/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12007870]

Now that the dust has settled, does it deserve the hate?

[Anonymous No.12007891]

>>12007870
Yeah sure

[Anonymous No.12007900]

If it helps people live what they believe to be meaningful lives then more power to them, especially if it comes with a propensity to keep ethics grounded in religion rather than bullshit humanism or subjectivity or anything else.

That said,
>It's not when you realize that nothing can help you—religion, pride, anything—it's when you realize that you don't need any aid.

[Anonymous No.12007903]

>>12007870
generic self-help

[Anonymous No.12007907]

No, but he brings it on himself nonetheless.

[Anonymous No.12007939]

People are just assholes

[Anonymous No.12008341]

>>12007891

fpbp

How can anyone be anything more than indifferent to JBP at this point. Dude's boring

[Anonymous No.12008861]

>>12008341
idk cult leaders are intriguing

[Anonymous No.12008863]

>>12007870

JBP is coming to my university tomorrow. Is it worth to go see him? All his talks look rather the same

[Anonymous No.12009227]

>>12008861
He really does have that cult leader vibe going, doesn't he?

[Anonymous No.12009237]

>>12009227
Yeah, he's DANGEROUS and a FEARMONGERING EXTREMIST, full of HATE.

[Anonymous No.12009258]

>>12007870
JBP is the most dangerous man to come in and influence academia. He is ruining all the good work we've been doing for the past several decades in the west.

His cis, heterosexual, whiteness diqualifies him from any discussion, yet he keeps butting in with his "opinion" and fucking stupid morons keep believing him like the good little NPCs they are.

I will NEVER call him a Dr. He is a fake. Hopefully his momentum dies soon because the damage he is causing to society is irreparable.

PEOPLE ARE FUCKING DYING.

[Anonymous No.12009283]

>>12009237
Low effort bait, but I'll bite.
No one is saying that he's dangerous, he just acts like he's some kind of cult leader. People worship him for his basic bitch philosophy because he (I assume) has studied how to really get into the minds of young men and exploit that, thus a cult leader. I just think at the end of the day he only cares about money, and does what he does for money.

[Anonymous No.12009340]

>>12008863
And what would you do instead? Read some /lit/ meme? Play videogames for manchildren? Jerk off furiously looking at your lolis? Man, action > inaction. Go for the giggles and for the future shitposts

[Anonymous No.12009361]

It's alright as a self-help book, but not near the best of the genre.
Outside of that, Peterson doesn't get post-modernism, his definition is wrong.

[Anonymous No.12009442]

>>12009258
took me a moment...

[Anonymous No.12009562]

>>12009283
I actually really don't think it's intentional. As someone who still likes wash your penis man despite seeing his viewpoint as ultimately shallow, he was willing to stand up for young men in a way that next to nobody else is. While you could argue that men are more capable of self-advocacy than women thus needing less of a support network, there are a lot of alienated young men who genuinely look up to someone willing to speak the truth about visible reality (even if it's fairly banal from a philosophical perspective) in a world they see as full of lies and pitted against them.

[Anonymous No.12009571]

>>12009562
this desu

[Anonymous No.12009588]

>>12009258
While pretending to be SJW is certainly hot bait right now, the most effective way to employ it is through subtlety. Don’t show all your cards at once- start off with a simple, vague statement that will have people asking you questions.

D- for this post, but it certainly shows promise.

[Anonymous No.12009633]

>>12009361

>Self-help genre

What would you recommend instead?

[Anonymous No.12009643]

Peterson fanboys and critics alike need to read this series.

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/10/24/reply-to-jordan-peterson-on-the-jewish-question-from-his-heroes-part-one-solzhenitsyn/

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/10/25/reply-to-jordan-peterson-on-the-jewish-question-from-his-heroes-part-two-dostoevsky/

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/10/26/reply-to-jordan-peterson-on-the-jewish-question-from-his-heroes-part-three-jung/

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/10/27/reply-to-jordan-peterson-on-the-jewish-question-from-his-heroes-part-four-nietzsche/

[Anonymous No.12009645]

>>12007870

[Anonymous No.12009663]

>>12009643
Occidental Observer is the only poltard site I respect and read from time to time

[Anonymous No.12009664]

>>12009258
>PEOPLE ARE FUCKING DYING.

[Anonymous No.12009671]

>>12009643
>2018/10/24
>2018/10/27
wew, people are still writing about memerson, i thought he was just an old stale meme

[Anonymous No.12010124]

>>12007870
It's like reading a book written by your Dad, I can appreciate that. Most people who read this book seriously don't have a Dad, so they can't appreciate it as semi-serious but still valuable advice. They'll only see it as a self help book.

[Anonymous No.12010267]

>>12009671
Then you're out of the loop grandpa, he only got bigger over the last 6 months

[Anonymous No.12010292]

>tfw he's giving a talk at my uni tomorrow
should I go?

