Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

[luc]

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.

Well, here's how I see it: The other day I watched a video by Robert Barron where he dissects the latest Star Wars movie, using concepts from Campbell and Jung (hero journey, archetypes etc.). There was one interesting comment below the video by a guy who said he's an expert on Jung and Campbell and that they would spin in their graves were they to listen to Barron's use of these concepts. And I thought that maybe he has a point: if he's really a Jung scholar, he might see a lot of darkness in his works (without realizing it), and thus (rightly) thinks Barron's "benign" interpretation is wrong.

My point is: it seems to me that people like Barron and Jordan Peterson take a few general concepts from Jung - like the hero's journey, the idea of a deeper "archetypical" reality, the fact that people can be possessed by ideas etc. - and use them for something positive. In fact, I think a person's orientation in a sense is more important than the "raw material" with which he works: someone who is aligned with a quest for truth and goodness will use anything as a starting point to make some excellent points, whether it's the bible, Jung's work, a classic novel, a movie, or some philosophy. On the other hand, someone who is possessed by ideology, ego, lower drives etc. will take anything, no matter how good, and twist it into a tool for power, self-aggrandizement and justification for evil.

So at the end of the day, while the "evil STS forces" are out to twist our minds by popularizing schizoidal theories, they are up against the goodness of the human spirit: people on a good quest will take these ideologies and filter out the kernels of truth, then use those as seeds to grow their understanding. The evil forces seem powerless against this sort of thing - I guess it has to do with free will and "good forces" doing their thing if people truly ask with their whole being. So - it's up to us to do the hard work of filtering out these "kernels" using our whole being and understanding; we can't just categorize thinkers or influences into "good" and "evil" - we need to understand their arguments, the history of their tradition, their circumstances etc. and make up our own mind and use it to get a better handle on reality. Just some thoughts.

 

[Cosmos]

Fully agree with luc here. If someone is on a path towards STO values and tries to life up to them and helps others on the way, such a person can take snippets from this or that source, which might be corrupted in some way, and use it to illustrate a point about something that person wants to express, without the need for us to think black and white about the end result that person creates.

Even though Peterson uses stuff to some extent that is questionable, the matter of fact is, that his overall message is a good one and especially in this day and age where big forces are at play, in which even small decent deeds can be of great value for a lot of people.

As Joe said:

It seems clear that Peterson has a "mission", and his abilities and drive are directed towards fulfilling that mission. He, like everyone else, does not have the whole picture. It is the tendency to look to someone else for the 'whole picture' that it the problem. We should simply stop doing that. Ain't no one gonna "save us". The sooner we accept that truth, the better, primarily for ourselves.

I wouldn't be too concerned about Peterson's skewed understanding of politics. Politics isn't really his 'thing' and he never claims that it is. Any mention of politics by him is used to back up his other primary points. From what he and others have said about the people that he has met and talked to directly, only a tiny percentage of them are even interested in the political SJW aspect of what he says. The vast majority want to talk to him about their personal lives and how much he has helped them.

 

[Seamus]

Well said luc, FWIW that is in line with my thinking as well.

 

[Beau]

My point is: it seems to me that people like Barron and Jordan Peterson take a few general concepts from Jung - like the hero's journey, the idea of a deeper "archetypical" reality, the fact that people can be possessed by ideas etc. - and use them for something positive.

I think in regards to Peterson's use of Jungian concepts, that is something he uses in his books and philosophical teachings but I don't think that in his practice as a clinician he is using Jung's therapeutic ideas on his clients. From what he's described about his therapeutic techniques, it's more about giving people foundational ideas and thoughts in order to better organize their life and improve their relationships with people and the world as a whole. So I agree with the above luc, Peterson seems to be taking what he finds most useful from Jung to mesh with his own ideas.

 

[Voyageur]

Caught your JP attendance/experience in Atlanta a few pages back, Beau. Very cool and thank you for sharing it.

Was thinking that what was remarkable and provides for some greater faith (there was such heart there) - and this is not JP the figure, it is JP's clear ability to provide people with some connection to their lost thinking/remembering that goes back in time and remembers itself in so many ways - like it was always there, latent within (like Dorthy going home), yet it has been set adrift for a while. So it is like a re-connection to themselves and something bigger then themselves, osit, that JP is helping people to find again. But they have to find it themselves.

