Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

Pashalis

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
[...] Why Dr. Gabor Maté disagrees with Dr. Jordan Peterson on his teachings of responsibilities
Sep 24, 2018
What stood out for me in the above video is one sentence that pretty much seems to sum up the real reason some people, including Mate I'm afraid, think of Peterson as an "angry and aggressive person":

[explaining Peterson subtext of quote "a kind of anger in him", "a kind of disdain in him for people who challenge the social structure", "there is an attacking energy in him", "he is always seeing conspiracies of Marxist intellectuals who are out to get him"] ...that's the subtext that I pick upon [that Peterson has] and I can't proof that , but on a gut level, I really, really see it....
Basically Mates reasoning is based on a gut feeling the same way that Trump derangement syndrome people feel it in their guts. Mate and others who see Peterson similarly, should ask themselves why "their gut" is telling them something like this and what this has to do with reality. They should further question their gut feelings and not blindly trust them, since there is a good likelihood that something quite different is creating that gut feeling. Like anger, envy and a not well integrated personality for example. Mate of all people should know that trusting your gut is a very tricky thing, especially if one has many unresolved and not consciously recognized issues that are for example explained in the book "the criminal mind".

Mate should really get up to speed on a number of things before passing judgment on anyone.
 

genero81

Dagobah Resident
FOTCM Member
Well, well, I just saw this. So now we know a little more about Dr. Mate. Just goes to show no matter how smart you are, you really need a network lest you err according to your own biases. Makes me wonder now too about Mate's own addictive tendencies because in my experience, it's denial of reality that tends to fuel addiction. Interpreting reality is a tricky thing when one is too invested in a certain view. It becomes far to easy to see things that are not actually there.
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
What makes this "diagnosis" of "rage" even stranger is the fact that Peterson is probably (from all that I have seen of him, which is a lot) one of the very few people in this world who actually seems to have achieved a level of healthy integration and expression of "rage" that is hard to miss, if you really look into what he is doing and how he interacts with people even for a second somewhat deeper.

In fact, I think I have never witnessed someone quite as able as he is (not to mention in the public sphere) that seems to have managed the art of redirecting "rage" in a healthy and constructive way then he has. I'm not even sure if calling this "healthy rage" or "anger" is the appropriate term for it at all. I think another term would be needed to describe it.

What separates him from most others is that he seems to have reached a very deep visceral understanding of the terror of the situation that is far away from pure theoretical knowledge and a very deep level of compassion and willingness to help others because of it. How one should associate that with "rage" is somewhat beyond me. At least in the usual sense rage is associated with.

Mate seems to be ideologically possessed and indeed should look in the mirror first before diagnosing anyone as having "suppressed rage" since the signs clearly point to the fact that he has that problem first and foremost.

Peterson simply plays in another ballpark and Mate should be grateful and thankful enough to accept that.
Yep. The irony is that Peterson is actually a great example of someone who understands his anger, can express it, but is never controlled by it. Mate's anger, on the other hand, seeps out in passive (or not so passive) aggression. I met him at a book event several years ago, and he didn't impress me as a person who had a handle on his emotions...
 

Gawan

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Seems like Peterson getting some more negative attention, though I hope it makes him even more famous in the end :evil:. Because Swedens foreign minister crawled from under a rock ;-) and said indirectly to Peterson, that he should "crawl under his rock he came from". Of course, this minister is a feminist.

Sweden’s Foreign Minister has issued a rather undiplomatic request to Canadian academic and internet sensation Jordan B. Peterson, thrilling a Stockholm audience by expressing her desire to see him fade from the public eye.

Speaking on a “pro-women” panel in Sweden’s capital on Wednesday, Margot Wallström said that Peterson should "crawl back under the rock he came from,” adding that she "can't grasp why people waste so much time on that man." The snide remarks were reported by local media that covered the event.

Peterson recently visited Sweden to promote the international release of his new book, '12 Rules For Life, an Antidote to Chaos.’ The book has been slammed by the left as conservative snake oil and an affront to feminism.

Wallström is one of the leading forces behind Sweden’s so-called “feminist foreign policy.”

Peterson became an overnight sensation after creating a series of YouTube videos in which he decried the Orwellian nature of Canada’s Bill C-16, which he said would force Canadians to use gender-neutral pronouns. The clinical psychologist has since become a widely followed lecturer, making a number of meme-famous appearances on television.

