# Any Jordan Peterson Fans?



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

Started watching the guy. Amazing orator and philosopher in my opinion.

For those not in the know, Jordan Peterson semirecently got famous after the Canadian government threatened to pass a bill requiring people to use the pronouns required by other people. He vehemently opposed it, claiming that it infringed on free speech. 1,000,000 YouTube subs later, here we are.

He claims not to be particularly left or right, he appears to be an advocate for common sense than anything else.

Thoughts?


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 21, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> Recently started watching the guy. Amazing orator and philosopher in my opinion.
> 
> For those not in the know, Jordan Peterson semirecently got famous after the Canadian government threatened to pass a bill requiring people to use the pronouns required by other people. He vehemently opposed it, claiming that it infringed on free speech. 1,000,000 YouTube subs later, here we are.
> 
> ...


No its common sense to use the right pronoun to the other person it's a little thing called respect. Its that simple


----------



## Mark McDonut (Sep 21, 2018)

ehh he likes to use narrow anecdotes to push as facts, people like that just come off as arrogant in my opinion, you learn by discussing and learning about varieties of backgrounds and situations with people, not by listening to some IRL LPT coach.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 21, 2018)

You can’t always know what someone’s pronouns are by looking at them. Asking and correctly using someone’s pronouns is one of the most basic ways to show your respect for their gender identity.

When someone is referred to with the wrong pronoun, it can make them feel disrespected, invalidated, dismissed, alienated, or dysphoric ( often all of the above.)

It is a privilege to not have to worry about which pronoun someone is going to use for you based on how they perceive your gender. If you have this privilege, yet fail to respect someone else’s gender identity, it is not only disrespectful and hurtful, but also oppressive.

But hey its ok this is just the view of a transgender woman that witnesses that damage using incorrect pronouns does on a daily basis.


----------



## sarkwalvein (Sep 21, 2018)

TBH, I agree with many of the points he brings upon and with his reasoning.
All in all, I believe he is quite reasonable, and he doesn't just "pull shit out his ass".
The arguments he usually present are very well thought and with some solid base to it.
He says some things I don't want to listen, but it doesn't mean I think he is wrong in those cases.
I think many times people prejudge and label the guy, later avoiding to truly listening to him and trying to understand what he is saying.
I also think that many other people misinterpret what he says, adding to it an ultra-right seasoning that is not there, but that serves their narrative.

That said I also disagree with some points he makes, but in general I would say he is decent and reasonable.

If we only considered his quality as an orator, I would say he is a near genius level orator. But the same could be said about Joseph Goebbels, so not sure that is a compliment.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 21, 2018)

sarkwalvein said:


> TBH, I agree with many of the points he brings upon and with his reasoning.
> All in all, I believe he is quite reasonable, and he doesn't just "pull shit out his ass".
> The arguments he usually present are very well thought and with some solid base to it.
> He says some thing I don't want to listen, but it doesn't mean I think he is wrong in those cases.
> ...


So do you believe he has the right to use whatever pronoun he wants even though it is going to cause hurt to the other person??


----------



## sarkwalvein (Sep 21, 2018)

AmandaRose said:


> So do you believe he has the right to use whatever pronoun he wants even though it is going to cause hurt to the other person??


Kind of yes. I believe _the government shouldn't force you_ to use the language in some kind of state-regulated way, not only pronouns.
That said I think it would be disrespectful and ill-intended to use the pronouns (or some other words) in a way that would hurt other people.
I think it is a personal choice in this case, to be a disrespectful asshole or to be a decent person, not something the state should regulate.

Well, whatever... I myself wouldn't be an asshole, but I don't want to think that I only behave so because the state is threatening me.


----------



## Localhorst86 (Sep 21, 2018)

AmandaRose said:


> So do you believe he has the right to use whatever pronoun he wants even though it is going to cause hurt to the other person??


"So you're saying..."

