Jordan Peterson

Your favorite books and links
Alphaville
Posts: 1998
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:00 am
@Alphaville:

Lol- I’m actually more subdued than that IRL. Absent-minded professor wandering about in a daze xNTP not bouncing off the ceiling Entp. I’m not infrequently mistaken for a dumb sloppy blonde until I start talking. Terrible old men who oogle Britney Spears videos and use phrases such as “Big Polish Girl” like me. The affluent Republican BF I just dumped just texted that he would consider marrying me if I lose maybe 40 lbs. I am so happy that my kids are well grown and I have earned the luxury of resort to the ridiculous.
oh yah i didn’t mean that these characters are carbon copies of real persons, much less you.

but they do illustrate a dichotomy in their approaches to life, in a way that’s both comical and very serious. and they have very different results in their lives, too, as the film progresses. not that a film is real life either, but one of the things it does is point to how you can be relaxed and competent and wound tight and incompetent. we all see examples of this in real life all day.

and lolololol what kind of marriage proposal is that? :lol: i can’t even....

anyway i hope you enjoy the movie. i gotta get some admin work done this morning...

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

“Alphaville” wrote: how you can be relaxed and competent and wound tight and incompetent.
Gotcha. Yup. N and P can make you seem vague and sloppy, but if you also have a lot of A for Assertive instead of T for Turbulent, well, let’s just say you can earn something like a living quieting down some big old colicky barking dogs.

ETA: Unfair to imply correlation between Republicanism and such a variety of marital proposal. Has much more correlation with profession of Engineer. He also noted that he would prefer that I was less lazy :lol: I blame the influence of this forum for such disparagement.

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Mister Imperceptible »

Alphaville wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:52 am
i think it was mister imperceptible who said upthread he finds some people contemptible? that wasn’t me.
Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Mon Nov 09, 2020 8:20 pm
Everything will likely get worse as even in these posts I read contempt, and I would consider the people here smarter than most. The modus operandi is Divide and Conquer. It is working like a charm. Contempt for the other kills reconciliation in the bud.

Jedi mind tricks do not work. If the other person is not sincere, there is no hope of repair.
My contempt is reserved for individuals. Not entire classes of people.

Alphaville
Posts: 1998
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:30 am
My contempt is reserved for individuals. Not entire classes of people.
oh, that thread. i don’t know what that was about.

i’ve only been criticizing peterson here. but i don’t have contempt for the guy—i do feel compassion for his pain, and i think he has honorable intentions, but i believe he’s acting out his issues in the public sphere to some extent (but aren’t we all, anyway, in the end?).

that about sums it up.

coda: i just don’t want him as brain of the galaxy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Prime

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Mister Imperceptible »

If you think back to what catapulted him into the public sphere, it was the Kathy Newman interview as the MeToo hysteria was beginning. Then people began to ask him about everything, including his diet. Of course people who want him to be cancelled will dig up every unsavory detail they can. That is what they are all about. If he died, they would tap dance on his grave. Some people here would tap dance on his grave.

Alphaville
Posts: 1998
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

Mister Imperceptible wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 11:52 am
If you think back to what catapulted him into the public sphere, it was the Kathy Newman interview as the MeToo hysteria was beginning. Then people began to ask him about everything, including his diet. Of course people who want him to be cancelled will dig up every unsavory detail they can. That is what they are all about. If he died, they would tap dance on his grave. Some people here would tap dance on his grave.
eh! that’s not me and i don’t swing that way. cancelling is stupid. making fun of terrible ideas is for sure more entertaining than having one’s opponents locked up. i’m for free speech, but against stupidity (including my own, which is the more vexing). why not? :D

anyway i’ve nothing more to say about peterson or the drama around him, as i need to devote my time to reading more taleb instead. now that’s a guy who enjoys mocking his opponents hahahahaaa. he even has a page dedicated to his enemies, see: https://fooledbyrandomness.com/smear.html lol dramas.

anyway, i said my piece, tired of the subject now. anyone looking for sane family structure advice please look for bradshaw. best to all. 🖖
Last edited by Alphaville on Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

daylen
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by daylen »

The last few pages are how I imagine an opera performed by coked-up academics might be like. Not that I have ever been to an opera or done coke.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@daylen:

You have quite an active imagination. Everybody knows academics can’t afford coke.

daylen
Posts: 1708
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2015 4:17 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by daylen »

@7w5

Only the ones that start an opera, marry an engineer, or otherwise live a vagrant lifestyle crashing on the couches of collaborators.