Peterson, who maintains an active and often combative Twitter account, has apparently not yet responded to Wallström’s fighting words.
'Crawl back under your rock,’ Swedish FM tells anti-PC academic Jordan Peterson
 

seek10

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Seems like Peterson getting some more negative attention, though I hope it makes him even more famous in the end :evil:. Because Swedens foreign minister crawled from under a rock ;-) and said indirectly to Peterson, that he should "crawl under his rock he came from". Of course, this minister is a feminist.
When C's said, "Great Soul", my mind related it to Gandhi. Gandhi too became an instant household name during his first major challenge to British since his arrival back to his birth nation. After that, he has a LOT of up's and down's, but his strength always relied on common man's trust in his conscience to do the right thing. JBP has earned the trust of the right-minded public. Swedens FM comment actually tells more of her stance rather than JBP's stance. I think she is the first political figure commented on him, maybe foreign politician. It moved him from media realm to politics. That may popularise him.

Without knowing, JBP challenged the biggest transition project of STS. Lefties and feminists don't have an answer to his extraordinary ability to express the truth to them except complaining that "They don't understand him". They can complain as long as the economy is good. But once the economy goes down, most of them will come back to the basics in a painful way. I get an impression that JBP is tired recent weeks due to the long crazy worldwide book tour schedule along with those attacks.
 
In this article on SotT, 'Humanities Hijacked by Ideologues': Jordan Peterson excoriates Western Academia , the author opined
However, while spending the entire time trying to "out-articulate" (a new sport among the left it seems) her opponent
I wondered what that meant, which was given a great example just a few sentences later.
Lewis criticizes Peterson: I don't see how your belief in God tessellates with your insistence on pure science.
Being not familiar with the word "tessellates", I looked it up. First definition is "decorate (a floor) with mosaics. " Secondary definition is "MATHEMATICS: cover (a plane surface) by repeated use of a single shape, without gaps or overlapping".

Hmm..

Let's use them in the sentence provided!

"I don't see how your belief in God [decorates the floor with mosaics] with your insistence on pure science."

or perhaps she was speaking mathematically?

"I don't see how your belief in God [covers (for example, a plane surface) by repeated use of a single shape, without gaps or overlapping] with your insistence on pure science."

:rotfl:
 
As for "tesselates", I think it means "fit together", as the pieces of a mosaic or a tesselation.
01:07:08 "and all those pieces tesselate together"
01:07:14 "how all the pieces fit together"
01:07:28 "I don't see how your belief in God tessellates with your insistence on pure science."
...

I'm still in the video, but it's not too bad I think. She might be wrong on many things, but at least she is not completely rude, and she does recognize more than once if her stance isn't valid.
 
Because Swedens foreign minister crawled from under a rock ;-) and said indirectly to Peterson, that he should "crawl under his rock he came from". Of course, this minister is a feminist.
Speaking on a “pro-women” panel in Sweden’s capital on Wednesday, Margot Wallström said that Peterson should "crawl back under the rock he came from,” adding that she "can't grasp why people waste so much time on that man." The snide remarks were reported by local media that covered the event.
A minister who is helping her country to fall off the cliff should be one of the first to crawl on her knees and leave her country. Pathetic elitist living in her gated-world of make believe where I am sure the people she is helping to import would never be allowed in.
 

c.a.

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
JBP IN THE NEWS / GQ trys to right a wong, and fails again. :phaser:


Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson, a very serious thought leader who believes that men would be less violent if only women were required to have sex with them, recently sat for a lengthy interview with Helen Lewis and our across-the-pond colleagues at British GQ. Most of their conversation focused on the pet peeves for which he is known best: feminism, political correctness, and so on. One notable digression, however, concerned the peculiar way that Peterson apparently fuels his brand of vapid pseudointellectualism: He claims to adhere to an all-beef diet.

"Really? Just beef? Can you have, like, ketchup on it?" Lewis asks, with the weary sigh of someone who has just been politely informed that the airline has no record of any reservation under their name. "No, nothing," he replies. "It isn't something I would lightly recommend." He goes on to characterize the regimen as "a little hard on your social life," as if his permanent dead-eyed stare and long-winded expositions on the hazards of "cultural Marxism" weren't already enough to make him North America's suckiest party guest.


Is this your intellectual?

Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson, a very serious thought leader who believes that men would be less violent if only women were required to have sex with them, recently sat for a lengthy interview with Helen Lewis and our across-the-pond colleagues at British GQ. Most of their conversation focused on the pet peeves for which he is known best: feminism, political correctness, and so on. One notable digression, however, concerned the peculiar way that Peterson apparently fuels his brand of vapid pseudointellectualism: He claims to adhere to an all-beef diet.

"Really? Just beef? Can you have, like, ketchup on it?" Lewis asks, with the weary sigh of someone who has just been politely informed that the airline has no record of any reservation under their name. "No, nothing," he replies. "It isn't something I would lightly recommend." He goes on to characterize the regimen as "a little hard on your social life," as if his permanent dead-eyed stare and long-winded expositions on the hazards of "cultural Marxism" weren't already enough to make him North America's suckiest party guest.

It turns out that Peterson's inspiration is his 26-year-old daughter Mikhaila, who told The Atlantic that she began experimenting with elimination diets a few years ago in an effort to address a laundry list of maladies. When only beef, salt, and water remained, her symptoms began disappearing. ("Strangely enough," she notes, her body can still "tolerate" bourbon and vodka.) Today, her father professes to have realized the same types of miraculous results: He told Lewis that he's lost 50 pounds in seven months, stopped snoring, shed unspecified autoimmune conditions, and stopped taking antidepressants altogether. He did not address whether this life choice has helped to curb his penchant for trafficking in boring sexism disguised as groundbreaking academic thought. Perhaps a few more months of hamburger patties will tell.

We asked a few experts for their opinions on the subject; they were, to put it delicately, skeptical. "A diet that is restricted to one food does not make any sense," says Jody Dushay, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. "It doesn't matter what the food is! Even if it's a 'perfect' food, it will still be imperfect." She points out that Peterson's diet leaves him without sources of crucial vitamins and minerals, not to mention carbohydrates. "It's not anything that can sustain human life," says nutritionist Judy Simon, a clinical instructor at the University of Washington Medical Center. Kristina Secinario, a licensed dietician at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, adds that eating is not as simple as just eating; an all-beef diet would not address, for example, the vital emotional and stress-management components of food consumption. (She also wonders whether it is practical for those who travel regularly; after all, there is only so much beef jerky one can tolerate.)

Peterson's star has dimmed a bit of late. An anonymous GQ staffer reports going on a recent first date with a man who enthusiastically referred to his alleged favorite author as a "controversial professor" and "total genius," only to be unable to recall his actual name for most of the evening. (She reports responding to his request for a second date by emitting a "guttural squeak" and running away.)

Unfortunately for Jordan Peterson, it does not seem that hawking this insane gibberish fad diet will prove to be a viable alternative career path. Fortunately for Jordan Peterson, it is only, at best, the eleventh-most objectionable thing about him.

 

Tristan

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
This is the interview to which the article refers, with unmissable moments I have enjoyed it a lot, and he talks about many topics including the carnivore diet (at the end of the video).

He clarifies many issues, while trying to be very precise in the terms he uses, as usual.

 

Woodsman

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
JBP IN THE NEWS / GQ trys to right a wong, and fails again. :phaser:


Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson, a very serious thought leader who believes that men would be less violent if only women were required to have sex with them, recently sat for a lengthy interview with Helen Lewis and our across-the-pond colleagues at British GQ. Most of their conversation focused on the pet peeves for which he is known best: feminism, political correctness, and so on. One notable digression, however, concerned the peculiar way that Peterson apparently fuels his brand of vapid pseudointellectualism: He claims to adhere to an all-beef diet.

"Really? Just beef? Can you have, like, ketchup on it?" Lewis asks, with the weary sigh of someone who has just been politely informed that the airline has no record of any reservation under their name. "No, nothing," he replies. "It isn't something I would lightly recommend." He goes on to characterize the regimen as "a little hard on your social life," as if his permanent dead-eyed stare and long-winded expositions on the hazards of "cultural Marxism" weren't already enough to make him North America's suckiest party guest.


Is this your intellectual?

Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson, a very serious thought leader who believes that men would be less violent if only women were required to have sex with them, recently sat for a lengthy interview with Helen Lewis and our across-the-pond colleagues at British GQ. Most of their conversation focused on the pet peeves for which he is known best: feminism, political correctness, and so on. One notable digression, however, concerned the peculiar way that Peterson apparently fuels his brand of vapid pseudointellectualism: He claims to adhere to an all-beef diet.

