Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

Jordan pointed out that the people at the top of a hierarchy are there because of competence, not because of power and will. The best electrician is as the top of the electrician's hierarchy because he is competent, not all-powerful
No, often not. All sorts of inter-relationship manipulation goes on behind the scene to climb that ladder. Drive for power through a pathological will goes a long way here on Planet:3D STS, you know that Beau... Or am I misunderstanding a specific context of hypothesis here?... Are you/Jordan defining "competence" to include the art of pathological manipulation too?
Even so, why would anyone use "all-powerful" to use a point?... That's condescending… No-one thinks any one person is "all-powerful" - everyone knows that title is only reserved for God, especially in traditionalist The South. So why use it?
 

Beau

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
No, often not. All sorts of inter-relationship manipulation goes on behind the scene to climb that ladder. Drive for power through a pathological will goes a long way here on Planet:3D STS, you know that Beau... Or am I misunderstanding a specific context of hypothesis here?... Are you/Jordan defining "competence" to include the art of pathological manipulation too?
Even so, why would anyone use "all-powerful" to use a point?... That's condescending… No-one thinks any one person is "all-powerful" - everyone knows that title is only reserved for God, especially in traditionalist The South. So why use it?
Those were my words, not Jordan's. I was paraphrasing.
 

herondancer

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I was there too, and it was a great evening.

He was explaining the difference between a hierarchy kept in place by power (which is inherently unstable) and a hierarchies based on the general recognition of the relative skills in different activities

JP was making the point that in human societies generally, hierarchies form naturally around competence. not power. It's most clearly seen in the trades, where the results of one's work are immediately evident. You don't hire a plumber because he's powerful and can bully you into it, you hire the one that produces the best quality work you can find. He even joked that when an SJW needs brain surgery, you can be sure all those principles about equity and inclusivity will go right out the window. :)

The opposite effect is seen in societies with corrupt structures. With communism, or even a criminally-controlled city, you would have to take on the incompetent plumber because his/her brother was a party member, or the cousin of the guy who runs the local protection racket, with predictable poor results. But left to free choice, the word about who is capable and who isn't gets around quickly, and voila, a hierarchy is established. He also talked about there are as many hierarchies as there are human activities and how while one's place in one might be on a lower step, in another it could be higher, depending on one's skill in the activity in question.
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
No, often not. All sorts of inter-relationship manipulation goes on behind the scene to climb that ladder. Drive for power through a pathological will goes a long way here on Planet:3D STS, you know that Beau... Or am I misunderstanding a specific context of hypothesis here?... Are you/Jordan defining "competence" to include the art of pathological manipulation too?
Which country do you live in? I've lived in Canada and U.S. and overwhelmingly the hierarchies are based on competence. They're never perfect, but that's the overall trend. Tradesmen tend to know what they're doing. Bad ones have bad reputations or go out of business (or both). University professors have a certain level of education (but that is being perverted in the humanities). Established businesses are largely trustworthy to get the job done. The power and water work, roads get repaired, police tend to arrest actual criminals (even if some know how to game the system in order to evade justice). There are always exceptions, but as a rule, things work. It's not as if on the whole electricians only get where they are because of their connections. It's because they know what they're doing.

Even so, why would anyone use "all-powerful" to use a point?... That's condescending… No-one thinks any one person is "all-powerful" - everyone knows that title is only reserved for God, especially in traditionalist The South. So why use it?
I don't think he used the word all-powerful, but if he did, it worked in context. Like herondancer said, he was contrasting power to competence. In general, free societies (even relatively free societies) establish hierarchies based on competence. Pathocracies (he doesn't use that word, but that's what he's describing) and societies heading in that direction don't. There are several sections in Ponerology on the incompetence of pathocrats, the inversion of normal hierarchies, and the techniques normal people have to develop in order to game the system so they can inject some competence, which the system is designed to stamp out.
 

Timótheos

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Some friends and I attended Jordan's book tour stop in Atlanta last night, which coincidentally was his birthday. His talk lasted about an hour where he discussed a few of his rules from the book and then he did about a 30 minute Q&A.
Thanks for the video and pics Beau. Did any of your entourage wait around after the talk to get their picture taken with JP?
 