[Anonymous No.12010306]

>>12007903
Literally this

[Anonymous No.12010317]

>>12008863
>>12010292
you guys should go

if it sucks you guys can leave and go fuck somewhere

[Anonymous No.12010331]

>>12010317
I'll put a rose in my breast pocket

[Anonymous No.12010344]

Not at all. It's almost like people expected to open this book and find hermetica written by the greatest thinker in world history.

Parts of it are helpful. It doesn't presume too much. It doesn't make too many promises on which it can't deliver. It is completely inoffensive.

[Anonymous No.12010398]

>>12007870
If it doesnt harm people and prompts people to improve, no.

[Anonymous No.12010448]

>>12009258

[Anonymous No.12010457]

>>12010267
>he only got bigger over the last 6 months
How? That Kannaugh shit took a huge hit on him?

[Anonymous No.12010537]

>>12009562
I'm in the same boat. His philosophy is reductive and so are his politics ("Pronouns are a closed linguistic category" is the most retarded argument of all time), but he is helping young men. He's like an MRA without being (as much of) a militant douche

[Anonymous No.12010555]

Isn't Peterson's interpretation of Nietzsche totally self-serving and horseshit? Nietzsche believed Christians to essentially be slave-moralists, and yet Peterson acts as if Nietzsche was a champion of Christianity

[Anonymous No.12010644]

>>12010457
Not a huge hit, it was only seen on twitter but someone's downfall usually starts one just one medium.
I figure he will slip up publically next(already has but drones dismiss it) and from then on it's downwards for this bucko

[Anonymous No.12010662]

>>12010457
Probably had to do with him appearing on the fucking Dr. Oz show like two times. That show gets millions of viewers

[Anonymous No.12010680]

>>12009227
Not at all. Cult leaders have charisma.

[Anonymous No.12010688]

peterson is a hypocritical charlatan

[Anonymous No.12010698]

>>12009258
this but only half ironically

[Anonymous No.12010702]

>>12010537
this is a pretty charitable reading of him, but not wrong

[Anonymous No.12010714]

>>12010555
>imagine having serious consternations about if someone 'gets' nietzsche right?

who cares? he's not a nietzsche scholar

[Anonymous No.12010722]

>>12009258
this but with full sincerity

[Anonymous No.12010771]

He always fake cries during interviews

[Anonymous No.12010778]

>>12010771
He's a psychologist...he knows how to push dem empathy buttons

[Anonymous No.12010780]

>>12009258

[Anonymous No.12010812]

>>12009664
This image is so incredibly full of expression. It reminds of that Russian painting of the tzar with his dead son.

[Anonymous No.12010825]

I haven't read past halfway, and the sleeve already has grease stains on it.

What's essential PBJ EDC?

[Anonymous No.12010838]

>>12010812
yeah. it's beautiful

[Anonymous No.12010932]

How did people like Peterson and Sam Harris become intellectuals in the public eye when they are embarrassingly crass and idiotic in the context of real philosophy?

Like Sam Harris's attempt of creating a new science of ethics with neuroscience influence resulted in him literally saying he wasnt going to address concepts like Meta-ethics because they were boring.

how fucking stupid is the public that these people are considered geniuses?

[Anonymous No.12010961]

>>12010688

[Anonymous No.12011021]

>>12009283
>He's a cult leader because *random guess* which explains why he's definitely a cult leader.

You could also call someone trained to get into the minds of younger people (and older) a teacher. How would you personally differentiate between an educator and your loose as fuck definition of "cult leader"?

That's where everyone in this discussion loses me. People bleated the same empty slogans about Sagan, and anyone popular really: the accusation of a cult or cult of popularity is hollow and ill-defined but it serves fear-mongering rhetoric employed by the same people who'd insist they're above it.

I think Peterson may not have a lot to contribute politically but I do feel he has a lot to offer the humanities that they're devoid of currently. His dependence on Jung feels better placed for example in the area of psycho-analysis than what critical theory currently teaches (e.g. Freud, Lacan, etc). He's a fantastic English teacher if nothing else, his lectures on Youtube are a lot more interesting than the ones presented by my professors while I was in college.

[Anonymous No.12011052]

>>12010932
>How did people like Peterson and Sam Harris become intellectuals in the public eye when they are embarrassingly crass and idiotic

Because one is a jew and the other runs cover for jews, which is an absolute necessity for the jewish ruling elite as awareness of jewish nature and the extent of jewish power continues to become known to the mid-range intellect, NPC crowd.

[Anonymous No.12011070]

>>12011052
come on dude theres a board tailor made for you to scream about jews
this isnt the one

[Anonymous No.12011087]

>>12011070
Jews run the publishing business and the jewish problem is front and center here on /lit/. If you can't handle that reality, you should head back home to redit.

