Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

Thanks for the video, in the first part Peterson really well analyzed Newman's "persona" and the whole situation. However, the second part was more interesting, the interviewer really did a good job making five short points from his Biblical lectures and subsequently, make Peterson explain them in a concise way. It really gives hope that many young people are listening to him, although it is not him as a person rather than the idea which outlives the historical personality, making them reflect which makes them more self-conscious, basically transforming them individually and due to that the others around them, the whole society. If I remember correctly, it reminds of the claim that some (ten?) critical percent of people is enough to change the society. Did Gurdjieff, or Ouspensky, said that?
 
Possibility of Being said:
Absolutely brilliant and highly educative Peterson's very serious analysis of the interview by Cathy Newman of UK's Channel 4 News the followed nasty Guardian's article and ongoing 'investigation'. First 30+ minutes of almost 2hs long conversation with GeenStijl:
Click to expand...

The entire conversation is worth listening. I haven't caught up with his entire Biblical Series, and here he offers some ideas from those talks. It seems also from what he says that he is aware of where he is at currently, and the challenges he is facing. It reminds me of this article I read recently about him, which concludes with:

Peterson seems more than a little overwhelmed by what’s happened to him over the past year. He estimates that he’s received 25,000 emails in recent months from fans who want to express what he means to them. At the same time, health problems that have long plagued him, including bouts of debilitating fatigue, have resurfaced. Plus there’s the ever-present anxiety: He is speaking so often now, and what he says is so closely scrutinized by supporters and detractors alike, that he fears one inartfully phrased remark could be used to pull him down from his new perch. "Surfing is the right metaphor," he says. "It’s like I’m on a very large wave, and that’s, you know, really something, but mostly you drown."
Click to expand...

I found the whole article a good introduction to Peterson and his work:
What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?
 
marek760 said:
Possibility of Being said:
Absolutely brilliant and highly educative Peterson's very serious analysis of the interview by Cathy Newman of UK's Channel 4 News the followed nasty Guardian's article and ongoing 'investigation'. First 30+ minutes of almost 2hs long conversation with GeenStijl:

Click to expand...

Thank you for the video, yes, the entire interview is amazing
Click to expand...

I agree, I just finished watching. It also shows clearly how a proper interview should be conducted! Thank you, Possibility of Being.
 
This would have to be one of the best JBP interviews I have come across. His analysis of the Cathy Newman saga was absolutely brilliant and on point. I felt for him, he looked particularly despondent about the whole thing- especially seeing as the media have spun this whole situation into Newman being the victim (so typical).

One thing I thought interesting was that he remarked how cordial she was prior to the cameras rolling, after which she turned into a totally ideologically possessed person with a hidden agenda. He also mentioned that he wants to see if she will have another interview, but this time a genuine conversation. Sadly, I just don't think she has the capacity to set aside her ideology. Would be interesting though.

Timon Diaz (the interviewer) is exceptional in unpacking some of the deeper aspects of Peterson's philosophy- in sharp contrast to the Cathy Newman fracas, it is evident that Diaz has researched JBP, watched his videos and distilled into 5 points what he thinks JBP is trying to get across. The whole interview is brilliant, one that I will watch again a few times. Thanks for posting it :)
 
Arwenn said:
This would have to be one of the best JBP interviews I have come across. His analysis of the Cathy Newman saga was absolutely brilliant and on point. I felt for him, he looked particularly despondent about the whole thing- especially seeing as the media have spun this whole situation into Newman being the victim (so typical). [snip]
Click to expand...
I agree. I thought it was interesting when Diaz pressed JPB on why he doesn't consider his victory against Cathy Newman as a healthy one, and that's when Peterson seemed the most despondent. It's around the 29 minute mark. You can tell that JPB doesn't really want to talk about it, but feels it's necessary:
Peterson: It's not a healthy victory.

Diaz: You said it's actually a sign of the times, where things could go really wrong for us really soon

Peterson: Yeah we're playing with fire.

Diaz: What do you mean by this, can you elaborate?

Peterson: Well things go wrong in cultures all the time. The polarization increases until people start to act it out. I mean **deep sigh** I'll give you an example. You know I always pay attention to what happens in the back of my mind, to the bottom of my mind, let's say, and what I learned from Carl Jung, for example, one thing was that if you watch what happens in your imagination while you're speaking and while things are happening to you is you'll see little dream-like fragments happening all the time. Not in words - they're really more like brief dreams. Jung thought we were dreaming all the time, even when we were awake. Today I was reviewing maybe 10 or 11 of these newspaper articles that had played this twisted game, accused me of sicking my internet trolls on this poor hapless journalist and I thought, this is the dark part of me, the shadow part thought, 'If I wanted to sic my internet trolls on Channel 4 there would be nothing but broken glass and riots.' And then there's a little part of me that thinks, 'Wouldn't that be fun?' And that's where we're at. I'm a reasonable person, a very reasonable person -

Diaz: You have these thoughts in the back of your mind.

