Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

[mkrnhr]

On the subject of "Social Sciences" vs. Science, here is a Norwegian documentary on Gender differences. The end of the video shows how these Social Science theoretists react to scientific studies that contradict their beliefs:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp0tg8

 

[Voyageur]

On the subject of "Social Sciences" vs. Science, here is a Norwegian documentary on Gender differences. The end of the video shows how these Social Science theoretists react to scientific studies that contradict their beliefs:

Good one, and the last word in this was "don't forget about biology" - it was interesting, the social scientists ability to dismiss anything contrary to their beliefs; the one person interviewed was lost for words when confronted, or so it appeared.

 

[luc]

New interview with Jordan Peterson:

https://youtu.be/HcEJr8h_yGM

I found it to be the most interesting so far. Geez, that man is brilliant, and he's on a roll!

He even talks about psychopathy, though more in the sense that we all have a 'predator'/psychopath within our own souls. This is of course true, but he still seems to miss the fact that there are literally psychopaths/humans with a purely predatory core. So his conclusions seem based on the assumption that there are only 'normal' people, though they are corruptible and have a predatory element in them that can take over if they don't integrate their shadow. Not sure though. Maybe he's thinking more along the lines of Hannah Arendt, that evil springs forth from "not thinking". He doesn't really explain his view on psychopathy in terms of nature vs. nurture and so on.

He clearly is familiar with psychopathy though and talks about Robert Hare, and what I found very interesting was his analysis of psychopathy in terms of personality traits. He says there are two styles of psychopathy: those low in trait agreeableness and those high in trait agreeableness. The former (low agreeableness) type is the classic, aggressive "male" psychopath. However, the latter (high agreeableness) is the "real" psychopath: the parasitic psychopath [the example from Martha Stout about the guy who was "married to my house and pool" comes to mind; they don't want to work at all and prey on people in order to live a parasitic lifestyle].

He seems to have a little blind spot in his "west is best" attitude, but as I said earlier here, I kind of get his point - he wants to rescue the good aspects of Western civilization (like the nobility of the individual/hero archetype), which he rightly feels are threatened today, especially by the left.

Further notes:

This ties in with "the dark side of compassion": the archetypical mother who protects her offspring; very compassionate, but woe to those perceived as a threat to the group that is enclosed in her compassion. This is exploited particularly by leftist ideologies targeting people high in agreeableness. "The mother bear will be deadly if you threaten her offspring." So once you threaten the group, you become fair game. [We can clearly observe this today with the hatred towards Trump supporters]

The nobility of the individual: we live in "value hierarchies", which give our lives meaning. The problem is that there are different such hierarchies (i.e. groups), so there's conflict. So we can either succumb to other hierarchies, or fight. How to solve this? It can be remedied by the individual's soul, the hero archetype. [We might say we do this by actualizing our higher being/higher centers; authoritarian followers/OPs can live and be productive within value hierarchies, but they can't actualize their higher centers. This job must be carried out by souled individuals, which takes a lot of work/suffering, because they are the most screwed in this world. JP thinks that this idea of noble individuality is at the core of Western civilization, but about to be lost.]

[Finding meaning and the predator's mind]: Notice when you are doing something that gives you meaning, and when you are doing something that doesn't. Start doing more of the former, and less of the latter. But: people are not very skilled thinking about their doubts. Often, it's just the little devil in your head that's whispering the same stupid doubts in your ear that it whispers to everyone else. These whispers carry a negative emotional punch, so we tend to believe it. But just because it's negative doesn't mean it's true!

Same with speech: Sometimes you say things that make you feel strong and together, other times you say things that make you feel weak and falling apart. Stop saying the former things and start saying more of the latter, do that for 5 years and see what happens! -> When you are uttering things that make you feel like standing on firm ground, this might be the real you speaking

Not everything in you is you. "Whom am I outside the influences of my past." -> Buddhist idea of detaching yourself from the voices in your head is extraordinary useful. But can be taken to an extreme, as in detaching yourself from the suffering of others - not good.

People need to become conscious of what as of yet was hidden behind mythological symbols; in other words, we need to clearly and concretely formulate things that people already know "somehow", i.e. that is hidden in the collective unconscious.

Free will is a funny thing: our legal system and common sense accepts that there are degrees of free will. For example, we are not mad at someone bumping us around in a bus if we notice that the person has down syndrome. Same with children or the elderly. We accept that they are less responsible. We can only play the cards we are dealt with, but we can't decide which cards we get.