[Anonymous No.12011091]

>>12010932
can't stand harris. he made his name with some *radical* essays against islam and then that new atheist tripe-- he's always just wanted to be an IMPORTANT public intellectual, and his *new* positivist/naturalistic/scientific ethics seems like just an attempt to gain the imprimatur of a *serious* guy. but i couldn't even give you even a slightly charitable explanation of his project -- it seems totally incoherent just from the start. its peak scientism. he's a smug positivist and the worst kind of technocrat.

i haven't read much of peterson, but it seems to me that he's given more to dispensing fatherly, homespun, received wisdom to young men, and that this is informed by a Jungian or some kind of psychoanalytic perspective. his professional/academic life doesn't seem to be a thin pretext to ground the reputation of his public persona, contra harris. he's become the patron saint of ressentiment filled cucks, but at least he's getting them off the internet, cleaning their penis, and reading books.

[Anonymous No.12011101]

>>12011087
>>12011052
>"NPC"
>using the same 'hot' meme as every other degenerative shut-in cuck

are you faggots too dumb for irony?

[Anonymous No.12011117]

>>12011101
When the jew york times comes out condemning a fucking meme, and twitter purges everyone using it, you better believe that shit is 'hot.'

[Anonymous No.12011118]

>>12008341
Not as boring as you or anyone else in this site, though. For all his faults, he's more still more successful and all-around better than you will ever be.

[Anonymous No.12011154]

>>12007870
remember to vote for 12 Lobsters on the shitty goodreads year end list
https://www.goodreads.com/choiceawards/best-nonfiction-books-2018

[Anonymous No.12011190]

>>12010555
Nice trips.

I don't think Peterson sees Nietzsche as a champion of Christianity (that much is beyond dispute), but rather as a champion of the /means/ by which Peterson himself champions Christianity. Peterson adheres to Christianity partly for its utility - he holds the very pragmatic belief (as do many of his devotees) that religion's imposition of order and hierarchic social values can be useful to the individual, and only becomes a collective good after it succeeds in serving the individual will.

Peterson, like Nietzsche(?), values life above everything. One of his heavily criticized dismissals of postmodernism is the assertion that, while there may be an infinite number of possible interpretations of a situation or circumstance arising in an individual's life, there are /not/ an infinite number of /viable/ interpretations (ones which don't lead to your own death / destruction / enslavement).

What would Nietzsche have thought of Peterson? It like to think it would've been a Foghorn Leghorn relationship - they'd dislike one another while "on the clock" in the philosophy department, but be friendly and complimentary under other circumstances. Or perhaps it would be just the opposite. I really have no idea what I'm talking about, but that's never stopped Peterson or any Nietzsche scholar.

[Anonymous No.12011195]

>>12011118
>For all his faults, he's more still more successful and all-around better than you will ever be.
so is lil pump

[Anonymous No.12011251]

>>12011195
I don't know who that is, but "criticism" from someone so below the person they're "criticizing" (I use quotes because, really, you're just bitching about them) is just sad and reinforces the idea that you incels are below subhuman-tier.

[Anonymous No.12011266]

>>12007870

Absolutely. Fuck off and die shill.

Please report these threads.

[Anonymous No.12011495]

>>12010771
love him or hate him.. the guy loves sobbing. it's his favorite thing to do

[Anonymous No.12011511]

it was not a very good read desu

[Anonymous No.12011609]

>>12007870
his biggest issue is that he often uses the premise of "life has an inherent amount of suffering" (true) to say that "the only way you can improve your life world is by improving yourself", and by extension that the suffering people have can be exclusively attributed to life's inherent suffering. he overlooks artificially induced suffering that can be caused by the environment people find themselves in and tells people that they can't make themselves happier by changing the world because life is suffering

it's easy to conflate the two but there's a huge difference between "if you do x, you'll be a better person and feel happier" and "don't worry about y, instead focus on improving yourself and that is how you will become a better person and feel happier". if you feel like you live in an artificially horrible environment (e.g. capitalism) why not change it? i've never seen him come close to addressing this, at best you'll get a "things could be a lot worse", which doesn't do much for me because you could say it to a jew in nazi germany and it would technically be true

[Anonymous No.12011621]

>>12007870
Why does so much self-help originate from America and Canada?

Repsect though, for being the father figure modern media/life has completely demoralised young men from the inside.

[Anonymous No.12011628]

>>12010932
>>12011091
Sam Harris is literally a stupid person's idea of what an intellectual is.

Absolute doughnut.

[Anonymous No.12011633]

No, it's just another self help book which is hated because of its writer and not its content (different from most self help books).