He's not against using the correct pronouns, he's agains making up new ones.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875695

EDIT: To clarify: he's not against refering to you as an individual as either "he" or "she" depending on what you identify as. He's refusing to refer to everyone as "they" or even "ze" or "zir"


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 21, 2018)

Localhorst86 said:


> "So you're saying..."
> 
> He's not against using the correct pronouns, he's agains making up new ones.
> 
> ...


Yes but ze or zir has been used in the transgender community for at least 20 years mabye even longer they are hardly new made up words. Do I personally like the use of ze or zir no but i respect peoples rights to use them and will address them as such.


----------



## Localhorst86 (Sep 21, 2018)

AmandaRose said:


> Yes but ze or zir has been used in the transgender community for at least 20 years mabye even longer they are hardly new made up words. Do I personally like the use of ze or zir no but i respect peoples rights to use them and will address them as such.


I would like for you to further adress me as "hjzudzs"


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

Localhorst86 said:


> "So you're saying..."
> 
> He's not against using the correct pronouns, he's agains making up new ones.
> 
> ...





AmandaRose said:


> Yes but ze or zir has been used in the transgender community for at least 20 years mabye even longer they are hardly new made up words. Do I personally like the use of ze or zir no but i respect peoples rights to use them and will address them as such.



Guys, he has said multiple times that trans students ask him to refer to them as their pronoun, and he'll refer to them with their pronoun. He opposed the bill based on the fact that it would *force *you to say someone's pronouns.


----------



## AmandaRose (Sep 21, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> Guys, he has said multiple times that trans students ask him to refer to them as their pronoun, and he'll refer to them with their pronoun. He opposed the bill based on the fact that it would *force *you to say someone's pronouns.


The above news report says differently 

Little quote from it. 

Dr Peterson was especially frustrated with being asked to use alternative pronouns as requested by trans students or staff, like the singular 'they' or 'ze' and 'zir', used by some as alternatives to 'she' or 'he'.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

AmandaRose said:


> The above news report says differently
> 
> Little quote from it.
> 
> Dr Peterson was especially frustrated with being asked to use alternative pronouns as requested by trans students or staff, like the singular 'they' or 'ze' and 'zir', used by some as alternatives to 'she' or 'he'.



I genuinely have no idea, none of his actual interviews say that.


----------



## CallmeBerto (Sep 21, 2018)

I've only listened to a handful of his videos and from what I've heard. I like him. One thing I really like is his series on taking ownership of your life and becoming the best version of you, you can be.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

I, uh, know a friend who listens to Jordan Peterson via lofi mixes that sample his speeches. It's kind of cool to listen to, honestly.

As for JP's actual content, though, can't say I have much of an opinion on it. I will say, however, that I don't like the implications of forcing proper pronouns onto people under a law, even if it is common decency to use them.


----------



## erikas (Sep 21, 2018)

I was 100% with him on the pronouns issue. And for a while after that, but then he started saying some really dumb shit. He thinks god is necessary for morality and said that Sam Harris is a christian in denial. Also for a guy who doesn't want to use artificially invented language, for some fucking reason he decided to redefine truth as something completely unusable. Watch some of his debates with Sam Harris to get what i'm talking about.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

erikas said:


> I was 100% with him on the pronouns issue. And for a while after that, but then he started saying some really dumb shit. He thinks god is necessary for morality and said that Sam Harris is a christian in denial. Also for a guy who doesn't want to use artificially invented language, for some fucking reason he decided to redefine truth as something completely unusable. Watch some of his debates with Sam Harris to get what i'm talking about.



Not sure what you mean by the god thing. He was saying that Christianity was the basis for early morality systems.


----------



## erikas (Sep 21, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> Not sure what you mean by the god thing. He was saying that Christianity was the basis for early morality systems.


He said to Sam Harris that he is not an atheist because he has morals and that morals come from christianity.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

erikas said:


> He said to Sam Harris that he is not an atheist because he has morals and that morals come from christianity.



Could you hit me with a link? Pretty stupid on his part if he really thinks that.