"Consciousness is a mystery that faces the mystery of potential and transforms it into actuality. We do that with every choice we make. Our choices determine the destiny of the world. By making a choice, you alter the structure of reality."

 

[Alana]

On the subject of "Social Sciences" vs. Science, here is a Norwegian documentary on Gender differences. The end of the video shows how these Social Science theoretists react to scientific studies that contradict their beliefs:

Good one, and the last word in this was "don't forget about biology" - it was interesting, the social scientists ability to dismiss anything contrary to their beliefs; the one person interviewed was lost for words when confronted, or so it appeared.

Yes, it was very interesting to watch the gender studies people just refusing to take into consideration, at all, any scientific finding, that might possibly hint towards a biological base in the differences that the two genders display in their choice of interests. They basically said: "Nope, I am not going to even consider this as a possibility, or allow it to enter my worldview, period". They seemed so divorced from reality that I felt embarrassed for them

I was also reading this topic on SOTT today: Are gender feminists and transgender activists ignoring science?

And thank you for the new Peterson interview luc, I'll try to watch it soon.

 

[Voyageur]

New interview with Jordan Peterson:
[...]
"Consciousness is a mystery that faces the mystery of potential and transforms it into actuality. We do that with every choice we make. Our choices determine the destiny of the world. By making a choice, you alter the structure of reality."

Watched and listen to this today, and you are right, he was on a roll with this interesting discussion. The part at the end above; played that back twice - "our choices determine the destiny of the world" and further on the part of our "structural reality" he said something like – you get nailed if you alter the structure of reality, it snaps back and takes you out.

It was also very interesting listening to Jordan deciphering some of the biblical stories, and he seems to have thought deeply about these stories -Eden, Cain and Able etcetera. I can appreciate his parsing open these stories in the language that he used, and could not help to think of the further language that has been applied here to the same stories, although they may be similar in some aspects. It is quite a leap of understandings via the work done by Laura (and others) on the often shadowed histories of our world, of religion and science, of how the C's have advised or left open thinking - delving into biblical meanings, including prying open that perplexing crack into our hyperdimentional realities.

Noticed his other references that you well outlined above with your observations, Luc - think you well grabbed the underpinnings of what he was discussing. So thanks for posting this video talk along with his talking points.

 

[Jefferson]

On the subject of "Social Sciences" vs. Science, here is a Norwegian documentary on Gender differences. The end of the video shows how these Social Science theoretists react to scientific studies that contradict their beliefs:

I watched the Norwegian documentary as well - Peterson tweeted it the other day.

The investigative journalist seemed to openly approach the subject, mind open, only asking questions, digging into the research data.

It is interesting how those Norwegian sociological 'academics' said the questions of biology or differences are "not of interest", almost as if it is something immoral to even ask! This is anti-science - it was chilling to see those 4-5 Norwegian researchers in the liberal paradigm discounting the biological research results outright. That dude saying that 'sexual orientation is just one's choice' in a cold, flat, almost contemptuous way gave me the chills. Someone gave lip service to 'biology having some effect' but it was not genuine. The Norwegian psychologist/researcher said flatly that research grants are not given to those pursuing the biological/evolutionary research.

 

[Arwenn]

New interview with Jordan Peterson:
[...]
"Consciousness is a mystery that faces the mystery of potential and transforms it into actuality. We do that with every choice we make. Our choices determine the destiny of the world. By making a choice, you alter the structure of reality."

Thanks for posting this, I am looking forward to watching this video. I find Jordan Peterson one of the most educated, articulate and corageous people in Academia, a truly rare find these days. I have watched some of his other interviews and lectures, and I find myself wanting to relisten to them, because there are so many pearlsof truth and wisdom in them.

Here are some of the interviews (there are plenty on YouTube)
Joe Rogan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE
Dave Rubin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n8zn-R10qM
GadSaad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bpim_n0r0z0

Dr. Peterson gave this amazing speech last year when he won the Canadian Values Award from POGG Canada.

https://youtu.be/pcNInM6Gf5k

And this one on Post Modernism vs Modernism is also worth a watch.

https://youtu.be/DAncrmE6YV0

He has a book coming out in the next year or so called The 12 Most Valuable Things Everyone Should Know: A Psychologist's Guide to Life in the Modern World I believe it is based on the Quora post below

[quote author=Jordan Peterson]
What are the most valuable things everyone should know?