[Anonymous No.12011639]

>>12011609
THIS

[Anonymous No.12011651]

>>12011609
>i've never seen him come close to addressing this
of course not, he's a shill for capitalism
that's what his whole "work on yourself and nothing else" is about, it's the apotheosis of individualism
we're running headfirst into an environmental catastrophe and his advice would be "use linen bags instead of plastic ones and walk to work sometimes"

[Anonymous No.12011667]

>>12011621
>Why does so much self-help originate from America and Canada?
Because modern Europeans can't into introspection.

[Anonymous No.12011687]

>>12011667

[Anonymous No.12011692]

>>12007870
>Jordan Peterson appears very profound and has convinced many people to take him seriously. Yet he has almost nothing of value to say. This should be obvious to anyone who has spent even a few moments critically examining his writings and speeches, which are comically befuddled, pompous, and ignorant. They are half nonsense, half banality. In a reasonable world, Peterson would be seen as the kind of tedious crackpot that one hopes not to get seated next to on a train.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-deserve

Where were you when Peterson was BTFO?

[Anonymous No.12011711]

>>12010537
I would take posts like this more seriously if instead of saying x argument is retarded actually post a refutation of the argument. I also understand that you're not in a debate about that argument so it's quick and simple to just say you disagree with it. I did a quick google search of "pronouns are a closed linguistic category". Now I don't study linguistics but what is wrong with this statement? The first link i clicked mentioned that it's not necessarily closed and open categories but one is more apt to include new members and one is more apt not to include new members. Would you say that's fair?

[Anonymous No.12011715]

>>12010662
Hahaha he was on Dr. Oz? He was in good company I guess. Two buffoons slinging snake oil and babby’s first philosophy to the intellectually shallow.

[Anonymous No.12011717]

>>12010555
Nietzsche would claim that just like he himself was "necessary" in his time (namely to spread life affirming values) so is Peterson. Nietzsche believed that his work was the final step in dissolving Christian morality due to the fact that the tools which it had invented ( introspection/truth-telling) were used by him to show that the tools in themselves where based on lies. These tools were based on the assumption that using them was "good" and that "goodness" was self-evident. He notes that in Greek tragedies the characters are not bound to truth-telling and use it in a much more pragmatic fashion (lying to plebs, telling the truth to equals and so on). Nietzsche showed that they only arise out of a slave-morality which seeks to distinguish it's self from a master-morality who does not reflect but only acts. Thus this morality must be done away with since its fundamentally contradictory. What Peterson seeks to do is re-inject these tools which in Nietzsche's time may have been the cause of apathy into a society which has become deeply dis-interested in reflection and truth-telling. He can't base his argument like past philosophers on the self-evident idea of the good and thus invokes people like Piaget and Dostoevsky to create a pragmatic framework for continuing to use these tools.

[Anonymous No.12011721]

>>12010825
Peanut butter and jam every day carry?
Bread and a couple of butter knives, I assume.

[Anonymous No.12011722]

>>12007870
It's not interesting enough to hate.

[Anonymous No.12011744]

>>12011692
>currentaffairs.org
ah yes, the goon rag

let me guess, <weird cultural phenomenon that cropped up on twitter this month> actually reflects the failings of neoliberalism? hmm... profound and novel stuff

[Anonymous No.12011747]

Yeah

[Anonymous No.12011764]

>>12011744
Maybe if you read the article you'd know what it says.

[Anonymous No.12011779]

>>12011764
It literally says what I just said in the summer title

>Jordan Peterson’s popularity is the sign of a deeply impoverished political and intellectual landscape…

Jordan Peterson is bad, but he's a product of neoliberalism. It's the same anodyne shite time and time again.

[Anonymous No.12011887]

>>12011779
The article is a relatively quick read, so I encourage you to try again.

The interpretation you have is only viable if you just read the first couple of paragraphs and skip the rest.

But even if you're right and the article is just yet another criticism of neoliberalism, there's still value in reading the method by which the author arrives at this conclusion.

But you're not right. The article includes a criticism of Maps of Meaning and 12 Rules for Life for being either vague or stupid, but also castigates the left for being useless. It also includes a transcript of a portion of a Peterson lecture and diagrams from Maps. Robinson engages with the the content of Jordan Peterson's work and still wins.

I'm guessing that reading comprehension wasn't your strong suit in school?

[Anonymous No.12012005]

>>12011887
>I'm guessing that reading comprehension wasn't your strong suit in school?
Wow, you really btfo him now.

[Anonymous No.12012925]

>>12011711
The thing is that Peterson is generally correct in saying pronouns are a closed linguistic category, but that is a meaningless statement in the context of the argument for/against made-up gender pronouns. Living languages (especially decentralized, irregular, unregulated ones like English) are defined by how they are used (descriptive), not by prescriptive rules. So someone could start using "cunthole" as a gender pronoun, and if it caught on, bang: it's part of the English language.