Those were my words, not Jordan's. I was paraphrasing.
Paraphrasing is ok... But the wording used I have a slight problem with. To say "all-powerful" is instilling in the mind of readers an 'all on' or 'all off' light-switch scenario for the overarching narrative. If I were to use 9/11 as an example: It would be similar to pushing those trying to analyse the event objectively to either accepting, unequivocally, the official government-endorsed version of events as portrayed by MSM - or to swing to the opposite extreme and wholly believe the Pentagon must have been hit with a frozen fish. No 'in-between'. I'm not saying that was your intention because i know you don't think like that, but those that may come here reading your words first time may take your meaning taken out of context.

in human societies generally, hierarchies form naturally around competence. not power
Yes, if left unmolested. Society "sorts itself out". Even so, there are always ebbs and flows, because Hierarchy is interesting. We all subscribe to it consciously or unconsciously whether we like to admit it or not. Tribalism and especially of nepotism too is a form of hierarchy. Ones experience of 'competence' all comes down to ones determined 'hierarchical-positioning' within wider socio-economic standing of value and worth against the backdrop of any given society. Like the protection racket and bad plumbers, its a form of nepotism taken to extreme. Large swathes of our society live within nepotism-led communities to some degree... Especially more rural regions - Its natural... but how far will a given society allow it to go before necessary services are compromised due to favoring select individuals. I've witnessed many a time someone gets a job over a more competent contractor because of blood-ties... Of course, he still has to qualify a certain degree of competency - but it certainly is NOT an exception to the rule for the most competent to be denied the top spot in any given services sector - usually the most competent is mid-upper on the ladder I'd say.

Which country do you live in? I've lived in Canada and U.S. and overwhelmingly the hierarchies are based on competence. They're never perfect, but that's the overall trend
Depends which communities you have the fortune to have 'synced with' and move about in. Im sure those in Compton, The Bronx or Detroit would think different here. Pot-holes in one part of the city may get fixed more adequately than pot-holes in more deprived sectors of same city.

For many those others in 'relatively free societies' its often more about how much incompetence from up top can be gotten away with in relation to the sub-society and demographic value for rendered services put back out into the 'parent' society... And how often such 'incompetence' those people must fight to pull up to maintain an 'acceptable' standard.
Here in the UK, the NHS is a neverending shambles lurching from one crisis to the next forever teetering on the brink living in a perpetual twilight zone - its been going on for years. People forever kick up stink. Every now-and-then a bit of money is pumped into a particular department on its last legs. Those working within the hospitals know what need to be done - but get blocked! Why? Because there's an agenda to run the NHS into the ground - by nefarious forces wanting to privatise the NHS. This very detrimental tug-of-war has been going. on. for. years. The general population just cant seem to 'hierarchicalize' it the way they really do know how it should be run. This is a First World country where the general population have the advantage in voicing themselves without getting gunned down in the streets.

Bad ones have bad reputations or go out of business (or both).
You'd think so. In my city we have a very high footfall in the center... This allows the particular services industry of "food and catering" local services to be gotten away with continuously being run badly because there is always a large enough influx of people passing through needing to eat. Chefs don't need to care, the manager can't do her job properly, but it doesn't matter because her job is secure as long as she continues sleeping with the owner... And on and on it goes - and is NOT an exception in my part of "free/relatively-free society" (I assume you generally class UK as such if you infer the US under said category).
Regards herondancer raised city-corruption (ie communism states)... If we were to take humanity globally, how unusual is that really, today? It goes on - and a lot! - across our fair planet - in fact the majority of countries around the globe id say suffer from this. Why? Because abuse of power holds sway - and continues to do so. Ironically often as a result of the very 'free/relatively free societies' over-reaching hegemony. So where does JP draw up the boundaries and quantify 'generality'?
Irrespective, however, services across even the more obviously corrupt nations will run to a degree of 'competence' in accordance to how much 'incompetence' the general society puts up with and what can be gotten away as being generally 'acceptable' in relation to the general conditioned psychology of the populous. What is accepted 'over there' is not accepted 'over here' because of how much abuse by power is accustomed to being acceptable. Natural hierarchy of competence with humans "sorting themselves out" is all sooooo subjective. One mans pot-hole is another mans crater.