Tell the truth.
Do not do things that you hate.
Act so that you can tell the truth about how you act.
Pursue what is meaningful, not what is expedient.
If you have to choose, be the one who does things, instead of the one who is seen to do things.
Pay attention.
Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you need to know. Listen to them hard enough so that they will share it with you.
Plan and work diligently to maintain the romance in your relationships.
Be careful who you share good news with.
Be careful who you share bad news with.
Make at least one thing better every single place you go.
Imagine who you could be, and then aim single-mindedly at that.
Do not allow yourself to become arrogant or resentful.
Try to make one room in your house as beautiful as possible.
Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today.
Work as hard as you possibly can on at least one thing and see what happens.
If old memories still make you cry, write them down carefully and completely.
Maintain your connections with people.
Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or artistic achievement.
Treat yourself as if you were someone that you are responsible for helping.
Ask someone to do you a small favour, so that he or she can ask you to do one in the future.
Make friends with people who want the best for you.
Do not try to rescue someone who does not want to be rescued, and be very careful about rescuing someone who does.
Nothing well done is insignificant.
Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world.
Dress like the person you want to be.
Be precise in your speech.
Stand up straight with your shoulders back.
Don't avoid something frightening if it stands in your way -- and don't do unnecessarily dangerous things.
Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them.
Do not transform your wife into a maid.
Do not hide unwanted things in the fog.
Notice that opportunity lurks where responsibility has been abdicated.
Read something written by someone great.
Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street.
Do not bother children when they are skateboarding.
Don't let bullies get away with it.
Write a letter to the government if you see something that needs fixing -- and propose a solution.
Remember that what you do not yet know is more important than what you already know.
Be grateful in spite of your suffering.


It might be of interest for people who like this answer to know that these rules figure prominently in Gregg Hurwitz's latest novel, Orphan X, Gregg Hurwitz - New York Times Bestselling Author and will also be expanded into book form by Dr Peterson and Penguin/Random house in January or February of 2017.[/quote]
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-valuable-things-everyone-should-know

 

[Scottie]

"Consciousness is a mystery that faces the mystery of potential and transforms it into actuality. We do that with every choice we make. Our choices determine the destiny of the world. By making a choice, you alter the structure of reality."

Watched and listen to this today, and you are right, he was on a roll with this interesting discussion. The part at the end above; played that back twice - "our choices determine the destiny of the world" and further on the part of our "structural reality" he said something like – you get nailed if you alter the structure of reality, it snaps back and takes you out.

Yeah, those parts were particularly interesting.

The other one that caught my attention was his idea that the "crazy liberals" are basically trying to enforce "matriarchal totalitarianism". In short, some of these lefties see minorities as their children that they must protect at all costs - even against all logic and reason - and thus they lash out as if they are a mother protecting her infant. I actually wondered if that was the plan with Hillary from the get go.

It's funny, because everyone in many countries is saying, "Yeah, we need a woman for president!" as if that will solve everything, but then they seem to choose the worst ones - as with men.

Fascinating interview overall!!

 

[luc]

It's funny, because everyone in many countries is saying, "Yeah, we need a woman for president!" as if that will solve everything, but then they seem to choose the worst ones - as with men.

Indeed, and as Peterson points out, we know quite well how 'male totalitarianism' looks like, but we have no clue how 'female totalitarianism' plays out. Well, we're being educated right now I guess...


I stumbled across this interview with Peterson and his daughter Mikhaila by chance, really interesting. Turns out they both battled depression and various autoimmune issues with... tada: pretty much the diet recommended here on the forum!

https://youtu.be/A6g_geYeL4U


Quite an impressive family apparently, and I guess it makes sense - the kind of deep research of the human condition Peterson devoted his life to probably wouldn't be possible without some kind of strong and steadfast support (and a great deal of suffering), osit.

 

[Timótheos]

A short 5 minute video JP recently uploaded in response to the impending anti-Islamophobia motion M103 being tabled in the Canadian parliament next week...

https://youtu.be/1VwpwP_fIqY

 

[Joe]

A short 5 minute video JP recently uploaded in response to the impending anti-Islamophobia motion M103 being tabled in the Canadian parliament next week...

Not sure that was a good way to deliver the message, and I think it's a little more complicated than he makes out.

We're all being gaslighted. There's a big game of NIGYSOB going on here.