"Really? Just beef? Can you have, like, ketchup on it?" Lewis asks, with the weary sigh of someone who has just been politely informed that the airline has no record of any reservation under their name. "No, nothing," he replies. "It isn't something I would lightly recommend." He goes on to characterize the regimen as "a little hard on your social life," as if his permanent dead-eyed stare and long-winded expositions on the hazards of "cultural Marxism" weren't already enough to make him North America's suckiest party guest.

It turns out that Peterson's inspiration is his 26-year-old daughter Mikhaila, who told The Atlantic that she began experimenting with elimination diets a few years ago in an effort to address a laundry list of maladies. When only beef, salt, and water remained, her symptoms began disappearing. ("Strangely enough," she notes, her body can still "tolerate" bourbon and vodka.) Today, her father professes to have realized the same types of miraculous results: He told Lewis that he's lost 50 pounds in seven months, stopped snoring, shed unspecified autoimmune conditions, and stopped taking antidepressants altogether. He did not address whether this life choice has helped to curb his penchant for trafficking in boring sexism disguised as groundbreaking academic thought. Perhaps a few more months of hamburger patties will tell.

We asked a few experts for their opinions on the subject; they were, to put it delicately, skeptical. "A diet that is restricted to one food does not make any sense," says Jody Dushay, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. "It doesn't matter what the food is! Even if it's a 'perfect' food, it will still be imperfect." She points out that Peterson's diet leaves him without sources of crucial vitamins and minerals, not to mention carbohydrates. "It's not anything that can sustain human life," says nutritionist Judy Simon, a clinical instructor at the University of Washington Medical Center. Kristina Secinario, a licensed dietician at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, adds that eating is not as simple as just eating; an all-beef diet would not address, for example, the vital emotional and stress-management components of food consumption. (She also wonders whether it is practical for those who travel regularly; after all, there is only so much beef jerky one can tolerate.)

Peterson's star has dimmed a bit of late. An anonymous GQ staffer reports going on a recent first date with a man who enthusiastically referred to his alleged favorite author as a "controversial professor" and "total genius," only to be unable to recall his actual name for most of the evening. (She reports responding to his request for a second date by emitting a "guttural squeak" and running away.)

Unfortunately for Jordan Peterson, it does not seem that hawking this insane gibberish fad diet will prove to be a viable alternative career path. Fortunately for Jordan Peterson, it is only, at best, the eleventh-most objectionable thing about him.

There's no comment section accompanying that piece in GQ, I notice. That's hardly surprising.

It was clear from this author's words and tone that he is quite determined to wield his free will like a mighty hammer, smashing any twinkle or hint of Objective (Objectionable) Reality that might come to trouble his ideological poise. So be it. It's altogether too much work to try to convince the stubbornly unconvinceable. All you can do is toss them a flotation ring and recommend they pull themselves up by it. -And let them drown if they choose. It's no great loss, and indeed, a comfort even as their incessant vitriol bubbles into silence. They will become dreams of the past, fading away, but clutching fiercely their cold trophies, not having had to change their minds. Congratulations! What was your name, again..?

I've been watching the Keto train pick up a whole lot of steam lately, with dozens upon dozens of new adherents just in my local area, drawn from the population of regular, normal folks who don't spend time on Twitter or obsessively reading the news, all of whom sing praises of High Fat, Low Carb as their body weights normalize and lingering ailments of every description clear up.

Those among them who are unsure of what to think of JBP ought to read this article. They'll get a clear picture, I think.
 

Voyageur

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Amsterdam's Interview
Very good, thanks.

Btw, here I had to use the the youtube link as it was not available otherwise.

JP, again, showed his humility when discussing how people have responded to him - people who were in their doom and came around. Very good JP!

This lead to the Q&A's that had a number of really good responses...he respondes on the architype of Trump when asked (with Clinton in tow); funny.

Lastly, was thinking just two years ago, who could have perdicted his dedication to speaking with people the world over, to helping people, and man, you can see how so many are looking for, to paraphrases his words, a new 'map of meaning' for themselves and how to interact. He said that he, by nature, is pessimistic, and yet he is optimistic as people are acceding out of some of the darkness in their lives. Very encouraging.
 
Top Bottom