Another example in "free societies" is the manufacturing industry and deliberate waste: For example, deliberately sabotages in particular - its mass-produced products to keep consumerism - and therefor the economy - high and buoyant and churning over - thus 'Things' are deliberately designed to have a limited use-date. Is that general competence because on some level it could be argued it is for the sake of healthy 'economy'. Maybe... I don't think so, because I believe the economy should serve humanity - not the other way round.

The point is, "competence" and "incompetence" against the complex back-drop of an advanced society is undefined and what can be defined in a roundabout way is nevertheless unevenly distributed not only across wider global humanity - but within localised sub-sections of subsequent societal geo-political boundaries.
When I look over the hill to see what others experience - I see far more "incompetence" 'out there' than i do "competence" 'in here' due to the knock-on down effect of pathologicals in power. Jordan Petersen tends not to see that much - his views on Israel a case in point - and see things from where he stands in his more familiar "competently" run free/relevantly-free sub-sections of society - and therefor what he has to say is very good for those whom stand within similar environs as his, and those environs immediately adjacent. Those who are not? Well, his sound advise is not always applicable because the adequate societal infrastructure isn't first in place.
 

Scottie

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
The answer to the question of competence vs pathocracy is rather simple in its complexity.

In short: zoom lens!

People like Peterson and Pinker tend to zoom out and look at the Very Big Picture. In that picture, yes, shit happens. It's still happening. But the overall trend is progress. Sure, things are really screwed up - even more screwed up in certain ways than before. But when you make the comparison of the Middle Ages vs today, clearly quality of life IS higher for the majority of people.

That doesn't mean there is no suffering anywhere, or that everything is perfect everywhere, or anything else. It just means that overall, "things are getting better" from that broad perspective. Of course, residents of Gaza and Syria would tend to disagree with that statement, naturally, but that's a narrow perspective.

But that's only 1 data point. Zoom in a bit, and you see problems. These problems often become worse with time due to pathocracy.

Zoom in even further, and either you will see a perfect life, or horrible suffering. In either case, you're looking so closely at one tiny part of everything that you can't see anything else.

It's like an American complaining that his country is a cesspool of corruption, things are getting worse, yadda yadda. And then someone from a horribly poor country where starvation is rampant says, "Oh really? You think you've got it bad?" And then there is the question of the US having played a part in overthrowing the government in that poor country, and empowering an evil dictator, etc.

There are MANY perspectives there, and all of them are valid. It isn't enough to only take a narrow view, or a broad view. We need to see everything.

Most people choose to view life through a fixed zoom level. Sometimes this is because it suits them, sometimes because they don't know any better, and sometimes because the motor that makes the lens zoom is busted and they don't know how to manually adjust it.

So, in JP's case, what he is saying is in response to the SJW-type nonsense going on. He is clearly not very well-informed about certain subjects - like the rest of us. He has a point to make, a goal to accomplish, and he does this using data from a certain zoom level. This serves as an antidote to chaos (hopefully) - but only at wide angles.

Then we start to zoom in, and oops! We see problems. Clearly, JP is useless because he doesn't "get it".

Well, hell's bells! What are YOU doing to make things better? What am I doing? Are we just sitting around nitpicking what other people are doing because we're so offended that they're not fixing everything for us? Or maybe we just like sitting around feeling high and mighty because we can zoom in and see problems that aren't being addressed?

Being able to zoom in and out is priceless. It is also not without risks: Save the whales (to the exclusion of all else)! Save the poor cows! Save the poor transgenders! Save the poor Gazans! OR: Don't worry about the whales, cows, or transgenders because overall, things are getting better - YAY!

Well, yes and no.

I have a pretty good idea of what will happen. The "left" is pushing. The "right" will fight back. Then it will be the right's turn to get bashed over the head for going overboard.

It's like driving a large boat across the ocean. They don't exactly turn on a dime. All you can do is help steer it in the right direction. And there's nothing at all you can do about huge storms and big scary mega-octopus creatures, Godzilla, or any other catastrophes which may befall the boat on its journey.