20 years of a 'war on terror' that required the complete demonization of Muslims as terrorists by Western governments and media, not to mention many Western government-facilitated "terror attacks" and the creation and funding of ISIS, and yet when Western people respond negatively to Muslims, they are told they are being racist and fascist and risk being put in prison for "Islamophobia".

Everyone should refuse to play this sadistic game, and instead call it out for what it is.

 

[Scottie]

A short 5 minute video JP recently uploaded in response to the impending anti-Islamophobia motion M103 being tabled in the Canadian parliament next week...

https://youtu.be/1VwpwP_fIqY

We're all being gaslighted. There's a big game of NIGYSOB going on here.

20 years of a 'war on terror' that required the complete demonization of Muslims as terrorists by Western governments and media, not to mention many Western government-facilitated "terror attacks" and the creation and funding of ISIS, and yet when Western people respond negatively to Muslims, they are told they are being racist and fascist and risk being put in prison for "Islamophobia".

Everyone should refuse to play this sadistic game, and instead call it out for what it is.

Dang! Good point.

That one's goin' on my FB page!

 

[Laura]

On the subject of "Social Sciences" vs. Science, here is a Norwegian documentary on Gender differences. The end of the video shows how these Social Science theoretists react to scientific studies that contradict their beliefs:

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp0tg8

Thant ending was just "amazing" as the evolutionary biologist noted. A stark exposition of the thinking of those infected with the Liberal virus!

 

[mkrnhr]

A short 5 minute video JP recently uploaded in response to the impending anti-Islamophobia motion M103 being tabled in the Canadian parliament next week...

It is somehow astonishing to see JP doing such an amateurish appeal to emotion instead of tackling the issue through reason. It might be that the M103 contains disputable aspects but he doesn't explain what. Addressing "all Muslims", in the manner of "each and every Muslim" as if it were a single and homogeneous entity is at the least an intellectual laziness.

I agree that Islam has to be criticized and transformed because it's a dangerous ideology (basically, it's a polemist outgrowth of Jewish messianism with a proselytist dimension). However, the aggressive attitude of Western elites towards Muslim population (whom majority is Muslim only by name) and towards Western population by importing Islamic terrorism and orchestrating a "clash of civilization" isn't discussed anywhere.

A nice old book (1977) that sheds some light on why is incomprehensible to Western intellectuals IMHO is "Hagarism, the making of the Islamic World" by Patricia Crone and Michael Cook. There a few others but this one is clear and well written.

When a critic of an ideology cannot be formulated, it quickly devolves into the alienation of entire populations by association. The leftists in the West are doing just that, grouping entire populations into broad labels with no distinction between criminal and normal components within.

 

[Cosmos]

A short 5 minute video JP recently uploaded in response to the impending anti-Islamophobia motion M103 being tabled in the Canadian parliament next week...

Not sure that was a good way to deliver the message, and I think it's a little more complicated than he makes out.

We're all being gaslighted. There's a big game of NIGYSOB going on here.

20 years of a 'war on terror' that required the complete demonization of Muslims as terrorists by Western governments and media, not to mention many Western government-facilitated "terror attacks" and the creation and funding of ISIS, and yet when Western people respond negatively to Muslims, they are told they are being racist and fascist and risk being put in prison for "Islamophobia".

Everyone should refuse to play this sadistic game, and instead call it out for what it is.

A short 5 minute video JP recently uploaded in response to the impending anti-Islamophobia motion M103 being tabled in the Canadian parliament next week...

It is somehow astonishing to see JP doing such an amateurish appeal to emotion instead of tackling the issue through reason. It might be that the M103 contains disputable aspects but he doesn't explain what. Addressing "all Muslims", in the manner of "each and every Muslim" as if it were a single and homogeneous entity is at the least an intellectual laziness.

[...]

Yes. I think part of it probably comes down to the idea the Jordan has a good grasp of totalitarianism in many countries and eras , except in his own sphere there in the americas. I think a big piece of the puzzle might be missing, aka. what catalyzed the islamophobia: 9/11. And all it has created from then on. But even before that, for centuries the west in general (and especially the US) has committed unbelievable atrocities that inflicted tremendous suffering globally. I think taking it all together, what the west has done is at least similarly disastrous as all the evils he talks about in regards to the soviet union, china under mao etc.

A big piece seems to be missing there, or so it seems. Might be a sacred cow there.