Jordan Peterson: Gender Pronouns and Free Speech War

[axj]

You say, "the soul is who we are", but I'm not sure why you think that. One of the foundational principles of the fourth way Work is the opposite of that: that we are an artificially created personality and only through esoteric work can we grow a soul or connect with our higher centres/higher self/soul.

For souled beings, the soul is who we are. The body is just a vessel used by that spirit being. Having an artificially created personality does not mean that it is who we are, even when we are fully identified in it and believe so. It is a tricky topic though, since it does of course take conscious Work to fully connect to the higher centers.

OP's can't do this, but they are not physically dead or appear to others as zombie-like empty vessels.

OP's have group souls with the capacity to become individual souls. So they are not as fully "soul-less" as you portray them here.

 

[T.C.]

For souled beings, the soul is who we are. The body is just a vessel used by that spirit being. Having an artificially created personality does not mean that it is who we are, even when we are fully identified in it and believe so. It is a tricky topic though, since it does of course take conscious Work to fully connect to the higher centers.

So if our personality is the same as our soul, what is the purpose and function of a) doing the work, and b) connecting with the 'higher centres'?

OP's have group souls with the capacity to become individual souls. So they are not as fully "soul-less" as you portray them here.

If they don't have an individual soul, then they're soul-less. That's what not having a soul means. Unless you want to argue that individuals of 2D have souls. Then you're making up your own definitions of words.

 

[axj]

So if our personality is the same as our soul

I said exactly the opposite. The artificially created personality is a part of the body-vessel, which the soul or the spirit being temporarily uses during a physical incarnation.

If they don't have an individual soul, then they're soul-less. That's what not having a soul means.

Group souls are a type of soul, is it not? Or are group souls not souls by your definition? The point is that even OP's are not completely like "zombies", since they do have group souls and can develop individual souls.

That doesn't mean that they cannot be dangerous or easily manipulated by 4D STS.

 

[Redrock12]

Same here.


View attachment 84666

Ditto

 

[T.C.]

So if our personality is the same as our soul...

I said exactly the opposite.

You said:

For souled beings, the soul is who we are.

So I ask, what do you mean by 'who we are'. You believe that the personality who is writing the posts under the name of axj is no different than the soul of axj? (assuming axj has a soul). If that is the case, then I ask you again (since you didn't answer the first time):

what is the purpose and function of a) doing the work, and b) connecting with the 'higher centres'?

 

[Bluegazer]

You can support a regime that kills innocent people without being aware of it. We saw this with Covid-19. Ignorance, fear and propaganda blind those who support a genocidal regime. But there are also those who know and support this regime for other reasons, power for example; and also others because they suffer from psychiatric illnesses, are psychopaths themselves. Have no spirit inside them. I don't know about JP. Maybe he was really scared, maybe he decided to sell his soul to the devil.

Or simply a victim of their own prejudices and biases. The sacred cow of believing that Western civilization is the best thing that could have happened to mankind. Rome thought that of itself and we know how it ended...

 

[axj]

So I ask, what do you mean by 'who we are'.

It is kind of self-explanatory. We are not our bodies, we are spirit beings who temporarily use them as vehicles in this incarnation.

You believe that the personality who is writing the posts under the name of axj is no different than the soul of axj?

Again, where do you get this idea? The personality is kind of a more complex topic, because as we do the Work, more and more parts of the personality become aligned with the higher centers - so that the personality becomes more and more a pure expression of the soul. People who do not do the Work are fully identified in the false or artificial parts of the personality, believing that that is who they are.

(assuming axj has a soul)

I wonder why you seem so confrontational, including little "jabs" like this one. Do you think there are a lot of OPs on this forum discussing what souls are? If not, why even make remarks like that?

If that is the case, then I ask you again (since you didn't answer the first time)

I didn't answer the first time, because the premise of your question was the opposite of what I said ("So if our personality is the same as our soul..."). I don't even know what the purpose of your question is. Why are you doing the Work?

 

[T.C.]

I wonder why you seem so confrontational

I’m not being confrontational. You’ve snipped a short sentence out of everything I’m asking you and taken it out of context in order to deflect away from the issues I’m pointing out. We’re all trying to be on the same page when we’re discussing Work concepts and metaphysics, and you and I are not on the same page. So I’m asking questions to try to understand what you’re saying.

I don't even know what the purpose of your question is.

The purpose of my question is to show that if you answer it, it will invalidate your statement that anyone with a soul, is their soul, and not their false personality (which you know, which is why you’re not answering it). At least, that was Gurdjieff’s theory anyway, and the one we’ve been going with since this forum was started.

 

[axj]

The purpose of my question is to show that if you answer it, it will invalidate your statement that anyone with a soul, is their soul, and not their false personality

The soul (or 'consciouness unit') may delude itself into believing that it is the false personality, but who you are is still the soul deluding itself and not the false personality. I don't think that anything Gurdjieff said disagrees with that.