Driving the boat up into the clouds and sailing along effortlessly while choirs of angels sing us along isn't even close to being an option. Not in this reality, anyway.

There will always be good and bad. It will never be all good, just as it will never be all bad.

Even if I had the power to directly intervene in chaotic events around the world, I wouldn't do it. I'm fairly certain that I would mean well, but end up screwing things over pretty good.

So, what we do is just send out our little signal, and see what happens. I mean, what else are you gonna do? The bad guys try to effect things on a large scale. Because there are many of them, and they are often at odds with each other, this just creates mayhem and chaos and destruction.

Everyone in the Evil Hierarchy does little things every day. Some people do little evil things, some people do big evil things. In the end, it all adds up. We are very quick to notice this. It's plain as day.

On the flip side, how often do we see how doing Little Good Things can add up to making real change in the world? Like, never? Why is that? Why do we see the Bad Guy doing something small and think, "Oh, that's adding to the mayhem!" and yet when we have the option to do something good, we think, "Oh, poor little me, I'll never make any difference..." :huh:

Why do we place so much value on darkness, but so little on light?

In any case, if it wasn't for Evil Google and Evil Controlled Internet, none of us would ever have heard of Laura or most of the other people here. No one would know who Jordan Peterson is.

Anyway, recognizing both sides of the equation doesn't mean you support one over the other. It's not black or white. It's BOTH. And sure, you have to choose a side. But it's why you are choosing that side that matters most. Is it based on knowledge of all the zoom levels, or a whim, or an emotional reaction, or...?
 
Last edited:

Beau

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Thanks for the video and pics Beau. Did any of your entourage wait around after the talk to get their picture taken with JP?
We did wait around, but the event staff booted us from the building. They wanted everyone out of there I guess. There was the option of buying the VIP tickets which guaranteed a personal meet, but I didn't opt for those.
 
Good discussion going on here, thanks.

JP is delivering a box of tools unto the world stage for many people to work out their issues, and hopefully help our society. And if he has to ignore certain issue or is naive to them it kind of not important right now, but to get up and make his delivery.

Iv been wondering if when this all comes apart, are we could be in a lefty nightmare, or a righty nightmare, and cant tell for sure yet, but it is pretty well set up to swing fast and ugly to the right. It’s worrisome.

Thanks again to those adding to this thread.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Thanks, Scottie, for your excellent analysis! It's easy to just give up, and 'enjoy watching the show', but it doesn't feel right even if the chances to change anything are slim. Lately, I've felt that the momentum to give up and do nothing has increased for me personally, but perhaps now is the time to really start fighting against it!

And if you're not doing anything, not putting out any signal, the last thing you should do is criticize someone like Peterson for not having the whole banana. I think one of Peterson's 'rules' can be applied to this, saying something like:

"Try to do something, no matter how little, everyday, so that the world will be better than it was yesterday".
 

herondancer

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
"Try to do something, no matter how little, everyday, so that the world will be better than it was yesterday".
To me, if the people JP is reaching just go for this at whatever level they can manage, it's got to help. Really, it's all anyone can do, but how many folks ever get around to identifying what they can do that is right in front of them, let alone actually muster up the will to do anything about it? If JP's books and lectures give a boot in the bum in that direction, then more power to him. I imagine thousands of little pockets of order and sanity (to borrow Scottie's metaphor) being created, that could join up and add up in ways we couldn't imagine.

It's a tiny point, but one thing I noticed about 90% of the young men in the crowd, was that they were "well turned out". Clean, pressed shirts, ties, sometimes suitcoats for the men, and their dates equally well-dressed (though that may just be a Southern thing). Even the ones who had worn some sort of supportive tee shirt instead, still looked nice. Obviously just about all the young people had taken extra care about their appearance. It was quite the visual confirmation that these kids really were trying to 'put themselves together' and delightful to see.
 

mkrnhr

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
It's a tiny point, but one thing I noticed about 90% of the young men in the crowd, was that they were "well turned out". Clean, pressed shirts, ties, sometimes suitcoats for the men, and their dates equally well-dressed (though that may just be a Southern thing). Even the ones who had worn some sort of supportive tee shirt instead, still looked nice. Obviously just about all the young people had taken extra care about their appearance. It was quite the visual confirmation that these kids really were trying to 'put themselves together' and delightful to see.
It's maybe a small detail but it's a good sign. Appearance doesn't matter but taking care of appearance matters as the outside reflects the inside.
 