And this brought up Bishop Barron's little video and he mentions Plato's Cave:



And was thinking that people in society (as a generality), and as technological as it is, are down there in this cave thinking they have it all, and more and more material stuff keeps getting dropped in. It all looks good, they are busy and it is an appealing world of pseudo social interaction and they don't know why it is not sustaining, there is something deeply missing.

As so many say about his talks, people are 'starving' for who they really are, a message, information, not what they have been socially, politically and materially engineered to think they have become. JP is providing a root message, something bigger, and as he says, it can be hard, man! So, maybe he is helping people step out of the cave of their minds and rediscover what was adrift in themselves - to see some new horizon...

 

[genero81]

So at the end of the day, while the "evil STS forces" are out to twist our minds by popularizing schizoidal theories, they are up against the goodness of the human spirit: people on a good quest will take these ideologies and filter out the kernels of truth, then use those as seeds to grow their understanding. The evil forces seem powerless against this sort of thing - I guess it has to do with free will and "good forces" doing their thing if people truly ask with their whole being. So - it's up to us to do the hard work of filtering out these "kernels" using our whole being and understanding; we can't just categorize thinkers or influences into "good" and "evil" - we need to understand their arguments, the history of their tradition, their circumstances etc. and make up our own mind and use it to get a better handle on reality. Just some thoughts.

Yes, great point Luc! From our perspective it would appear that the STS side has an 'unfair' advantage. They can lie, manipulate, coerce, pose as something they're not, etc. While the STO side respects free will, only gives when asked, serves self by serving others, and so forth. However, it seems that there's a catch that can be utilized for good when one has sufficient knowledge. And that is, STS forces pretty much must wrap whatever lie it is they are attempting to utilize for their purposes in enough truth to make it believable. And that's where those who work together for good can derive benefit by extracting and distilling. Perhaps that is true alchemy.

 

[Maat]

Yes, great point Luc! From our perspective it would appear that the STS side has an 'unfair' advantage. They can lie, manipulate, coerce, pose as something they're not, etc. While the STO side respects free will, only gives when asked, serves self by serving others, and so forth. However, it seems that there's a catch that can be utilized for good when one has sufficient knowledge. And that is, STS forces pretty much must wrap whatever lie it is they are attempting to utilize for their purposes in enough truth to make it believable. And that's where those who work together for good can derive benefit by extracting and distilling. Perhaps that is true alchemy.

It's kink of remind me this quotation from Faust "I am part of that power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good.”

And like pain is a warning message for the body, suffering is a warning message for the soul. And when evil seeks to impose more and more suffering, it forces the individual to seek answers, explanations, and... solutions, and to choose. So, in the end, evil shoot itself in the foot !

 

[DianaRose]

I came across this article yesterday: Father's Day: Transgender dad wants his son to see him as a man - CNN

It's about a woman who became a man and who married a man who became a woman. The "husband" carried their child. What is interesting to me is that he said that as a girl he was uncomfortable with his breast and everything that made him a woman. Yet, in the end it those very feminine attribute that allowed to "complete" his life by enabling him to carry a baby. I kept thinking "wouldn't it be easier to live as a woman?" It reminded me of the discussion people believing they're god. Those people are turning biology upside down.

And I don't want to be mean, but the "wife" is a poster child for the new liberal movement.

 

[Turgon]

Another excellent debate with JP on whether we need God to make sense of life. I think he's learned quite a bit since his talk with Dillahunty, and I'm still amazed at the depth and clarity of thought he's put into explicating these ideas.

 

[Ca.]

Another home run interview with Dr. Peterson and Aubrey Marcus
Worth noting:
* Prayer 1 & 2
* Heath Ledger

Published on Jun 13, 2018 / 1:25:45 213,645 views

The people asked and Dr. Jordan B. Peterson answered! This long-anticipated conversation with one of the brightest minds in the field of psychology did not disappoint.