And yes, you are being confrontational for some reason. The same topic can be discussed without making accusations like these and presenting them as "facts":

(which you know, which is why you’re not answering it)

You’ve snipped a short sentence out of everything I’m asking you and taken it out of context in order to deflect away from the issues I’m pointing out.

I would suggest that you look with brutal honesty at what is causing you to use this rather aggressive tone (anger? at what?) - and whether it is really my words that are the cause of it.

 

[Ricardo]

( imo ) Mr. Jordan Peterson hasn't benefited from the works of the Tradition (...) his emotional center and , by , implication intellectual center, ( his crying on international teevee ) , are being moved about , thus for example , when dealing with an apparatchik (op ) his emotional response , explicitly addresses words , which are not acknowledged in his own self-reflection , by context ( ie. " is it about raising money for you ,or is it about a cause ? " bbc machine ) , an organic portal can only reflect generalities thus , so personal boundaries are , non existent , further , a year or so ago , was watching a panel discussing on the daily wire with Mr. Jordan . (iirc) , the entire discussion with representatives of several formal organized religions, was , eh , balanced only on words , thus , to borrow gnosis , first law and meaning thereof , love, was entirely unmet , t'was merely words meeting words and struggling to know only based on an supposedly , empirical, historical sense, for example , to be explicit , that the pearly gates are a place(s) is entirely , unknown. Am i making sense ?

 

[axj]

You say, "the soul is who we are", but I'm not sure why you think that. One of the foundational principles of the fourth way Work is the opposite of that: that we are an artificially created personality and only through esoteric work can we grow a soul or connect with our higher centres/higher self/soul.

Gurdjieff's Fourth Way ideas need to be taken with a grain of salt too, especially his purely materialistic thinking or that "we have to grow a soul". It was discussed in this session several years ago:

Session 14 October 2017​

(L) {Addressing Cs} You have already said that all souls exist from the beginning, and that souls are not created as we go along through time. We asked about that some time ago when we were asking about Messages from Michael and so forth. And you've also talked about instances of large soul groups such as organic portals or whatever - group souls, souls of animals, and so on and so forth. So basically, we already have kind of a system here that you have given that is quite different from what Gurdjieff proposed, which was that people had to GROW a soul. It was like something that if you didn't have it, when you died, you died. And if you were only partly crystallized, well then a certain number of days after you died, that you would be kind of like floating in some atmospheric area and then even that part of you would die. That's kind of what I got from reading this book. And I think that was partly from some of the ancient traditions, actually.

(Joe) That's what the Cs have said about kind of a "pool".

(L) Well, going into a pool is one thing – there is still soul involved even if it is a fragment of a larger soul - but here Gurdjieff had the idea that there is no such thing as soul as we conceive it; a soul had to be “grown” or crystallized in a given lifetime and even then, it was material.

(Mikey) Which parts of Gurdjieff's teachings are still most useful to read?

A: Psychology, up to a point. [...]

Q: (Chu) What was Gurdjieff trying to achieve?

A: His own salvation and immortal life.

Q: (Joe) And was he successful?

A: Not by his terms. He was actually rather surprised!

Q: (Pierre) Was the surprise that after dying, he...

(Joe) That he got a lot wrong, yeah.

A: Yes [...]

(Joe) I wonder... His own fixation on materialism and seeing the material universe as the be-all and end-all ... I mean, it kinda reflected in his approach to life. You talked about Idiots in Paris and the way he ate and how he abused himself with food and alcohol and bad living habits basically and probably caused himself an early death. The descriptions of the feasts he used to have were extreme, just eat and eat and eat...

(L) And that was contradictory to his whole thing: that you've got to learn about your machine in order to take care of it properly in order to preserve your life long enough in order to be able to have time enough to figure things out and to work on yourself.

(Joe) But how did he not see the negative health effects that he had from how he was eating?

(Pierre) In his mind, he was above it. (He thought he was crystallized and could do what he pleased.)

Session 25 February 1995​

A: Soul is consciousness, period.

 

[Joe]

Maybe it's just the case that "great souls" come here with great lessons to learn and in the process make great mistakes. Being on the wrong side of history (supporting genocide) is perhaps not such a big 'sin' as we might imagine when you do it for what you think are good reasons. Let's be honest, there's a big difference between Peterson's public support for Israeli actions in Palestine and him taking direct part in it himself. It seems there's a lot of leeway allowed for a person just being really stupid on a particular issue.

 

[Jebra]

You know there may be a more simplier explanation for his behaviour. Obviously I don't know his mind and may probably be wrong but..

I don't really think he knew the full vitriol that he would face when he started speaking out in 2016. He's been persecuted and harrassed and this obviously is highly stressful. He coped with the anxiety by taking psych meds. He became incredibly well known and his books widely read. He became wealthy too (but you can so easily lose all that!) The persecution and harassment carried on and when his wife became ill it was a tipping point. He went on the high dose Benzos then and he became seriously ill coming off them which, frankly I think he did the wrong way. (Correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like he went cold-turkey instead of gradually lowering the dose). The combination of all this was way too much for him and the left continued to attack him and he sought safety from this.