----------



## erikas (Sep 21, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> Could you hit me with a link? Pretty stupid on his part if he really thinks that.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 21, 2018)

Seldom watch the guy directly, and if I do it is usually him on a TV show or giving a talk rather than his lectures or his webcam videos, but do seem to see a fair bit of rebuttal and counter rebuttal concerning him. Haven't read any of his books either but I don't think I am the target audience, if I see one in a charity shop in a couple of years I might give it a go though. Not a fan of his religious stuff and there have been stronger science types in the past, though I am probably thinking more straight biology with an atheist objective and such rather than psychology and sociology with a... for want of a better term I am going with humanitarian bent. He does not seem to get challenged the best either -- usually get some shrieking harpy or some poor bastard that has never been taught to argue properly (or what they consider proper argument does not hold up under law, logic, most forms of morality or the things which typically underpin all of those), possibly one that also believes such utter nonsense as "there are no biological differences between men and women" (plus all the other sorts of things that spill forth from such circles), and then left wondering why their feels based reasoning or disingenuous* tactics fell flat on their face.
On the other hand other than the religious stuff most of what I have seen from him is pretty good, he is probably overly empathetic for my taste and approach to the world but such things are typical of medics really. Seen a few times where he has not got a formulated and reasoned argument to hand and unfortunately goes for the politician's answer or dodges the question -- I was always taught and can see the value in saying "I don't know" (usually before immediately breaking the problem down and learning what I need to solve it), however psychiatry occasionally has different approaches (see something like refocusing**) so it is not entirely unexpected. By similar token I have seen better historians but if we go with history is about critical analysis rather than memorising names, dates and events then I can see listening to what he might have to say.
With all that said he seldom seems to hold anything like a radical or indefensible position***, again often contrary to some vocal narratives but nothing most people out on the street would consider terribly radical.

Anecdotes I see mentioned above and that is an interesting one. It has been said that the plural of anecdote is not data and I agree, though it could be the basis for a hypothesis. At the same time one of my favourite book franchises is the freakonomics one and they noted that part of their success was the ability to make it presentable to the average person, something credited to the journalist/writer part of the pairing. Personally I actually like dry data but it is rare for me to meet a normal person that does, everybody likes anecdotes and observations though.

I once saw someone had said something to the effect of "every 20 years or so a charismatic figure arises to help direct "aimless" young men, Dr Peterson is then that today" and there is an element of that from where I sit. Not even close enough for me to want to dismiss him though and absolutely regard him as a considerable force for good in the world. So yeah seems like a dude with an abundance of empathy and a desire to make the world a better place, one that does not buy into a popular narrative at this point in time and thus suffers a bit for it.

*whether they know it, and indeed the likes of https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ , is a different matter. Sadly full reasoned debate and all that goes with it (classically you would probably find it taught as "rhetoric") is not taught so well these days.

**I can argue with other science/engineering types and with businessmen, can just about hold my own with lawyers and finance people as well, mentally distressed types is another matter entirely. I saw the sorts of things that someone with the relevant training can do the other day (far from the first time, but first in a while)... it was about all I could do to keep conversing and not screw things up and it is not like I entirely lack capabilities in that arena.

***relevant




AmandaRose said:


> No its common sense to use the right pronoun to the other person it's a little thing called respect. Its that simple





AmandaRose said:


> So do you believe he has the right to use whatever pronoun he wants even though it is going to cause hurt to the other person??


There is a difference between respect and legal requirement, and it sounds like he was speaking out against the latter.
Also you would have to qualify harms, something remarkably hard to do under the law and incredibly variable as well.

To that end their ain't any law against being a cunt, indeed such a law would probably be antithetical to the notions underpinning law making in any legal tradition in the more desirable parts of the world.


----------



## Taleweaver (Sep 21, 2018)

I honestly don't know. A couple month ago, I made the error of watching a random youtube video of him. All of a sudden, my youtube became FLOODED with suggestions on him, all bearing titles as "Peterson DESTROYS <random person>", "watch Peterson wipe the verbal floor with <someone else I don't know>", "Peterson UNRAVELS the LIES and PROPAGANDA of <yet someone else>" and so on. Christ...okay, fine: the guy is trending...can he please trend somewhere else? He might be the superhero of the social justice warriors league, or even the direct opposite, but I was just trying to look up some gaming videos or my daily dose of Trump scandals. 