The answer to the question of competence vs pathocracy is rather simple in its complexity.

In short: zoom lens!

People like Peterson and Pinker tend to zoom out and look at the Very Big Picture. In that picture, yes, shit happens. It's still happening. But the overall trend is progress. Sure, things are really screwed up - even more screwed up in certain ways than before. But when you make the comparison of the Middle Ages vs today, clearly quality of life IS higher for the majority of people.

That doesn't mean there is no suffering anywhere, or that everything is perfect everywhere, or anything else. It just means that overall, "things are getting better" from that broad perspective. Of course, residents of Gaza and Syria would tend to disagree with that statement, naturally, but that's a narrow perspective.

But that's only 1 data point. Zoom in a bit, and you see problems. These problems often become worse with time due to pathocracy.

Zoom in even further, and either you will see a perfect life, or horrible suffering. In either case, you're looking so closely at one tiny part of everything that you can't see anything else.

It's like an American complaining that his country is a cesspool of corruption, things are getting worse, yadda yadda. And then someone from a horribly poor country where starvation is rampant says, "Oh really? You think you've got it bad?" And then there is the question of the US having played a part in overthrowing the government in that poor country, and empowering an evil dictator, etc.

There are MANY perspectives there, and all of them are valid. It isn't enough to only take a narrow view, or a broad view. We need to see everything.

Most people choose to view life through a fixed zoom level. Sometimes this is because it suits them, sometimes because they don't know any better, and sometimes because the motor that makes the lens zoom is busted and they don't know how to manually adjust it.

So, in JP's case, what he is saying is in response to the SJW-type nonsense going on. He is clearly not very well-informed about certain subjects - like the rest of us. He has a point to make, a goal to accomplish, and he does this using data from a certain zoom level. This serves as an antidote to chaos (hopefully) - but only at wide angles.

Then we start to zoom in, and oops! We see problems. Clearly, JP is useless because he doesn't "get it".

Well, hell's bells! What are YOU doing to make things better? What am I doing? Are we just sitting around nitpicking what other people are doing because we're so offended that they're not fixing everything for us? Or maybe we just like sitting around feeling high and mighty because we can zoom in and see problems that aren't being addressed?

Being able to zoom in and out is priceless. It is also not without risks: Save the whales (to the exclusion of all else)! Save the poor cows! Save the poor transgenders! Save the poor Gazans! OR: Don't worry about the whales, cows, or transgenders because overall, things are getting better - YAY!

Well, yes and no.

I have a pretty good idea of what will happen. The "left" is pushing. The "right" will fight back. Then it will be the right's turn to get bashed over the head for going overboard.

It's like driving a large boat across the ocean. They don't exactly turn on a dime. All you can do is help steer it in the right direction. And there's nothing at all you can do about huge storms and big scary mega-octopus creatures, Godzilla, or any other catastrophes which may befall the boat on its journey.

Driving the boat up into the clouds and sailing along effortlessly while choirs of angels sing us along isn't even close to being an option. Not in this reality, anyway.

There will always be good and bad. It will never be all good, just as it will never be all bad.

Even if I had the power to directly intervene in chaotic events around the world, I wouldn't do it. I'm fairly certain that I would mean well, but end up screwing things over pretty good.

So, what we do is just send out our little signal, and see what happens. I mean, what else are you gonna do? The bad guys try to effect things on a large scale. Because there are many of them, and they are often at odds with each other, this just creates mayhem and chaos and destruction.

Everyone in the Evil Hierarchy does little things every day. Some people do little evil things, some people do big evil things. In the end, it all adds up. We are very quick to notice this. It's plain as day.

