provide an ambitious range of innovative, high quality programming that is intellectually and culturally enriching, taking an expert and in-depth approach to a wide range of subjects."

    So, again, is her interviewing style appropriate? I think not.

  22. Post
    #73
    In the latest Joe Rogan podcast, Peterson says she was nice enough before the interview, then totally turned on him once the cameras went live.


  23. Post
    #74
    fascinating

  24. Post
    #75
    bradc wrote:
    In the latest Joe Rogan podcast, Peterson says she was nice enough before the interview, then totally turned on him once the cameras went live.
    He said the same thing a few posts back (I think the vids unsettled linked too).