Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

[Voyageur]

I admit I haven't read Altemeyer's book about authoritarian followers, so maybe someone who has could chime in here.

You can get a pdf copy from the U of Manitoba - actually maybe not anymore, but just checked and it is here at Researchgate.net

As for JP, he runs in very intense circles and on certain issues he may or may not be able to adjust his declination (no network), however folks have seen him do this.

Kinda feel like she's the primary vector for the hyperdimensional negative influence that's apparently being exerted upon JP.

In one way, she may have been the reason JP survived, while she also helped herself and many others (dad included) navigate the world of psychoactive drugs and better diets. So will give her her dues. I'm sure there is certain public enamoring aspects that accompanies her world, so with time she may find her way.
.

 

[Laura]

That's why I mentioned a "solid" network.

Also, I may be fooling myself (and I probably am to some extent) but I tend to think that, even without the Cs, we would have been unlikely to make any of the gross errors that others have made and continue to make. At least, I don't think we would have persisted in any errors. Remember, the thing that brought people to the Cs was, generally speaking, an innate sense that there is something very wrong with this world, not just some aspects of it, but ALL of it. That kind of inbuilt awareness is well-suited to not falling for (or getting lost in) any particular modern-era ideology.

I dunno. I know that my own thinking, on its own, led me into quite a number of errors. The early sessions show that pretty clearly. The thing is, I KNEW I couldn't figure it out on my own because it was all just too darn complex. So I think, possibly, taking that humble stance and ASKING sincerely is what led to the Cs and some clarity.

Really, just go back in your mind and remember how baffling it all was and how truly impossible it would be to get past the blockages of both social/familial programming AND an extraordinarily complicated series of things designed to conceal the truth or make it look so insane that nothing could come out of trying to figure it out even with a network.

 

[Bluegazer]

I'm fascinated with the cognitive dissonance between his criticism of the woke ideology and his defense of western cultural heritage that gave rise to it.

I don't know about this. Did 'Western cultural heritage' give rise to woke ideology? I'm not so sure.

I don't think it is in the generalization of "western civilization".

South America with countries with populations where culturally we have a Hispanic heritage is also of western origin.

The difference is religious/philosophical. What should be noted is that the western civilization that JP defends is the Anglo-Saxon vision. From what little I know of history, the classical liberal ideas are born from that vision (the same in France with Jean-Baptiste Say). Thomas Maltus and related to them, even Charles Darwin, with his theory of evolution. Here is where we see that in the liberal ideas is the germ of the dominant materialism. As far as religion is concerned, there is the element that arises from Protestantism and Anglicanism. When we see in the passage of time the development of these ideas, that is when it unravels in the woke movement, postmodernism and that everything is subjective. That is the contradiction that JP cannot see.

And well, how is South America different? Most, if not almost all (except the evangelical minorities) are of catholic tradition, and the feeling of helping others even with political and economical differences is deeply rooted in the communities (I didn't really want to mention it here, but I think it is necessary, just look at the dynamics that is happening with the World Cup, and the ideological clash between the south american countries and the woke agenda -just look at twitter-)

My 2 Cents.

 

[Voyageur]

Really, just go back in your mind and remember how baffling it all was and how truly impossible it would be to get past the blockages of both social/familial programming AND an extraordinarily complicated series of things designed to conceal the truth or make it look so insane that nothing could come out of trying to figure it out even with a network.

Yes, complicated.

Spend many years with a literal map and compass, setting the declination and checking on it once in awhile so would not get too off bearing. Steady as you go, however in what you are saying, even today its like trying to fine tune to a declination that keeps shifting when thinking one might have the right of it. That is rather frustrating, scary and humbling.

In 2009/7/16 you said:

...(L) I guess the hope is how we meet the wave, and what our world is like after. When you have a wave, a tsunami, you can do like that guy did in the movie Krakatoa. Ya know, throw out your anchor and head into it, tie yourself to the wheel, and grin a lot! That was so cool! So, is that basically what we're talking about here? The wave is gonna happen and how we meet it depends on what we do to prepare and that we can...