Okay, on a more serious note: the reason I don't know anything about him is because I'm against his fanbase. The guy is apparently smart and takes a strong opinion. That's nice for him, but it doesn't help if all I know about him comes from either drooling fanboys or offended critics.

EDIT: kind of forgot, but what's the deal with those pronouns, really?  Yes, it's stupid to pass a law for it in either direction, but defending the right against is isn't much less stupid. From personal experience, transgenders don't mind at all if you stumble or are unsure whether to call someone he or she (or both, or none), as long as you treat them like everyone else (I'm honestly not sure if that's the local LGTBDHKLSFKLJQ...something community is or a general trend).


----------



## pustal (Sep 21, 2018)

He has some points but as some narrow minded views as well. He repeatedly calls childish people who don't live to fulfil his view of what a roll should be in society which frankly is the Christian family. I'm a function adult, I have a job I studied for and payed my taxes. I go home and play videogames because I feel happy about it, so screw him if he doesn't like that? I don't want kids, he can have kids for me with his wife if he wants to.

Then he undermines stuff like the feminine struggle. Yes, it is true that much of the rop jobs require a certain type of people that are basically either sociopathic or extremely pragmatic, because their job is to turn a profit, and that men tend to fill that description more often, but there are obstacles and glass ceilings for women that have to be address. I see in the workspace that women are far too often and far too naturally sexualized and disregarded. Things have come a long way, but they are not there yet.

It also annoys me, for the most conservetcon views the guy has, the alt right goes to the extreme of adulterating what he says and make a champion out of him.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Seldom watch the guy directly, and if I do it is usually him on a TV show or giving a talk rather than his lectures or his webcam videos, but do seem to see a fair bit of rebuttal and counter rebuttal concerning him. Haven't read any of his books either but I don't think I am the target audience, if I see one in a charity shop in a couple of years I might give it a go though. Not a fan of his religious stuff and there have been stronger science types in the past, though I am probably thinking more straight biology with an atheist objective and such rather than psychology and sociology with a... for want of a better term I am going with humanitarian bent. He does not seem to get challenged the best either -- usually get some shrieking harpy or some poor bastard that has never been taught to argue properly (or what they consider proper argument does not hold up under law, logic, most forms of morality or the things which typically underpin all of those), possibly one that also believes such utter nonsense as "there are no biological differences between men and women" (plus all the other sorts of things that spill forth from such circles), and then left wondering why their feels based reasoning or disingenuous* tactics fell flat on their face.
> On the other hand other than the religious stuff most of what I have seen from him is pretty good, he is probably overly empathetic for my taste and approach to the world but such things are typical of medics really. Seen a few times where he has not got a formulated and reasoned argument to hand and unfortunately goes for the politician's answer or dodges the question -- I was always taught and can see the value in saying "I don't know" (usually before immediately breaking the problem down and learning what I need to solve it), however psychiatry occasionally has different approaches (see something like refocusing**) so it is not entirely unexpected. By similar token I have seen better historians but if we go with history is about critical analysis rather than memorising names, dates and events then I can see listening to what he might have to say.
> With all that said he seldom seems to hold anything like a radical or indefensible position***, again often contrary to some vocal narratives but nothing most people out on the street would consider terribly radical.
> 
> ...




Whenever I see one of your posts, I don't know if I should think:

Man, this guy is so smart!

Or if I should think:

How does he have the time to type out half an essay on a gaming forum?


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 21, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> Or if I should think:
> 
> How does he have the time to type out half an essay on a gaming forum?


I type fast and such that I can think about things I want to write while my fingers set about the mindless task of typing it out. Was a trick I picked up many years ago and has served me well ever since.