I agree with Peterson that pronouns like Xe or Xir are stupid and unwieldy, but the "closed linguistic category" argument was a loser from the beginning. It is the argument that "since this is a closed category, you can't/shouldn't add to it" when in reality, all that means is "since this is a closed category, it would be difficult to add to it." He should just stick with the "compelled speech is bad" argument, because that is a very valid one. Hope this makes sense, I don't want to just smear JBP.

[Anonymous No.12012939]

>even his self-books come with zionist propaganda

[Anonymous No.12013702]

>>12008863
>JBP is coming to my university tomorrow.
See you there!

[Anonymous No.12013858]

>>12010124
THIS. 12 rules is designed for the millenniials and zoomers that had parents do everything for them, and don't have the skills needed for life. They never learned to do "Adulting" in real life. 12 Rules serves it's purpose in teaching a bit of common sense and basic life skills to those that lack them. It's not rocket science. It's stuff you could have learned from your grand parents, if you were paying attention, instead of doing dope and playing vidya games.

[Anonymous No.12013860]

>>12007870
It deserves more hate.

[Anonymous No.12013866]

>>12007870
deserves way more hate than it gets

[Anonymous No.12013873]

>>12011621
because thats what the american dream is supposed to be, everyone can succeed and will succeed if they work hard enough, and if you dont succeed its your fault and you should consult help on how to turn your life around and be successful.

[Anonymous No.12013879]

>>12007870
Yeah, I mean, it's better than most self-help books out there but that doesn't mean it's not lame and poorly written.

[Anonymous No.12013924]

>>12007903

thread should have ended here

[Anonymous No.12013944]

Nah. His haters are mostly those insane on both sides of the spectrum, which is ridiculous considering his political analysis is, by his own admission, limited, because it's not his field.

His crusade against ideology in universities, in light of the ''grievance studies'' scandal, is fully justified.

The rest is basic self-help shit, which apparently society had forgotten, mostly thanks to the above mentioned polticization of education by extremists.

[Anonymous No.12013987]

>>12009227
absolutely not

[Anonymous No.12014393]

desu i really felt it when I read it, I really felt like he was on to something or i was on to something and then like 3 days later i had completely forgotten about its lessons and moved past his general outlook so it didn't really do anything except confirm everything i already thought about self help

[Anonymous No.12014455]

he is a social conditioner and probably mk ultra as well

[Anonymous No.12014575]

>>12010537
>pronouns are a closed linguistic category
Literally not his argument at all

[Anonymous No.12014581]

>>12010555
Peterson says repeatedly that Nietzsche was Christianity's critic. He gets hung up on the fact that even Nietzsche knew the death of god would be bloody and terrible, and even Nietzsche acknowledged Christianity's focus on truth being paramount as at least part of its own undoing.

[Anonymous No.12014836]

>>12010932
Sam Harris has been disowned by everyone including his fans

[Anonymous No.12014888]

>>12011609
>artificially induced suffering that can be caused by the environment
No such things. There is literally no other way than improving yourself to reduce suffering as all suffering is caused by you and only you.

[Anonymous No.12014902]

He's boomerpilled on Jews and nationalism but otherwise good

[Anonymous No.12014924]

>>12011091
>at least he's getting them off the internet, cleaning their penis, and reading books.

Perfect Summary

[Anonymous No.12014944]

>>12014888
Yes there fucking is. One of Lacan's points was the idea of self serving psychology to come to some breakthrough on your own self actualization and self suffering was fucking pointless and that you should instead improve your life and existential suffering, not through self improvement and filling in the empty husk that is human consciousness, but to instead latch onto an ideology that then negates your own self importance and individualism.

Basically the problem is not trying to fill in the void and ease your own suffering, its to stop paying attention to that gay shit and basically misdirect your existential dread to someplace else entirely through literally everything else but yourself.

The problem with Peterson's idiotic strawman of post-modernism and all things French, he doesnt fucking understand Lacan and outright claims he is unreadable and ridiculous (despite being a Jungian, the fucking irony) to the point where mere mention of Lacan's name should be enough to discredit his ideas.

[Anonymous No.12014967]

jbp is a zionist midwit cuckold selling life advice to depressed redditors. his work doesn't warrant any scrutiny, it's simple and innocuous.

[Anonymous No.12015294]

>>12014944
All this swearing and cursing.
Are you mad?

[Anonymous No.12015369]

>>12014944
While I certainly dispute the claim that all suffering is the direct result of the self - though maybe not on the grounds you'd think I would - I am hesitant to abandon my anecdotal position that self suffering is pointless.

Self-suffering, by its very nature, has made me better disposed to live life, though what sort of life it has been or will continue to be is matter which invites some disquiet.