A: Yes. And there are a lot of the "elite" who will go under. As we once said it will be a "triple bad day" for Rockefeller and his ilk.

That may be it, preparing and anchoring down with a grin.

 

[Joe]

I dunno. I know that my own thinking, on its own, led me into quite a number of errors. The early sessions show that pretty clearly. The thing is, I KNEW I couldn't figure it out on my own because it was all just too darn complex. So I think, possibly, taking that humble stance and ASKING sincerely is what led to the Cs and some clarity.

Really, just go back in your mind and remember how baffling it all was and how truly impossible it would be to get past the blockages of both social/familial programming AND an extraordinarily complicated series of things designed to conceal the truth or make it look so insane that nothing could come out of trying to figure it out even with a network.

Yeah, it' obviously hard to know what would have happened, I think most of us would have just ended up disaffected citizens, kind of lost, not knowing what the hell is going on, very disturbed by it all, not knowing what to do, and maybe pulled, to one extent or another, into one of the 'ideologies' that are offered today. Or maybe just staying disaffected and throwing it all out.

A good reference, perhaps, is looking at the people out there today who have a bit of a clue, like those who spotted the covid manipulation, or the Trump deception, or the Russia angle. There are quite a few of them.

I think however, that even those people will be left bewildered when things start to fall apart in earnest, and if there are weird 'signs and wonders' in the environment, all bets will be off for most. It's at that point that the really important philosophical/cosmological understanding provided by the Cs will, potentially, be a life saver.

 

[SlipNet]

Peterson's cosying up to Netanyahu is a really bad look for the man. His association with Daily Wire is too. Politics and ponerology are not strong attributes for him either. As stated by others here, he's a bit of an authoritarian follower isn't he? And to be honest his mistakes here are a bit inevitable for me. I don't think he's gonna get enlightened any time soon. For instance, why isn't he arranging an interview with Ilan Pappe to get info from the other side of the subject? So frustrating to see, but as has also been noted above he doesn't have the benefit of a robust feedback mechanism, a solid network.

Actually though, he's had some decent feedback on Twitter recently. He called one person with a pro-Palestinian perspective an "evil rat". The bloke is losing his grip, and emotionally he's been a bit fragile for ages now. TBH, he's not a figure I follow that closely, so although I appreciate his psychological insights, his political gaffes let him down big time.

On the subject of overcoming socio-familial programming, well I kinda resonate with what has been said here also. I've done plenty of reading since my awakening post 9-11, and can see the lies pretty plainly these days. However until I found Sott and the forum in 2004-06 I was still pretty ignorant in most aspects of life. But just figuring out all those things that don't quite add up was the big factor for soul growth, and for that the forum has been a godsend. it's not so difficult to understand this world now, but it still hurts to see the injustice, and to glimpse the insidious nature of power and influence.

 

[Laura]

A good reference, perhaps, is looking at the people out there today who have a bit of a clue, like those who spotted the covid manipulation, or the Trump deception, or the Russia angle. There are quite a few of them.

I think however, that even those people will be left bewildered when things start to fall apart in earnest, and if there are weird 'signs and wonders' in the environment, all bets will be off for most. It's at that point that the really important philosophical/cosmological understanding provided by the Cs will, potentially, be a life saver.

Yes. And that is why it is so sad that so many can only go so far and then are blocked. It really is like the Parable of the Sower.

“Listen! Behold, a sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seed fell along the path, and the birds came and devoured it. Other seed fell on rocky ground, where it did not have much soil, and immediately it sprang up, since it had no depth of soil. And when the sun rose, it was scorched, and since it had no root, it withered away. Other seed fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it, and it yielded no grain. And other seeds fell into good soil and produced grain, growing up and increasing and yielding thirtyfold and sixtyfold and a hundredfold.” And he said, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” — Mark 4:3–9

10 And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 And he said to them, “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, 12 so that

“‘they may indeed see but not perceive,
and may indeed hear but not understand,
lest they should turn and be forgiven.’”