With razor-sharp logic, the oddly notorious Dr. Peterson wastes no time cutting right to the truth of the stories told by society, and more importantly, the stories we tell ourselves.

In this wide-ranging discussion, we discuss the themes of responsibility and redemption and how it is never too late to save the world--Starting with yourself first.
#155 Truth and Responsibility with Jordan Peterson

With a mirrored reflection by The Editors of Balder and Dash

Bright Wall/Dark Room December 2016: "It's a Wonderful Life?" by Chad Perman | Balder and Dash | Roger Ebert
Snip: December 13, 2016
It’s easy to lose track of your life All of us do it, in one way or another, locked up so tightly in our own heads—our own private little worlds—that we lose sight not only of The Big Picture, but of our own smaller pictures as well: our families, our friends, the things we set in motion, the lives we impact and influence on a daily basis.


Dr. Irvin Yalom, a brilliant psychotherapist and writer, is, sadly, nearing the end of a long and distinguished career. As such, he’s turned his professional focus over the past few years towards death, and the long shadow it casts over every single aspect of our lives. How are we, the only creatures on earth aware of our own fragile mortality—no matter how well we live, how wonderfully we behave, how healthy we are—supposed to carry on with this awful knowledge? In the face of this, what is the point, ultimately, of anything that we do? How do those of us not comforted by the tonic of religion, soothed by the promise of a better world awaiting us after this one, confront our own mortality without being utterly paralyzed by it?

Yalom, an existentialist to his core, concludes, finally, that we’re each responsible for making our own meaning in this life, but that the way we ultimately endure is through our “ripples”:

“The fact that each of us creates—often without our conscious intent or knowledge—concentric circles of influence that may affect others for years, even for generations…[and] this effect we have on other people is in turn passed on to others, much as the ripples in a pond go on and on until they’re no longer visible but continuing at a nano level.”

 

[whitecoast]

I saw this in the Globe and Mai. Apparently Jordan Peterson is suing Wilfred Laurier University for defamation.

Jordan Peterson sues Wilfrid Laurier University for defamation
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-jordan-peterson-sues-wilfrid-laurier-university-for-defamation/

Author and free-speech advocate Jordan Peterson is suing Wilfrid Laurier University over comments made about him by three staff members in a meeting held to discipline Lindsay Shepherd, a teaching assistant who showed her class a clip of Mr. Peterson talking about gender pronouns.

During the meeting, the three staff members repeatedly and maliciously defamed the author and University of Toronto psychology professor, the $1.5-million suit alleges, detailing multiple negative comments.

Mr. Peterson targeted transgender students, said Nathan Rambukkana, Ms. Shepherd’s teaching supervisor. Showing students comments he has made is like “playing … a speech by Hitler,” Mr. Rambukkana also said. Herbert Pimlott, another professor present at the meeting, questioned Mr. Peterson’s academic credentials, saying he “does not have the substantial academic evidence to be a credible person,” the suit says.

Ms. Shepherd secretly recorded the meeting and released it to the media, leading to national criticism of the university’s actions against her. It has since been posted or linked online on multiple sites.

The three staff members should have known that could happen, the suit says.

“These defamatory statements were malicious and designed specifically to damage [Mr. Peterson’s] personal and professional character as a Professor, author, lecturer and public intellectual,” the suit says.

None of the allegations outlined in the suit has been proved in court and those named in the suit have yet to file their statement of defence.

The university said it would “vigorously defend” itself. “Laurier remains committed to intellectual inquiry, critical reflection, scholarly integrity, academic freedom and freedom of expression while striving to be a supportive and inclusive community,” the Waterloo, Ont., school said in a statement.

Several experts in defamation law, however, said the university could argue that any comments made in the meeting are protected by “qualified privilege.”

“The law wants to give people the ability to speak freely without fear of a libel lawsuit in certain situations,” Toronto defamation lawyer Gil Zvulony said.

Disciplinary meetings could be one such situation if the people in the meeting are fulfilling their duty, according to defamation and media lawyer Peter Jacobsen, who also represents The Globe and Mail.