[Anonymous No.12015382]

>>12015369
the above should've read:

>I am hesitant to abandon my anecdotal position that self-suffering is /anything but/ pointless

also, the claim about suffering being a direct result of the self - certainly without the self there can be no suffering, but this does not mean that "blame" for suffering of some sort must be aimed at the self in all cases

[Anonymous No.12015484]

>>12007870
Garbage book, kino audiobook

>tfw daddy starts cring

[Anonymous No.12015903]

>>12015484
>tfw daddy starts cring
AHAHAHA NO WAY

[Anonymous No.12015910]

>>12015382
In which cases?

[Anonymous No.12016304]

Why the fuck is he acting more "intense" during interviews. He really is trying to become daddy to his fanatics.

>>12015903
this guy loves to cry, and its clearly a psychologist trick

[Anonymous No.12017646]

>>12014944
why are psychoanalysts so bitter and jealous of non-meme theorists?

[Anonymous No.12017649]

>>12015903
he cries on every single interview he gives

[Anonymous No.12017661]

>>12014888
>literal solipsism
neat

[Anonymous No.12017680]

He's ok for being a modernist, one of the best current "intellectuals" but not close to the essential.

[Anonymous No.12017738]

>>12007870
Yes, all of it. The man is a charlatan hack

[Anonymous No.12017762]

>>12010812

[Anonymous No.12017784]

Consider the lobster.

[Anonymous No.12017794]

>>12017680
In order for Traditionalism to have any validity you have to disprove the idea of Historical Materialism

good luck!

[Anonymous No.12017806]

>>12011692
This is such a shitty article though with a very clear political agenda.

[Anonymous No.12017812]

>>12017806
but not wrong :)

[Anonymous No.12017828]

>>12017812
I read it a while ago and I feel like it blatantly tries to discredit his work by taking it completly out of context (the transcript of his lecture on the children's book for example is a ridiculous ploy)

I don't see the author actually engaging with the content at any point. It's more of an attack on Peterson's character than it is anything else.

[Anonymous No.12018001]

>>12017828
>I don't see the author actually engaging with the content at any point.
He did. Really after that Orwell portion, I don't see how Peterson can deny otherwise

[Anonymous No.12018860]

>>12017828
"You didn't read Daddy's books and watch every single minute of his youtube lectures REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

[Anonymous No.12019095]

>>12007903
except for all of the parts that literally fly in the face of established self help narratives

[Anonymous No.12019142]

god why do i come to this website
separating the wheat from the chaff is an essential part of being a decent person
peterson isn't all good
peterson isn't all bad
he's not god (and nobodies claiming he is)
he's not the devil (and only retards say as much)
He gets some things right (clean up your room, take responsibility), some things wrong (postmodernism, canonical Christianity). Stop being a bunch of fucking pussies and learn how to listen to somebody who you partially disagree with and still find ground to agree.

[Anonymous No.12019214]

>>12019142
la la la cant hear you

[Anonymous No.12019530]

I'm quite disturbed by the fact that a lot of young, "lost" males are turning to these turbulent father figures. I understand not having a father because mine also wasn't there for me. My mother made sure I was amongst positive male role models, though. Made sure I played sports (baseball) and had good hobbies and read a lot. I'm surprised the mothers of others didn't do this and the lads are now turning to charlatans in order to fill a void. Someone with twisted views that women who wear make-up are asking for rape should be looked up to? Crazy. Seriously unbelievable.

It's just so strange how our current society (especially here in America) is so hollow due to capitalism that instead of trying to fix the problem (capitalism) people will instead be conned to "improve" themselves. It can be the fault of others. Not everything is your fault, guys. That's capitalist propaganda.

There's nothing wrong with cleaning your room, though.

[Anonymous No.12019639]

>>12011717
Good post

[Anonymous No.12019743]

>>12011609
What exactly is artificial about capitalism? Almost every society in human history has been inherently capitalist.

[Anonymous No.12019745]

>>12015910
I'll answer, but it will be a repetition of what Eric Weinstein said in one of his conversation videos with Peterson.

Individuals act in their own interest. They form groups with similar interests in order to reach a common goal. Somewhere along the line, however, these groups begin to decay - they function in a way that's expedient but ultimately destructive, they become mired in tradition instead of positive adapting, or they "adapt" in a way that loses sight of the group's purpose.

An example from my hometown is a chemical laboratory opened to run tests on samples of evidence collected by local police. This organization began as an efficient, procedural machine which did not lose sight of its purpose.

Due to bureaucratic laziness and salutary neglect, technicians in the lab began to break protocol - they falsified test results, published reports which were academically dishonest, etc. Their abandoning of the truth for expedience sent a lot of people to jail who should not have been convicted.

On the surface, these problems can be traced back to individual sins and mistakes. Why didn't the technicians perform their functions as instructed? Why didn't the superintendent proofreading the reports catch obvious inconsistencies? Why didn't people in charge of ethics and quality assurance catch any of this?

