/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14664886]

>tfw my boomer coworker thinks Jordan Peterson is a genius

uh how do i break the news to him?

[Anonymous No.14664895]

>>14664886
Kill him

[Anonymous No.14664901]

He is. Otherwise you could refute him.

[Anonymous No.14664905]

>WHERE ARE THE MARXISTS, BOOMER?

[Anonymous No.14664910]

>>14664901
You're a fucking nerd

[Anonymous No.14664911]

you need to imitate him by doing a high voice and paraphrasing the arguments he's most known for

like saying "clean your room bucko" in a petersin voice

[Anonymous No.14664921]

>>14664911
This is based. The fact of the matter is nobody alive today deserves anything but mockery and dismissal. Including me.

[Anonymous No.14664924]

>>14664910
and youre a faggot

[Anonymous No.14664942]

I never see threads praising or even supporting Peterson here, it's always seething lefties who can't move on. Actually obsessed with the guy.

I'm not a big fan of him either, but do we need multiple threads about the guy every day?

[Anonymous No.14664943]

>>14664886
it is for him to discover. the most you can do is nudge him on the path of reading Nietzsche himself

[Anonymous No.14665159]

The man is insightful, charismatic, and appeals to scholars and laymen alike. I don’t see the problem people have with him

[Anonymous No.14665162]

>>14664924
This

[Anonymous No.14665173]

>>14664886
Show him the vid of him crying when he ran out of k pins and he couldnt sell anymore lobster pants

[Anonymous No.14665182]

>>14664886
genius is relative. Joe Rogan is a genius to many people. can you convince him Peterson is a shill, you will have to give him something worthy that beats Peterson. sperging out about socialism won’t. your coworker just wanted his beliefs reaffirmed most likely, thats why Peterson became popular in the first place.

[Anonymous No.14665186]

>>14664942
to be fair he did own the libs, but to also be fair you don’t have to be a leftie or a pol-tard to find Peterson shallow. I used to like him a lot until I realized he didn’t have much to say, but I appreciate him for pointing me towards literature.

[Anonymous No.14665187]

>>14665173
lol, source?

[Anonymous No.14665222]

>>14665186
The only things he is famous for is misrepresenting the bill c-16
>to be fair he did own the libs
Too be fair he is too much of a spineless coward to be honest about his beliefs without paying lip service to liberalism

[Anonymous No.14665823]

Go full zizek, say just bc commie sjws suck doesnt mean what we have now is good.

[Anonymous No.14665866]

>>14664886
boomers are retards, news at 11

[Anonymous No.14665890]

>>14664942
/lit/ is full of resentful faggots and mexican intellectuals who's seem to really enjoy a.kicking a man when he's down & b.posturing about their own intellectual superiority.
to really make the pseudo fuckboi's of /lit/ seethe all you gotta do is say you admire the guy for putting up his maps of meaning lectures and bibleseries.

[Anonymous No.14665911]

It should be noted that I've upvoted every single person in this thread, including but not limited to myself.
>inb4 B-B-BUT AHOOBLY BLOO BLOOBLY (You)

[Anonymous No.14666016]

>>14664886
You tell him he’s right, but that there are thinkers beyond Jordan Peterson and that he still has much to learn. Encourage him to believe that he’s only scratched the surface of academia.

[Anonymous No.14666039]

Get a transcript of a Peterson "speech" about any topic not directly related to the topic of interpersonal psychology. Pick apart his idle speculations and pet theories -- he used to make lots of unfounded claims about evolutionary biology (morality is founded on a notion of rational self-interest which young children develop through parallel play; lipstick is attractive to the male 'hunter-gatherer' brain because it makes a woman's lips look like ripe fruit; humans developed religious characteristics as a kind of evolutionary bulwark against the spectre of nihilism -- etc.).

Pay close attention to how he uses language. It is often very circumspect. If Peterson is making an insubstantial point about something, he draws from a word bank of ambiguous terms and phrases, linked together with insipid descriptors and sequiturs. Some terms he uses abusively:
>fundamental (probably appears every sixth word when he's discussing human behavior); fundamentally; on a fundamental level
>pathology; pathological (Instead of taking the time to establish a causal relationship between X and Y, Peterson uses the term "pathological" as shorthand for "becoming progressively more flawed" or "based on flawed assumptions." But that is not sufficient. He should explain the nature of the flaw and prove how it propagates itself. Simply pointing at something and saying ["That is pathological."] should not be enough to convince anyone.)
>undeniable (when discussing culture and/or human life, Peterson will make an assertion that is highly disputable, then treat it as axiomatic for the purpose of his lecture -- e.g. treating the maxim "life is suffering" as a universal, "undeniable" truth)
>reprehensible (another word Peterson uses in off-the-cuff criticism of things; insipid, hackneyed, often fallacious; to say that something is deserving of censure is not the same as outright condemning it, which Peterson only does implicitly through ethical pathetics and narrow moralizing)
>archetypal (a term Peterson overuses; applies Jungian typology in a way that is often shallow and uninformative -- how helpful is it to sort modern social subject(s) into symbolic anthropological categories? this is just academically spurious belle-lettres and masturbation)
Or, just point out that he's a giant pussy. He became a completely milquetoast and inoffensive figure the second he became a network TV "public intellectual."

[Anonymous No.14666098]

>>14664886
>uh how do i break the news to him?
Have him watch Peterson's refusal to address the Holodomor question. Be sure to address the fact that it has been two years with no answer forthcoming.

[cunt No.14666127]

>>14664901
>Otherwise you could refute him.
A misreading of Nietzsche and Christian conservatism
A philosophy 101 student could take that down