On a different note. Forgot about the IQ stuff in the reply above. He seems to lean into that far more than I care for. The measurement of abilities is a fascinating field and one that will only get more interesting as the years roll on (ain't like jobs for mindless button pushers are becoming more common) but... I mainly figure there is a reason it is only really the US that cares to administer such things routinely and everywhere else does not.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 21, 2018)

erikas said:


> He said to Sam Harris that he is not an atheist because he has morals and that morals come from christianity.



Eh, it should be noted that this was after he was extremely emotional and was literally crying. Pretty much everything else he says contradicts the weird statement he made in this particular interview.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



FAST6191 said:


> I type fast and such that I can think about things I want to write while my fingers set about the mindless task of typing it out. Was a trick I picked up many years ago and has served me well ever since.


For me, I've always been very over-critical. I constantly try to figure out how to simplify my statements and improve my grammar/spelling.


----------



## erikas (Sep 21, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> Eh, it should be noted that this was after he was extremely emotional and was literally crying. Pretty much everything else he says contradicts the weird statement he made in this particular interview.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


The thing is that he said it, and i haven't heard him say that he was wrong on this. As for contradicting himself, his "the goal of life is to play in a way that everyone invites you to play with them" is the best explanation for morality i have ever heard, but then he still says that morals come from Christianity, so wrap your head around that.


----------



## Taleweaver (Sep 21, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> I type fast...


I *KNEW *it!!! 

/off-topic


----------



## Subtle Demise (Sep 21, 2018)

AmandaRose said:


> You can’t always know what someone’s pronouns are by looking at them. Asking and correctly using someone’s pronouns is one of the most basic ways to show your respect for their gender identity.
> 
> When someone is referred to with the wrong pronoun, it can make them feel disrespected, invalidated, dismissed, alienated, or dysphoric ( often all of the above.)
> 
> ...


Yeah, someone purposely misgendering someone else is an asshole, but you can't really make being an asshole illegal. People have the right to act like pieces of shit, but the beautiful thing about freedom of speech is that we can tell them they're pieces of shit. Constantly saying rude and offensive things has real life consequences socially and in the workplace. That's what I would call true social justice. 

When the government starts making laws mandating being nice to each other, it breeds contempt and rebellion, and people will break the laws out of spite. Also as well-intentioned as a law like this seems to be, it still favors one group of people over others, essentially giving them more rights than everyone else. This would breed further contempt, and bring more bigots out of the woodwork, as well as other groups wanting their fair share of special treatment. You also have the problem of trying to prove something like this in court without some kind of recording. Unless the burden of proof is so low that a single testimony is enough for a conviction, but that just opens the door for false accusations and all kinds of scummy shit.

I get offended all the time by all kinds of people: far-left Democrats, far-right Republicans, religious zealots who try to turn nations into theocracies, and the list goes on; but I believe that putting individual liberties as a first priority is one of the biggest building blocks to a great civilization. Their rights don't end where my feelings begin.

As for the man this thread is actually about: it's kind of concerning that he thinks that mankind can't have a morality without God. The same God who both commited and commanded unspeakable acts in the Holy Bible. The same God that people actually believed commanded the Crusades and the God Hates Fags movement started by the Westboro Baptist Church. The same God who punished all of mankind multiple times for the actions of Adam and Eve. The same one who had his own son tortured and executed in one of the most inhumane ways imaginable. I'm not trying to start a religious debate in this thread, but I'm just saying that the standard for morality there isn't a very good one and that maybe we get our morality from something else, perhaps an innate desire to see our species survive?


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 22, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> As for the man this thread is actually about: it's kind of concerning that he thinks that mankind can't have a morality without God. The same God who both commited and commanded unspeakable acts in the Holy Bible. The same God that people actually believed commanded the Crusades and the God Hates Fags movement started by the Westboro Baptist Church. The same God who punished all of mankind multiple times for the actions of Adam and Eve. The same one who had his own son tortured and executed in one of the most inhumane ways imaginable. I'm not trying to start a religious debate in this thread, but I'm just saying that the standard for morality there isn't a very good one and that maybe we get our morality from something else, perhaps an innate desire to see our species survive?