13 And he said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables? 14 The sower sows the word. 15 And these are the ones along the path, where the word is sown: when they hear, Satan immediately comes and takes away the word that is sown in them. 16 And these are the ones sown on rocky ground: the ones who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with joy. 17 And they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while; then, when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately they fall away.[a] 18 And others are the ones sown among thorns. They are those who hear the word, 19 but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. 20 But those that were sown on the good soil are the ones who hear the word and accept it and bear fruit, thirtyfold and sixtyfold and a hundredfold.” Mark 4:10-20

Those who don't have the hyperdimensional understanding/knowledge/awareness just don't seem to have a real chance.

Indeed, it is shattering to some to achieve that (as it was in my own case), but it's ultimately worth it.

 

[Ryan]

I think however, that even those people will be left bewildered when things start to fall apart in earnest, and if there are weird 'signs and wonders' in the environment, all bets will be off for most. It's at that point that the really important philosophical/cosmological understanding provided by the Cs will, potentially, be a life saver.

Yeah, I think the C's are just as much a participant in our network as any of us 3D "flesh and blood" types, although their knowledge and unique perspective makes them 'pivotal' members of the network, in a certain sense. Us being willing to give them an equal voice in consensus decision making is likely what makes it worth their 'time' to help us out!

The first is *the* main problem with JP's network: None of the participants in his network have the kind of unique perspective that can identify the really big problems we are all facing, or if they can, propose solutions that 'fit' the context of these problems in exact ways. Some of the participants in his network may even be working at cross-purposes to the rest of them, which is probably their second-biggest problem. In terms of the "blind men and the elephant" story, the main precondition for success is that at least one of them knows what an elephant is. Without that, even if they can approximate a "model" of an elephant based on sharing experience and feedback honestly, they still won't have much more information than that; the "whole" will be little more than the "sum of its parts", so to speak. Whereas if at least one of them does know, then they can use that opportunity of the 'group experiencing an elephant' to effectively share their knowledge of what the elephant is.

Without the actual 'elephant' though, it would just be a blind man telling a story of a fantastical creature that wouldn't have much direct relevance to the group's experience. Although, in the case of the Cs, it's more like one of the men actually being able to see and describe the nature, attributes, actions etc of the elephant to the others in precise detail, so that the elephant remains calm despite their fondling.

I guess we can only continue to maintain the 'elephant-identifying lighthouse' and hope that JP and his network will remain open enough to acknowledging their own nescience in a way that will enable objective information from outside to continue to be assimilated and integrated, moving them collectively toward a greater and greater polarity of Service To Others, as we aim to do ourselves.

I now finish this post before my use of this analogy becomes completely ridiculous.

 

[Joe]

Just had a conversation with my wife and we're seeing him become somewhat unhinged in his defense of everything western civilization supposedly stands for.

This is, I think, an example of people (of which there are many) who have no real conception of the transcendent, other than some vague theoretical ideas. It's a function of the materialism that dominates in the world today. Peterson, like many others, sees this world as 'our only hope', and as such he fights for the set of values and social structures that he believes are the 'best of bad lot'. If things pan out as we are told, then all such people will lose those foundations, and be forced to radically reshape their conception of what is and what can be. Hopefully it won't be too stressful.

 

[Joe]

Those who don't have the hyperdimensional understanding/knowledge/awareness just don't seem to have a real chance.

Yep, although based on what the Cs have said in a session (somewhere back in the mists of time), some will be able to make it through such a trial, although they will be like "lost lambs beying in the knight" (that's a quote, I think, from the session).