On the flip side, how often do we see how doing Little Good Things can add up to making real change in the world? Like, never? Why is that? Why do we see the Bad Guy doing something small and think, "Oh, that's adding to the mayhem!" and yet when we have the option to do something good, we think, "Oh, poor little me, I'll never make any difference..." :huh:

Why do we place so much value on darkness, but so little on light?

In any case, if it wasn't for Evil Google and Evil Controlled Internet, none of us would ever have heard of Laura or most of the other people here. No one would know who Jordan Peterson is.

Anyway, recognizing both sides of the equation doesn't mean you support one over the other. It's not black or white. It's BOTH. And sure, you have to choose a side. But it's why you are choosing that side that matters most. Is it based on knowledge of all the zoom levels, or a whim, or an emotional reaction, or...?
Nice write up. Given the opening of your comment, I assume its predominately for my benefit. Thank you. I particularly like the zooming in and out of the lens analogy. I get what you're getting at. However, much of what you've written here doesn't really apply to where I'm coming from. Though, if it was aimed as much for other readers benefits as is mine? Then... my bad.
 

Mike

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I went to the Atlanta show. I’m really glad I went even though you can watch a lot of Dr. Peterson in videos, etc. Here are a couple things that stood out to me.

It is one thing to read his book ’12 Rule for Life’ and then another thing to listen to Dr. Peterson weave the connections between the rules live on stage into a general understanding about how they apply and relate to one another. That is really what I thought he did exceptionally well and for me it was an amazing thing to watch a person piece it together for himself as he is trying to explain and relate it to others. I’ve heard that he doesn’t plan his speeches except maybe deciding on a starting point of some kind prior to taking the stage. He also mentioned at the beginning of his talk that he uses the talks to stretch the boundaries of his ideas and thinking. It was like listening to and watching a philosopher (possibly a great one) develop and tune his ideas and explanations of life and reality on the fly. For me it was a very impressive thing to observe and take part in as part of the audience. He gave his ideas life and it was interesting to take part, even in a very small way, with interacting with his being.

At one point during the question and answer portion he mentioned using the reading of and thinking about the work of Jung, and with the recent C’s session and thread on the ‘The Aryan Christ’ book it predictably raised my antenna, as a mean to how he approaches the therapeutic relationship when working with clients. This was in response to a question about whether he meditates. He says he kind of meditates when with a client. He clears his mind and listens until something prompts his mind to react by giving him an image or something to say. I just started reading ‘The Aryan Christ’ last night and couldn’t help to think about Dr. Peterson and his relationship with the work of Jung and maybe how juxtaposition they are in terms of their lives, orientation to it and possibly what their aim is/was. What also made me think about this is I finished the last part of ’12 Rules for Life’ last night. There is an ending of the book after he describes his 12th rule. In it he describes using his pen of light, after seeing it and acquiring it from a friend, to write responses to questions he has. He poses these questions in his mind and waits for responses in his mind, similar to his approach to counseling clients, which he writes down as the answers. I couldn’t help to think that he is tapping into something. I’m not sure what and if it is channeling per se. Whatever it is it seems to be connected to truth and service to others as far as I can tell.

A very encouraging thing to me is that another question posed to him was does he worry about how fame might change him. He talked about how he has people that he has surrounded himself with that will tell him when he has said something stupid or did something stupid. It also seems like he has a very close and dynamic relationship with his wife, who has been traveling with him for all his shows. In short it seems like he has some kind of network in place to keep him grounded and on the track to whatever he wants to accomplish. Yet I’m not even sure what his overall aim is at this point besides just trying to help people through his book and work.
 
Last edited:

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
A very encouraging thing to me is that another question posed to him was does he worry about how fame might change him. He talked about how he has people that he has surrounded himself with that will tell him when he has said something stupid or did something stupid. It also seems like he has a very close and dynamic relationship with his wife, who has been traveling with him for all his shows. In short it seems like he has some kind of network in place to keep him grounded and on the track to whatever he wants to accomplish. Yet I’m not even sure what his overall aim is at this point besides just trying to help people through his book and work.
Coincidentally, he was asked this question very recently in the following video. Basically, he says his aim is to help as many as people possible sort out their lives and their relationships with their families and communities as possible.

 
Top Bottom