Because the entire system was corrupt. Every single person involved in oversight knew what was going on and was powerless (and, in many cases, unwilling) to stop it. Their "group cohesion" created a kind of repression which nobody could escape, and also which no individual could defeat on his or her own.

How do you tell the people in charge that the system - not a fraction of it, but the system in its entirety - is fundamentally corrupt? Not only won't you be taken seriously, but you'll also find yourself without allies, without self-assurance, and (eventually) without a job. The system has created a wall which makes personal responsibility almost totally ineffective - to claim that a single cog in the machine has the responsibility to set it right again is pathological and unhelpful.

I've gone off on a bit of a tangent here. My aim was to provide an example of a situation in which corruption and suffering become almost too much to be fixed through individual suffering and determination.

[Anonymous No.12019762]

>>12019142
NO YOU HAVE TO PICK A SIDE!

Also, I have never heard a good criticism of his work on maps of meaning and personality neuroscience which are his actual fields of study.

[Anonymous No.12019783]

>>12019745
also, sorry that each sentence is pretty much its own paragraph, i have a bad habit of doing this

[Anonymous No.12019801]

>>12019743
Capitalism was inaugurated with joint stock companies in 16th century Holland. Capitalism doesn't have a monoploy on trade or finance

[Anonymous No.12020418]

>>12019745
Is a corrupt system worth saving? Assuming that by corrupt system I mean a group of individual and not the idea behind a system.
You suffer by abiding to this corrupt system. You suffer not because of it, but by your action torward it.
Sure, you'll lose a lot by not following their rules, but even then, the suffering is all in your head, always.
The environment act upon your senses and you ultimately feel them. You can choose how to feel and perceive them. You choose to suffer. Even if that isn't obvious.
See the inputs as what they really are. Not good or bad, just inputs.

[Anonymous No.12020721]

>>12020418
I perfectly understand and agree with the idea that one chooses to suffer, or chooses to place a label on a particular feeling as "suffering." I've read the work of Buddhists and Taoists, along with a few Stoics, and studied accounts of tragic figures like Frankl and Solzhenitsyn.

My only claim is that the act of assigning blame to oneself for his own suffering - and by this I mean the causal chain of events which have led to you receiving input, not the emotional response to stimuli which individuals can turn up or down with a certain amount of success. I feel that the latter is not necessarily a productive or healthy mindset. I do not necessarily prescribe any action against the system, just like I don't necessarily prescribe complicity within it. All I mean to say is that the sufferers in this scenario - the individuals who were wrongly convicted of offenses, the whistleblowers who were maligned and fired, the techs who either lost their credibility by association or ruined it through negligence - were hit by a turn of events which was so absurd and unpredictable that no crisis could have been averted. I almost see it more as a natural disaster than a corruption scandal.

I believe, like you, that we can control our attitudes and responses with great success, and that wallowing in negative emotion is like staying in a jail cell after the door has swung open. I also that believe that it's counter-productive (as I'm sure you do) to pretend that one is the author of his own inputs, or that having free will is the same thing as having unqualified agency (I know of course that you never made such a claim). When things become as complicated as, let's say, Enron in 2001, one's mantra should be:

>give me the strength to change what I can
>the peace to accept what I cannot
>the wisdom to know the difference

Ultimately, we lack a point of reference that guarantees /objective/ meaning in human suffering. We also lack a complete understanding of where all of our inputs come from. I congratulate you on mastering your own response to the trials of life, but would counsel Dr. Peterson against adopting a form of hyper-responsibility that defies logic and invites confusion.

I think we agree on everything important.

[Anonymous No.12020753]

>>12009227
No he doesn't
Check your ego

[Anonymous No.12021379]

>>12007870
>an antidote to chaos
Hard pass from me tbqh.

[Anonymous No.12021386]

>>12007870
when 4chan used to like peterson i hated him but now 4chan hates him i find myself enjoying him alot more

[Anonymous No.12021395]

>>12021386
4chan isn't one person but lefty-/pol/ might as well be

[Anonymous No.12021425]

>>12007870
>Now that the dust has settled
>Jordan memerson

yeah keep thinking that

[Anonymous No.12022218]

Nobody hates him, he isn't even arguing for any position. The controversy actually just stems from him pointing out that a lot of ideologies interpret reality in a way that is inconsistent with the science of psychology and with all available statistics, not from the position of another ideology like facism, liberalism or whatever but as a clinical psychologist himself. It's mostly funny to watch since he is always trying to explain blatant facts to delusional people in the most friendly and respecting way possible while the lose their marbles any how.

[Anonymous No.12022252]

>>12022218
>It's mostly funny to watch since he is always trying to explain blatant facts to delusional people
Exactly why I love watching him

[Anonymous No.12022274]

>>12022218
>The controversy actually just stems from him pointing out that a lot of ideologies interpret reality in a way that is inconsistent with the science of psychology and with all available statistics, not from the position of another ideology like facism, liberalism or whatever but as a clinical psychologist himself
This is what petersontards really think.