The Jews are considered the most persecuted group of people, but they are also the most protected. You can say nothing bad about them and Israel can you? Getting 'in' with them is one way of shielding yourself from constant attacks and harrasment but staying 'in' with them perhaps comes with a price that is too high. I think that is where he is right now.

Just my thoughts..

 

[Revolucionar]

JP is ideologically possesed. He's also a condescending prick with a massive ego. I think he's always been this way. Our mistake was holding him in high regard merely because he was on our side of the argument for a good deal of time and he was very effective at countering the woke mind virus in the oubloc arena. It was sort of like cheering for your team and one of its greatest players, but now get to meet our hero, so to speak.

It's not really a stretch for someone who's so obsessed with the old testament and is very creative about interpreting the stories in a positive light to become a great defender of the people who gave birth to these ideas.

If he is able to cast the supremely psychopathic Yahweh character in a positive light, it's no problem for him to weave interpretations of the current genocide that cast Jews as the good guys.

He's really all about the materialistic, Darwinist interpretation of history and life and only uses religion and spiritual notions to bolster his arguments. I mean, look at how he talks about children and what his child rearing advice consists of. It's utterly devoid of compassion and flies in the face of everything we know to be true about trauma and all of that mess.

I don't think any sort of programming needed to happen during his hospitalisation. He's just lost all patience and self control after and has become a grumpy old man. And grumpy old men are basically the same as what they were earlier in life, they're just not hiding it anymore.

Plus, this grumpy old fart also has a bad case of Dunning-Kruger effect. One of the worst I've seen.

I can't listen to him, or read him anymore, even when I'm in agreement with the point he's trying to make, because he just comes across as angry, bitter and jaded. I don't want him as champion of any cause that I might stand with.

Piss off, JP!

 

[iamthatis]

I started reading MacDonald's Culture of Critique which looks at Jewish involvement in destroying the West as a European Civilization, and I think it has some bearing on understanding Peterson.

The best strategy for a collectivist group like the Jews for destroying Europeans therefore is to convince the Europeans of their own moral bankruptcy.

That's clearly happening.

A major theme of CofC is that this is exactly what Jewish intellectual movements have done. They have presented Judaism as morally superior to European civilization and European civilization as morally bankrupt and the proper target of altruistic punishment [AKA the punishment of freeloaders - MacDonald says this is a uniquely Western trait]. The consequence is that once Europeans are convinced of their own moral depravity, they will destroy their own people in a fit of altruistic punishment.

I don't think this is where Peterson is at just yet, but he's perfectly willing to advocate for the destruction of certain other peoples - the Palestinians of course, and also the Iranians. He's probably not aware that this is what he's doing, but his rhetoric against Iran could easily translate to an advocacy of mass death, not just through regional war, but also knock-on affects like fuel price increases and economic collapse. He's already on that track. It's only one step further before he - like certain American conservatives who are remembering Franco's anti-left brutality with some appreciation - starts writing some Twitter poems about killing the woke.

The general dismantling of the culture of the West and eventually its demise as anything resembling an ethnic entity will occur as a result of a moral onslaught triggering a paroxysm of altruistic punishment. And thus the intense effort among Jewish intellectuals to continue the ideology of the moral superiority of Judaism and its role as undeserving historical victim while at the same time continuing the onslaught on the moral legitimacy of the West.

So there has been a trend to convince Europeans of their moral bankruptcy. It ramped up in the cultural revolution of the 60's, in which the Left was encouraged to hate civilization, and become disturbed degenerates. It grew slowly but surely and had another boost more recently with the woke nonsense coming to be a major force in Western culture, in which the Left was further encouraged in its slide into total depravity. Many normal people, including Peterson (in his recent past), saw this, and attempted to take a stand against the degeneracy. However, according to MacDonald, this right wing response was predicted, and is part and parcel of the plan to destroy the West - by provoking the right into reaction mode.

A common response to societal upheaval is looking to the idealized past for answers. For JP, that was the Old Testament. At the same time Western culture has been corrupted by the PTB - the PTB making it look like part of a Jewish ethnic strategy, setting them up as scapegoats - Judaism was also been upheld as a shining light in the darkness. Peterson took the bait. I suppose we'll see if he goes into an anti-woke Franco-mode in reaction to whatever chaos is coming our way.

Another and maybe more uplifting thought I had when thinking about all this is how important it is to avoid the temptation of looking at the woke poisoning of the West and assuming that it's the entirety of Western civilization that is corrupted. I've done this, and it's so damn demoralizing. But that's exactly what they want. It's also incorrect, and for me at least I think it's important to strike the balance and remember that there's still plenty of good, common-sense people of character out there, doing their best, and that maybe a civilization isn't so easily destroyed.