Alphaville
Posts: 1998
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 2:59 pm
Everybody knows academics can’t afford coke.
truth. the new vending machines on campus no longer take coins!

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@daylen:

True, but it’s not over until the lady who exceeds engineering specifications sings.

Campitor
Posts: 1064
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Campitor »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Fri Nov 20, 2020 10:02 am
@Campitor:

Agreed. Who am I to censor?
I wouldn't want you to censor anyone including yourself. The only way to arrive at the truth, as much as it's humanly possible, is to express the differing viewpoints with lucidity undergirded by facts while adhering to Jacob's forum guidelines.

Without facts then Hitchen's razor would apply: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Accusations without foundation do not aid in the discovery of the truth.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@Campitor:

What I should have typed instead of "Who am I to censor?" would be something like "I am extremely opposed to censorship. If examining the evidence offered by the sub-text, as well as the evidence offered directly by the text, is so likely to be, as the kids put it, butt-hurt-ful that it inhibits free expression by other, I will freely choose to cease and desist." Is it possible that I am mistaken in my reading of the subtext of Peterson? Of course, it is, because largely an intuitive process. Does that mean that I am able to inhibit myself from reading sub-text as well as text at this juncture in my cognitive development? No, I have read thousands of books and I now do it on auto-pilot. For instance, there are very few lines that speak directly to the topic in "ERE" the book, but my reading of the sub-text was "Conscientious-motivated by saving the planet."

Returning to text proper:
It is the primary duty of parents to make their children socially desirable. That will provide the child opportunity, self-regard, and security. It's more important even than fostering individual identity. That Holy Grail can only be pursued, in any case, after a high degree of social sophistication has been established.
It occurred to me that opposing argument could readily be constructed along the lines of:
It is a primary duty of parents to make their children socially desirable. That will provide the child opportunity, self-regard, and security. Only the task of fostering individual identity can be regarded as more important. As parents we function much like gardeners, preparing fine seed bed and watering as needed, but it is not within our power to direct a lima bean towards developing into a tomato.
My serious question would be which of these two arguments is most in alignment with a 21st century conservative or liberal viewpoint?

Another question I would put to those of you who have read more than 1of his books or watched more than a couple of Peterson's debates, would be what does he suggest is the process through which the child who must be socialized towards being likeable becomes the "competent" individual whom society should allow to be "difficult" or "politically incorrect?"

Another question would be how would you imagine the Peterson Parent dealing with the classic icon of American Boyhood in the character of Tom Sawyer? Are we gonna give him a good whuppin' after he tricks Ben Rogers into taking over his white-washing chore? Maybe after participating in some other risky scheme or dangerous adventure?
“Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do. Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do.” — Mark Twain

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Let's take the case of the "woman question" (to use this old, totally inappropriate designation): philosophically, it can be resolved neither through a new (post-patriarchal) symbolization of femininity nor through the elevation of woman into an entity which resists symbolization, into the "indivisible remainder" of the process of symbolization. This second path was taken by F.W.J. Schelling, who "knew that one cannot derive an expression like 'woman' from principles. What cannot be derived one should narrate." Schelling's break out of the logical structure of reality (which can be presented as a notional system) into the Real of primordial drives (where there is no deduction, one can only tell a story)-i.e., his move from logos to mythos- is thus also an assertion of the Feminine. Schelling extrapolated this line of thought to its extreme: his premise (or, rather, the premise that Peter Sloterdijk imputes to him) is that the female orgasm, this most ecstatic moment of sexual pleasure (as the ancient Greeks already knew), is the high point of human evolution. Sloterdijk even claims that its experience plays the role of providing the ontological proof of god: in it, we humans come into contact with the Absolute. Schelling tried to break out of the idealist closed circle, bringing in matter, organism, life, development, so he was attentive not only to the purely logical mind but also to what goes on in the bodily sphere, sexuality, with human evolution: bliss is not just the Aristotelian thought thinking itself, but also a body enjoying itself to the almost unbearable maximum.