As a Christian, I take offense to that 



erikas said:


> The thing is that he said it, and i haven't heard him say that he was wrong on this. As for contradicting himself, his "the goal of life is to play in a way that everyone invites you to play with them" is the best explanation for morality i have ever heard, but then he still says that morals come from Christianity, so wrap your head around that.



Didn't he do an entire lecture on how morals would have developed without religion? The only time I heard him say that bs statement was in this interview.


----------



## FAST6191 (Sep 22, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> As a Christian, I take offense to that


So you have taken offence. What are we supposed to do with that (or if you prefer then why should we care)? What aspects in particular offend you so?

Beyond that what is a Christian? There are all sorts of mutually incompatible takes on philosophies involving that Jesus dude. Lumping them together seems rather tricky.


----------



## dAVID_ (Sep 22, 2018)

TerribleTy27 said:


> As a Christian, I take offense to that
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't he do an entire lecture on how morals would have developed without religion? The only time I heard him say that bs statement was in this interview.








This is one of the reasons I find the "there's no morality without religion" argument to be invalid.


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 23, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> So you have taken offence. What are we supposed to do with that (or if you prefer then why should we care)? What aspects in particular offend you so?
> 
> Beyond that what is a Christian? There are all sorts of mutually incompatible takes on philosophies involving that Jesus dude. Lumping them together seems rather tricky.





dAVID_ said:


> View attachment 144183
> 
> This is one of the reasons I find the "there's no morality without religion" argument to be invalid.



Guys, it was (mostly) a joke. Please. I could care less what non-Christians think of Yahweh.


----------



## Hanafuda (Sep 23, 2018)

Not really. I've seen a couple youtube videos, agree with a few things he says. But then again, I probably agree with a few things ANY person says. Don't see any special reason to 'subscribe' to his worldview of things though.


----------



## Taleweaver (Sep 23, 2018)

Subtle Demise said:


> As for the man this thread is actually about: it's kind of concerning that he thinks that mankind can't have a morality without God. The same God who both commited and commanded unspeakable acts in the Holy Bible. The same God that people actually believed commanded the Crusades and the God Hates Fags movement started by the Westboro Baptist Church. The same God who punished all of mankind multiple times for the actions of Adam and Eve. The same one who had his own son tortured and executed in one of the most inhumane ways imaginable. I'm not trying to start a religious debate in this thread, but I'm just saying that the standard for morality there isn't a very good one and that maybe we get our morality from something else, perhaps an innate desire to see our species survive?





TerribleTy27 said:


> As a Christian, I take offense to that


You take offense at people reading the bible? 

Okay, okay: I've read your later post. You meant it mostly as...sorry: you meant it (mostly) as a joke. Well...in that same vein, I can say that I don't get the pun of that most part, and have some opinions on that lesser part of meaning it. The things @Subtle Demise mentions aren't new (FFS...they're in that book for a couple thousands of years now), but still in there. As such, they're valid criticisms. Being (for a small part) offended is at best irrelevant and usually widens the gap between Christians and the rest of the world population.


...but I wasn't really going to post about this. Back to the topic at hand...

I've watched a video on basic income with the guy. IMHO, he mostly dodged the question, but he DID bring  one very valid point on the table that guys like me (who are in favor) generally don't want to think about (it was about our purpose as humans). As such...one video is probably a bit low, but for now I put him in the "guys whom I disagree with but who I'll give respect" category. It probably takes some more research before I reach a final conclusion (thanks to youtube, I can at least somewhat form an opinion on HIM rather than what people say is him).


----------



## Deleted User (Sep 24, 2018)

Taleweaver said:


> Okay, okay: I've read your later post. You meant it mostly as...sorry: you meant it (mostly) as a joke. Well...in that same vein, I can say that I don't get the pun of that most part, and have some opinions on that lesser part of meaning it. The things @Subtle Demise mentions aren't new (FFS...they're in that book for a couple thousands of years now), but still in there. As such, they're valid criticisms. Being (for a small part) offended is at best irrelevant and usually widens the gap between Christians and the rest of the world population.



it was a bad joke. Please stop reading into it.


----------