 

[RedFox]

Yep, although based on what the Cs have said in a session (somewhere back in the mists of time), some will be able to make it through such a trial, although they will be like "lost lambs beying in the knight" (that's a quote, I think, from the session).

Here it is:

I was sure thinking about that 6 November 1994 session recently and how the predictions have actually played out. Another one that I think about often is this:

11 July 1998

Q: (T) Is the approach of the realm border, is the change in
the magnetic field... does the reversal of the poles and
the broadening of the magnetic field, is that going to be
before the realm border crossing?
A: Intersection.
Q: (L) So, in practical terms, it may be that, what we
observe will be a series of cataclysms, disasters, the
'cleansing' of the Earth...
A: This has already begun.
Q: (L) So, it is already happening. It will accelerate and
intensify. And what we will observe is all of these
things happening. And, as a result of the intersecting of
these various energies, this realm border, this reality
change, this change in the magnetics because of the
interaction with the comet cluster, the sun's companion,
the realm border, and so forth, it will then have an
effect upon the people left on the planet who will then
change in some way as a result of this, is that correct?
A: Your Bible says that there will be many wonders on the
Earth and in the Heavens in the last days.
Q: (L) Okay, this period of time after this realm border, is
this period a preliminary to the total end of the Earth
and all life on it?
A: No.
Q: (L) After all of this change, those people who continue to
be on the Earth will be in a new environment, and it will
be almost like having to grow gills to live in water, and
some people will have the ability and some will not. Is
that it? It will be more gradual in terms of individual
physical structures and psychic structures?
A: No.
Q: (L) It will be a sudden, total change? Like flipping a
switch and everything is going to be different?
A: The key is awareness.
Q: (L) Are there going to be people...
A: Yes.
Q: (L) You didn't let me finish asking my question!
A: But we knew it!
Q: (L) In other words, there are going to be people who are
simply not going to see what is happening?
A: Lost lambs beying in the knight.
Q: (T) They are not getting it. They are lost sheep. That
really describes it. (L) Why did you give that funny
twist on the spelling?
A: Why not?
Q: (T) Now, didn't they tell us that when the transition
occurs, those who are moving to 4th density will move, and
those who aren't, won't. And that it is not a physical
move. That we really would not notice a difference when
we shifted because it's all right here. And, those who
are going to shift will shift right where they stand, and
they won't really notice a change, and the perception is
not the issue, it is the awareness of the shift, because
we will still be physical... am I heading anywhere in the
right direction?
A: Variability of physicality.
Q: (L) Does this have anything to do with changing of DNA via
awareness?
A: Both ways.

That "lost lambs beying in the knight" really struck me then, and especially more recently as I consider the meaning of the word "bey".

“Bey” a Turkish title for chieftain, traditionally applied to the leaders or rulers of various sized areas in the Ottoman Empire. The feminine equivalent title was Begum. The regions or provinces where "beys" ruled or which they administered were called beylik, roughly meaning "khanate", "emirate" or "principality" in the first case and "province" or "governorate" in the second (the equivalent of duchy in other parts of Europe). Today, the word is still used formally as a social title for men. It follows the name and is used generally with first names and not with last names.

It seems to me that the liberals are just such lost lambs and much of their activity is pretty much like "baying at the moon". And the connection to Muslims is also interesting since they are being invited or "beyed in" by the liberals, so to say. I have no idea why the Cs spelled "night" as "knight", though.

 

[Ben]

What comes to mind is the 'circle of the confusion of tongues', as Gurdjieff also called the exoteric circle of humanity. They cannot all pull in the same direction or form a coherent network because they cannot speak the same language. It's where we all start out until we learn enough, I suppose.