Female orgasm as a new version of the ontological proof of god... instead of dismissing this as a version of the obscurantist New Age speculation (which it is!), we should undermine it from within: the description of intense sexual act as the experience of the highest and most intense unity of Being is simply wrong, it obfuscates the dimension of failure, mediation, gap, antagonism even, which is constitutive of human sexuality. This minimal reflexivity that cuts from within every immediate orgasmic One is the topic of the present book.
- from Introduction to "Sex and the Failed Absolute- Slavoj Zizek


@Alphaville:

You're right. He is hilarious.

Alphaville
Posts: 1998
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2019 10:50 am
Location: Quarantined

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Alphaville »

hahaha stop making me come back to this thread! :mrgreen:

but yeah.

Campitor
Posts: 1064
Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:49 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Campitor »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Sat Nov 21, 2020 2:56 am
My serious question would be which of these two arguments is most in alignment with a 21st century conservative or liberal viewpoint?
It's hard to answer this question because if you put a thousand liberals in one room and a thousand conservatives in another room and asked them to codify their belief systems, you would get a thousand different responses and lots of argument regarding what is liberal and what is conservative. Just posing your question would likely result in liberals and conservatives agreeing with both statements depending on the scenario they are imagining in their heads. Both groups have shown they favor the individual over the collective and visa versa depending on the topic being discussed.

I favor enlightened self interest. I don't want my things stolen so I will not steal. I don't want my speech suppressed so I will not suppress the speech of others. I don't like loud music disrupting my concentration ergo I will not play loud music while others are working on focused tasks, etc. This doesn't mean that I'm only motivated by self interest.

And while I highly prize my individuality, I understand that I work within a societal framework and there has to be certain mutually agreeable values if we want to establish a functioning social contract. Parents need to educate their children about this social contract so they can astutely navigate it. They can rebel when they are young adults and are aware of the consequences of their rebellion.
Another question I would put to those of you who have read more than 1of his books or watched more than a couple of Peterson's debates, would be what does he suggest is the process through which the child who must be socialized towards being likeable becomes the "competent" individual whom society should allow to be "difficult" or "politically incorrect?"
When they reach adulthood and can grasp how their actions and decisions, using all the lessons and education they amassed along the way, will impact their existence within the local community.
Another question would be how would you imagine the Peterson Parent dealing with the classic icon of American Boyhood in the character of Tom Sawyer? Are we gonna give him a good whuppin' after he tricks Ben Rogers into taking over his white-washing chore? Maybe after participating in some other risky scheme or dangerous adventure?
I read Tom Sawyer in middle school. I thought he was a jerk for tricking the other boys into painting the fence. I imagine if Jordan Peterson existed in the antebellum era, and held the same values and education as he does in the 21st century, he would probably tell Tom Sawyer that it isn't nice to manipulate people with trickery. Per his philosophy, I don't think a whuppin we have been his 1st course of action.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Ha! Tom Sawyer is the classic ENTP.

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Mister Imperceptible »


7Wannabe5
Posts: 6606
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Of course, he should be published. He should also be freely criticized. Then in 100 years, his very popular books will be like the very popular books by 19th century preachers on the topic of evolution ;)

Mister Imperceptible
Posts: 1466
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 4:18 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Mister Imperceptible »

The best preachers are ancient because luxuries afforded by fossil fuel bubbles impart no timeless wisdom.

Post Reply