Peterson: Yes and I pay attention to them because I know that they're part of the collective unconscious, right they're the shadow part. And when there's part of me thinking well wouldn't that be perfectly God damn delightful, then there are people who not just think this sometimes but who think it all the time, and they're just waiting for this to be the right response.
Click to expand...
 
Hesper said:
I agree. I thought it was interesting when Diaz pressed JPB on why he doesn't consider his victory against Cathy Newman as a healthy one, and that's when Peterson seemed the most despondent. It's around the 29 minute mark. You can tell that JPB doesn't really want to talk about it, but feels it's necessary:
[...]
Peterson: Well things go wrong in cultures all the time. The polarization increases until people start to act it out. I mean **deep sigh** I'll give you an example. You know I always pay attention to what happens in the back of my mind, to the bottom of my mind, let's say, and what I learned from Carl Jung, for example, one thing was that if you watch what happens in your imagination while you're speaking and while things are happening to you is you'll see little dream-like fragments happening all the time. Not in words - they're really more like brief dreams. Jung thought we were dreaming all the time, even when we were awake. Today I was reviewing maybe 10 or 11 of these newspaper articles that had played this twisted game, accused me of sicking my internet trolls on this poor hapless journalist and I thought, this is the dark part of me, the shadow part thought, 'If I wanted to sic my internet trolls on Channel 4 there would be nothing but broken glass and riots.' And then there's a little part of me that thinks, 'Wouldn't that be fun?' And that's where we're at. I'm a reasonable person, a very reasonable person -

Diaz: You have these thoughts in the back of your mind.

Peterson: Yes and I pay attention to them because I know that they're part of the collective unconscious, right they're the shadow part. And when there's part of me thinking well wouldn't that be perfectly God damn delightful, then there are people who not just think this sometimes but who think it all the time, and they're just waiting for this to be the right response.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

This is the part that made me post it on my FB page.

The fact is, there is this undercurrent of anger and hostility at what's going on in the world. People usually have 1 of 2 general responses to it:

1. Well, it's a small minority, so let's not make a big deal about it. IOW, sweep it under the rug.

2. We can get all fired up about it, foaming at the mouth and the like. IOW, go nuts.

The funny thing is that both are emotional responses, and probably the proper path is to navigate between the two while integrating rational thought somehow.

It's no coincidence that JP looks tired and generally run down these days, because he certainly is. How could he not be?

So, here he is, basically warning about what is to come if things get out of hand.

And IMO that's the crux: If nothing changes, things are almost guaranteed to get out of hand. We've seen it again, and again, and again. It usually works like this:

There's a problem. It's not a simple problem to solve, because it involves lots of emotional topics. You can't rationalize and "statistics your way" out of the mess, because it's an emotional thing from multiple directions that has created a big, tangled web of nastiness. You also can't just emote your way out of it, cuz that's not gonna work either. Everyone is hoping that big mess will just go away, or somebody else will fix the problem.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why JP is so popular and practically killing himself to "fix it".

However, the Intellectual People think that they can just "logic" us all out of the mess, but that never works. The reason is that, as I said, we've seen this kind of thing over and over. The sad fact is that despite our claims of, "Oh, it's so horrible, I wanna change things," most of us LIKE the explosion of chaos and drama that inevitably occurs - because we're retarded humans with retarded emotional brains and thinking.

And then we usually have 1 of two responses to the explosion:

1. "Oh, it's so horrible, poor me, poor everyone, whoa is me"
2. "Don't worry! I'll save you! I'll fix EVERYTHING!"

Both of which are valid, but neither of which can actually solve the problem alone... Unity is required. Except that we have NO IDEA how to actually unite, because this divide has been around for ages and has to do with far more than just gender:

- Men vs Women
- Emotional vs Intellectual
- Science vs Religion
- Freedom vs Tyranny

The men and women thing is just kind of one expression of this divide since it happens to be convenient as a part of our physical biology. And even the definitions of each side of these divides are often warped and twisted beyond recognition - so who knows which way is up?!

We crazy humans literally define ourselves by differences: This good, that bad! Me American, you Crazy Foreigner! Me free, you oppressed! Me poor, you rich! I'm not sure that can be escaped in this world.

So, I don't think it's even just about divide and conquer, but maybe more of a global hysteria that is forcing every person to either learn to surf, or drown.

Like, hyperkinetic sensate, maybe?

Maybe a better goal is to just survive it instead of fooling ourselves into thinking we can actually fix it. On the other hand, that probably doesn't mean sitting back and doing nothing, either, since surfing is an active process. Another dichotomy, YAY!