[Anonymous No.12022276]

>>12022218
(((science of psychology)))

[Anonymous No.12022288]

>>12022218
lmao how delusional can one be?

[Anonymous No.12022309]

>>12007870
>taking advice from le edgy carnivore man xD

[Anonymous No.12022321]

>>12022218
He's basically Ned Pointsman lmao

[Anonymous No.12022324]

>>12022218
bro youre fucking retarded

he literally does not understand the topics he rambles on about like post-modernism and marxism. He does not interpret them different, he does not understand them. He lacks the ability to fully comprehend what these people are saying.

He outright dismisses lacan because he is hard to read and resorts to pseudo-science shit like Jung as the basis of his psychological understanding. he is a fraud

[Anonymous No.12022330]

>>12022324
Hey, give me the best by Lacan and I will purchase them right now. I forgot about JL in all honesty.

[Anonymous No.12022335]

also apparently the (((CBC))) is doing an expose on him tonight hahaha

[Anonymous No.12022338]

>>12022330
Ecrits
also be fluent in freud and you should probably have an aside piece to help you read through it like Intro to Lacan by Fink

[Anonymous No.12022352]

>>12022338
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.12022424]

What exactly is the big deal about this guy? From what I understand he gives people common-sense advice packaged in basic-bitch philosophy in such a way that people eat it up. Don't see whats so offensive desu.

[Anonymous No.12022432]

>>12022424
its when he reaches outside of his dumb little self help stuff and sticks his hands into political philosophy and post modernism like he knows what hes talking about. He constantly strawmans everything that isnt his particular branch of neoliberal jungian trash

[Anonymous No.12022449]

The insidiousness of Jordan Peterson lies in that he simultaneously reduces timeless wisdom to self-help jargon and common sense advice while also affirming the righteousness and desirability of modernity. All of the problems that Peterson tackles are themselves just various manifestations of modernity itself, but nothing he talks or writes delves into this larger problem or how to deal with it. To the contrary, he takes religious texts that contain profound wisdom and teachings passed down through the ages and uses them as corporate bug-man self-help advice for kids who weren't raised properly. Peterson low-key pushes a mythos that western society in modernity is fundamentally just and a good thing and that aside from some irrational, stupid and greedy people that you have to deal with that everything is okay in principle.

This couldn't be more wrong. Since the emergence of civilization most of the them were united by religious traditions teaching metaphysical knowledge. All the problems of the western mentality and society stem from the loss of this. Christ, the Neoplatonists and to some extent the Hermetics and certain Greek mystery cults all had it too but the Church eventually became an encrusted coffin of doctrine with no accompanying realizations to be had hence why it failed to prevent modernity from arising in the west. Without being connected to any higher understanding in any significant amount among it's intellectual elite, western society has ever since the renaissance has in free fall accompanied by materialism, nihilism, scientism and various other forms of spiritual and cultural degeneration. Peterson affirms all this as good by buying into the faulty idea of the linear progression of civilization and humanity and by shilling it to his unaware fans.

Did you ever figure out why Peterson never seriously delves into eastern thought aside from a few boomer references to Buddhism and Confucius? It's because it totally destroys his worldview and offers completely different solutions to the ideas he address. Why did one of the largest and most impressive bodies of spiritual literature ever emerge out of society with a caste system? Because they are the right way to base a society. Most of the societal problems he address wouldn't even arise in a traditional eastern civilization pre-modernity but just reflect the state of the modern west. It's bad enough that he does all of this already but then he takes one of the few sources of timeless wisdom that are tradition in the west and reduces it to a source of bland common-sense life advice instead of a window to transcendental truths wherein lies the solutions to all problems.

[Anonymous No.12022459]

[Anonymous No.12022466]

>>12007870
>>12022424
i have to admit i really liked him. not for the self help stuff or the political comment, but for the psychology lectures he uploaded some years ago. i found them to be incredibly interesting and wish he'd go back to just doing that. the bible series was ok too

why am i being warned?

[Anonymous No.12022516]

>>12009258
this only completely the opposite

[Anonymous No.12022527]

>>12022466
for posting >>12016873

[Anonymous No.12022546]

>>12022466
bc mods = fags

[Anonymous No.12022626]

>>12019743
Capitalism has only been around for 400 years tard.

[Anonymous No.12022655]

it really is poor.
its existence gives the idea that those of a right-wing/conservative disposition are lost and in a deep state of crisis.

[Anonymous No.12022904]

>>12022324
>lacan
The sooner this meme is stopped, the sooner continental philosophy can develop intellectually.

[Anonymous No.12022921]

>>12019095
and not a single example to show. typical.