“It will be of importance to determine whether there was a complaint [from a student] to determine whether or not these professors were indeed fulfilling their duty in bringing her into that meeting,” Mr. Jacobsen said.

The university initially said the meeting had been held in response to a student complaint about the showing of the video clip from the public affairs show The Agenda. But an investigation by the university later found no such complaint had been made and blamed mistakes and overreach for the episode. Mr. Rambukkana and the university have issued apologies to Ms. Shepherd.

Last week, Ms. Shepherd filed her own $3.6-million suit against WLU, claiming that the university’s actions have destroyed her chances of employment in academia. Lawyer Howard Levitt is representing both Ms. Shepherd and Mr. Peterson.

In a YouTube video, Mr. Peterson says he was inspired to launch the lawsuit by Ms. Shepherd’s action.

“I’m hoping that the combination of lawsuits will be enough to convince careless university professors and administrators blinded by their own ideology to be much more circumspect in their actions and their words,” he says in the video. He did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

Hundreds of articles from media outlets around the world have questioned Mr. Peterson’s ideas, his responsibility for his followers’ ideas and actions, and his expertise in politics rather than psychology. He first gained public attention by arguing that legislation aimed at ending discrimination against transgender people, such as Bill C-16, forces people to use gender-neutral pronouns and restricts freedom of speech.

The staff members in the meeting could argue they were expressing an opinion, and that they were not doing so maliciously, Mr. Zvulony said.

“Saying he’s like Hitler is an opinion. Nobody believes he is the incarnation of Hitler,” he said.

The suit seeks $500,000 for defamation, $500,000 for injurious falsehood and $500,000 in punitive damages.

I think the bolded portion is the most revealing in the article. This suit didn't make sense to me initially since it was a private conversation not a public defamation (which is what such laws mostly cover). But I think the suit needs to be examined in the context of Ms Sheperd's own suit. It seems like a pincer attack in which the university will be caught in a lose-lose situation in the courts. Either they were "just expressing opinions" as they say in this article, in which case the humiliation and censurement of Ms Sheperd was entirely malicious and unwarranted, or they were expressing the matter of factly and the university now has to justify its position on how JBP's ideas violate the university's hate speech policy in a court of law. It's pretty smart IOW. JBP has the disposable income to make something like this work to set an example for higher education.

 

[Ca.]

Jordan Peterson | Full Address and Q&A | Oxford Union

OxfordUnion Published on Jun 24, 2018 / 1:15:49

A Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto, Peterson has received considerable media coverage after publishing a series of videos criticising the Canadian government's move to enact Bill C-16, which made misgendering a form of hate speech. His recent bestselling book, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos topped the Washington Post, WSJ and Reuters U.S bestsellers lists ABOUT THE

OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Oxford Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. Since 1823, the Union has been promoting debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.

 

[Voyageur]

Very good, c.a.! It was a little different, with some interesting lines of force (although some of the usual structures were present). JP, at one point, was asked a question, more or less, about Russian influences in his life , which he expanded on somewhat; art, novels, writing and he left it very open for his thinking because it has not all resolved itself, or so it seemed. As an important country, people, there appeared to be a sense of great pondering of its historical (and perhaps present) qualities in his mind, yet that might not be so.

There are little funny things to think about with JP, nuances, references, and yet he was hitting the mark on many things in this talk. He spoke of resonance, the usual one foot in order and one in chaos, and the mind's overlaps, separations and ultimately the work to aim at marriage between them, which were not exactly his words.

Some good questions were asked by the audience and it was a lively talk overall.

 

[aragorn]

Jordan Peterson | Full Address and Q&A | Oxford Union

OxfordUnion Published on Jun 24, 2018 / 1:15:49

Thanks c.a.! That's another excellent discussion with Peterson. His way of "thinking with a hammer" never ceases to amaze me. Btw, the thing he says about high and low resolution theories/views echoes what Scottie posted earlier about 'zooming in and out'. Perhaps he's reading this forum? :)

 

[Scottie]

Btw, the thing he says about high and low resolution theories/views echoes what Scottie posted earlier about 'zooming in and out'. Perhaps he's reading this forum?

He stole my idea! And he grew a beard after I did...