Well, I dunno, but there you have it.
:nuts:
 
Scottie said:
Maybe a better goal is to just survive it instead of fooling ourselves into thinking we can actually fix it. On the other hand, that probably doesn't mean sitting back and doing nothing, either, since surfing is an active process. Another dichotomy, YAY!
Click to expand...

Thanks Scottie :D

I think navigating these dichotomies is an important part of the lessons we need to learn/the wave surfing. That's why I liked this little snippet from JP so much: reality is just so much bigger than these dichotomies, and oftentimes when you have such a dichotomy, they are both true in an interesting way! Which of course doesn't mean pure relativism, because some things are true and some not (ha, another one!).

Thing is, there are facts that can be observed, and here, it's possible to say "this is true" or "this is false". But there is a "higher world" I guess that consists of narratives, thought patterns, world views and so on that are often unconscious, and these are actually what's driving people's actions. Yes, they are related to the world of facts, but they are also different.

I always thought that one hallmark of spiritual development, if you will, is the ability to hold multiple narratives/thought patterns in mind simultaneously in order to get a bigger picture, a more sophisticated "story" that can drive your actions. Otherwise, if you identify with just one of these, you become their slave. Instead, we need to learn how to consciously navigate the "world of narratives", pick the right one in each situation while still holding the biggest picture in mind we can manage. It's very difficult however because the "world of thought patterns" seems to be closely linked to our bodily systems, our own experiences and so on and so we have to work on the body-psyche as well to increase "receivership capability"; otherwise the whole thing gets screwed. Or something like that!
 
luc said:
I always thought that one hallmark of spiritual development, if you will, is the ability to hold multiple narratives/thought patterns in mind simultaneously in order to get a bigger picture, a more sophisticated "story" that can drive your actions. Otherwise, if you identify with just one of these, you become their slave. Instead, we need to learn how to consciously navigate the "world of narratives", pick the right one in each situation while still holding the biggest picture in mind we can manage. It's very difficult however because the "world of thought patterns" seems to be closely linked to our bodily systems, our own experiences and so on and so we have to work on the body-psyche as well to increase "receivership capability"; otherwise the whole thing gets screwed. Or something like that!
Click to expand...

The first time I ever encountered the idea of archetypes was reading Barbara Hort's Unholy Hungers, which talks about the different manifestations of the vampire archetype. And one thing I remember vividly was that once a person identifies or attempts to embody an archetype, that usually meant that they would lose their essence or individual identity in the process. That we can act or do certain things, behave in certain ways, but if we are unconscious to the process of forms of ideas and thoughts that drive the behaviour and take the time to understand and perceive the deeper meaning, then we are subject to being 'taken over' by it and having someone else behind the wheel. That's how I see a lot of these movements playing out. Lot's of people up in arms, sooo identified with this cause or that, but no awareness of what it all means or why they're doing it. We have to be open to altering our worldview, perceptions and understandings on a continuous basis while still remain true and honest to ourselves and the larger aim. Maybe then we'll become most excellent surfers?!
 
luc said:
Scottie said:
Maybe a better goal is to just survive it instead of fooling ourselves into thinking we can actually fix it. On the other hand, that probably doesn't mean sitting back and doing nothing, either, since surfing is an active process. Another dichotomy, YAY!
Click to expand...

Thanks Scottie :D

I think navigating these dichotomies is an important part of the lessons we need to learn/the wave surfing. That's why I liked this little snippet from JP so much: reality is just so much bigger than these dichotomies, and oftentimes when you have such a dichotomy, they are both true in an interesting way! Which of course doesn't mean pure relativism, because some things are true and some not (ha, another one!).

Thing is, there are facts that can be observed, and here, it's possible to say "this is true" or "this is false". But there is a "higher world" I guess that consists of narratives, thought patterns, world views and so on that are often unconscious, and these are actually what's driving people's actions. Yes, they are related to the world of facts, but they are also different.

I always thought that one hallmark of spiritual development, if you will, is the ability to hold multiple narratives/thought patterns in mind simultaneously in order to get a bigger picture, a more sophisticated "story" that can drive your actions. Otherwise, if you identify with just one of these, you become their slave. Instead, we need to learn how to consciously navigate the "world of narratives", pick the right one in each situation while still holding the biggest picture in mind we can manage. It's very difficult however because the "world of thought patterns" seems to be closely linked to our bodily systems, our own experiences and so on and so we have to work on the body-psyche as well to increase "receivership capability"; otherwise the whole thing gets screwed. Or something like that!
Click to expand...

Love what you wrote! I find this mirrors my experience of late. But why do we have to choose one narrative at all? Is there always a right/best narrative? And if so, according to what criterion? Being with the various narratives without choosing, as you suggest, might open up a pathway for an unseen narrative to emerge. Or perhaps allowing the various narratives to be, without choosing, can increase receivership capability? And, What is a narrative anyway, but a story? An interim description of reality we tell ourselves until a better or more seemingly accurate one comes along.