The first is *the* main problem with JP's network: None of the participants in his network have the kind of unique perspective that can identify the really big problems we are all facing, or if they can, propose solutions that 'fit' the context of these problems in exact ways. Some of the participants in his network may even be working at cross-purposes to the rest of them, which is probably their second-biggest problem. In terms of the "blind men and the elephant" story, the main precondition for success is that at least one of them knows what an elephant is. Without that, even if they can approximate a "model" of an elephant based on sharing experience and feedback honestly, they still won't have much more information than that; the "whole" will be little more than the "sum of its parts", so to speak. Whereas if at least one of them does know, then they can use that opportunity of the 'group experiencing an elephant' to effectively share their knowledge of what the elephant is.

Without the actual 'elephant' though, it would just be a blind man telling a story of a fantastical creature that wouldn't have much direct relevance to the group's experience. Although, in the case of the Cs, it's more like one of the men actually being able to see and describe the nature, attributes, actions etc of the elephant to the others in precise detail, so that the elephant remains calm despite their fondling.

 

[Laura]

Well, I introduced Jordan to Ark and he was quite taken with him, especially his earlier talks. He has been watching/listening to them while in the hyperbaric chamber. Anyway, Ark kinda got caught up and was listening to some more recent talks. He said that Peterson talked for 30 minutes and didn't say a single thing of substance. And then, after listening to that talk (I think it was one of his most recent), Ark said his whole thinking process was skewed for most of the rest of the day.

That's the danger of listening to people who are deteriorating. Stuff they say can anchor in your brain and start to drive YOUR frequency if you are not fully aware of what is going on.

 

[Oxajil]

Anyway, Ark kinda got caught up and was listening to some more recent talks. He said that Peterson talked for 30 minutes and didn't say a single thing of substance.

I had the same experience. I didn't share the following before, because I wasn't sure if it was just me.

I went to one of his talks with my brother and some others back in September. The description was that it was going to be about his latest book (Beyond order: 12 more rules for life). Sadly, his book wasn't mentioned at all. It started with his wife coming onto stage and talking about their new plans and products (such as their plan for a university and their son's new writing app and their daughter's product or plan) for about 30 minutes. Then, Peterson started talking and mentioned how he found a nice church where he'll be finishing his next book and said a few other things, after which he went straight into Q&A. Shouldn't Q&A take place after a lecture? No mention of his latest book (12 more rules for life) which the talk was said to be about? A bit strange, but okay.

His wife then started to read the questions which the audience entered into an app out loud. He answered a simple question such as "what is the biggest/most important lesson of your life" in such a drawn-out way where you really had to have ultra super focus to get an idea of where he was going. He was all over the place.

The whole talk ('Q&A') was basically him trying to work out ideas for his next book, which were unrelated to the questions that were asked (he covered three questions in total if I remember correctly). To me it seemed he had a conversation with himself rather than with the audience. Something about helicopter parenting, Eve representing narcissistic compassion and how we can see that in the world. All in all, it was a pretty chaotic talk, and not really worth the money if I'm completely honest. A lot of talking, but nothing really of substance. I kind of feel like he's losing touch with his audience and losing order over his thoughts or something!

Also, at the end, he said that he doesn't see us as potential customers or along those lines and hoped we don't feel that way, but with all the advertising they did it did kind of feel that way. I do appreciate his earlier talks (on psychology and his motivational speeches) and find them inspiring. I went to an earlier talk by him a long time ago and it was much different than this latest one. FWIW.

 

[SlipNet]

@Oxajil, I've had very testy conversations with people online over my criticisms of Peterson recently. Always I get slandered as a hater, when I find much of value in his earlier work, it's really strange to behold. On Politics, he is hopeless, he simply doesn't know the truth about Israel and his recent vids on the subject appear to my eyes to be a craven, embarrassing debacle. And he's so buoyed by his faithful audience that he's been coming out on the offensive on twitter recently, clearly exposing his political ignorance on the roots of Zionism. He needs to talk with Gilad Atzmon, Ilan Pappe and Laurent Guyenot and then maybe I'll feel he's making some progress; until that happens, he is, like Laura said above, a man who is in the slow process of deterioration.