Narrative A: Humanity-is-acting-suicidal-and-irrational-and-stupid-and-heading-towards-a-cliff.
vs.
Narrative B: 4th-density-beings-are-manipulating-the-current-version-of-humans-to-drive-off-a-cliff.
vs.
Narrative C: BOTH of the above are true AND any part of 'humanity' is welcome to learn the required lessons to let go of this world and its ways and take a hike into a new narrative.
vs.
Narrative D?
 
Turgon said:
luc said:
I always thought that one hallmark of spiritual development, if you will, is the ability to hold multiple narratives/thought patterns in mind simultaneously in order to get a bigger picture, a more sophisticated "story" that can drive your actions. Otherwise, if you identify with just one of these, you become their slave. Instead, we need to learn how to consciously navigate the "world of narratives", pick the right one in each situation while still holding the biggest picture in mind we can manage. It's very difficult however because the "world of thought patterns" seems to be closely linked to our bodily systems, our own experiences and so on and so we have to work on the body-psyche as well to increase "receivership capability"; otherwise the whole thing gets screwed. Or something like that!
Click to expand...

The first time I ever encountered the idea of archetypes was reading Barbara Hort's Unholy Hungers, which talks about the different manifestations of the vampire archetype. And one thing I remember vividly was that once a person identifies or attempts to embody an archetype, that usually meant that they would lose their essence or individual identity in the process. That we can act or do certain things, behave in certain ways, but if we are unconscious to the process of forms of ideas and thoughts that drive the behaviour and take the time to understand and perceive the deeper meaning, then we are subject to being 'taken over' by it and having someone else behind the wheel. That's how I see a lot of these movements playing out. Lot's of people up in arms, sooo identified with this cause or that, but no awareness of what it all means or why they're doing it. We have to be open to altering our worldview, perceptions and understandings on a continuous basis while still remain true and honest to ourselves and the larger aim. Maybe then we'll become most excellent surfers?!
Click to expand...

I had a thought recently (I know, hold the presses!) One effect of the Wave seems to be that of bringing front and center any aspects of oneself that one is being less than totally honest with oneself about. So that either one has to acknowledge whatever it is and bring it into integrity with a more objective perspective, or one has to remain in a state of belligerent denial. And it's that state of denial that's causing people to essentially disintegrate, or lose their bearing and become unreasonable.
 
you know what? I followed this whole Peterson/Newman thing, and the more I explore about him, the more I think that Peterson is the "Second Coming of Christ". Warrior of Truth. Simple as that. And I think he doesnt want to be that, but nevermind, he is.
 
etezete said:
you know what? I followed this whole Peterson/Newman thing, and the more I explore about him, the more I think that Peterson is the "Second Coming of Christ". Warrior of Truth. Simple as that. And I think he doesnt want to be that, but nevermind, he is.
Click to expand...

Thanks for bringing this up.

This idea has been in my mind for many months now. He is literally speaking the "truth of Christ" throughout the world via the media, to the best of his abilities of course.

His recent TV appearances and sold out lectures in Europe due to his new book have once again caught my attention regarding this quote from the Cs:


[quote author=Session 16 October 1994]
Q: (L) "And I heard a voice from Heaven like the sound of great waters and like the rumbling of might thunder and the voice I heard seemed like the music of harpists accompanying themselves on their harps..." What is this voice from heaven and the sound like great waters and mighty thunder?

A: The return of Christ.

(...)

Q: (L) So, the comets are going to make a mess of things and then the transition is going to come as Christ comes?

A: Before.

Q: (L) The transition will happen and we will all be standing around glazed in the eyes or whatever, wondering what to do with ourselves, because we are finding ourselves in a new estate we have not been in before, and then Christ comes?

A: More or less.

Q: (L) Now, what is going to happen after Christ comes back and everything is sort of straightening out and he is teaching... is everybody on the planet going to be gathered together in one place to receive these teachings?

A: No.

Q: (L) Is he going to travel around and teach?

A: Technology.

Q: (L) He will teach via the media?

A: Yes.
[/quote]
 
etezete said:
you know what? I followed this whole Peterson/Newman thing, and the more I explore about him, the more I think that Peterson is the "Second Coming of Christ". Warrior of Truth. Simple as that. And I think he doesnt want to be that, but nevermind, he is.
Click to expand...

That's a bit over the top I think, and Peterson would be the first one to tell you that. But I definitely think he falls into the category of help, as in "help is on the way".

He is someone who is broadcasting a grounded, life-affirming message, without a speck of sugar coating. Those who need it the most are eating it up. And even if they are the sort who would never pick up an esoteric book in their life, if they follow his advice, they will still be contributing to the positive balance in the world.

Go Jordan!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom