/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.9118387]

Hey kid

[Anonymous No.9118393]

>>9118387
Why does he always look so burned out?

[Anonymous No.9118398]

>>9118393
He lives in Canada.

[Anonymous No.9118410]

take a good look at this post. this kinda shit will turn this board into /tv/

thats the direction we're going. we can embrace it and bump threads like this or we can sage and report. me? I'm a redditor born and raised so I know what I'll be doing.

[Anonymous No.9118412]

>>9118393
He read all the Dostoyevsky and all the Solzhenitsyn.

[Anonymous No.9118420]

>>9118410

[Anonymous No.9118421]

>>9118420
((((((((((fun))))))))))

[Anonymous No.9118437]

>>9118398
what does that have to do with it?

[Anonymous No.9118464]

>democrats are socialists
Why do people like this living meme?

[Anonymous No.9118482]

Does /lit/ actually like Peterson at all?

[Anonymous No.9118486]

>>9118482
No.

[Anonymous No.9118509]

>>9118464
His political ideas are meme-tier but his grasp on mythology is very solid.

[Anonymous No.9118517]

>>9118482
Yes.

[Anonymous No.9118525]

>>9118517
contrarian detected

[Anonymous No.9118532]

>>9118486
Because?

[Anonymous No.9118547]

>>9118482
His ideas are great but he's very unfair to thinkers he doesn't like (Marx and Post-structuralists, the latter of whom he considers indistinguishable from Postmodernists which is incorrect), and a little too easy on the flaws of thinkers he does like (whitewashing over Nietzsche's anti-religious and individualistic ideas in order to make him more Jungian)

Other than that he's a top lad and I'm happy he's blown up the way he has. He's the best thing to happen to the alt right, and if they actually listen to him, it'll do their movement a world of good.

prefer pic related tho

[Anonymous No.9118549]

>>9118437

the weather in toronto is either miserably cold or humid and hot (and the entire province lacks air conditioning). in the winter you have 8 hours of sunlight and in the summer you have almost 18. there's only a few months a year in which it's possible to feel untroubled by the constant flux of nature.

basically in the winter you are depressed and in the summer you are manic, if you have any sort of connection to the natural world at all

[Anonymous No.9118567]

>>9118532
Jungian in current year. Uses shitty utility bound definition of truth, custom tailored to justify his memery. Weak and boring memery overall - the only reason he's known and discussed is because of his videos on SJWs and Pepe the Meme. Rarely provides anything interesting in debates mostly resorting to incredibly vague obfuscatory language and namedropping some past greats.

[Anonymous No.9118571]

>>9118547
>whitewashing over Nietzsche's anti-religious and individualistic ideas in order to make him more Jungian

Well, you could argue that Nietzsche's Übermensch is actually his attempt at generating an archetype. Which is what Jung believed.

Whether or not that is true, it's certainly an interesting take on it.

Also, he actually says that the postmodernists do have something correct in their theory. If you value and categorize something, you are putting it into a hierarchy that necessitates you devaluing other things.

The problem is that the postmodern critique does not produce anything. It's just deconstructive nihilism.

[Anonymous No.9118580]

>>9118567
>the only reason he's known and discussed is because of his videos on SJWs and Pepe the Meme.

I don't think that's true though. I like him more for his other ideas than his adamant stance against SJWs.

In fact, I found this interview where this picture is from>>9118412 before the whole SJW debacle even started.

Also:

>uses shitty utility bound definition of truth

What's shitty about it though? Pragmatism is a legit and coherent philosophy.

[Anonymous No.9118589]

>>9118547
Peterson is an alt right figure? or he is claimed by some of its members?

Sadler is not redpilled, my man, but he is GOAT youtube philosopher; although he is more of a scholar than an actual philosopher, which might explain why he's better than the scurrilous hacks who are posted here so often.

[Anonymous No.9118595]

>>9118589
The alt-right just like him because he is against a specific law in Canada that is tangentially related to social justice.

I'm almost certain that he himself wouldn't consider himself on the right. I think he's more center, or center-left, because he has said that he was a member of the NDP in Canada for 20 years(which are social-democrats).

[Anonymous No.9118602]

>>9118393

he's a christian humanist but he knows deep down his mission has failed and the the promise of eternal life is a white lie, that SJWism is only the first thing he's began to address among a million problems of society and that humanity is just biological fuel for the transhuman elite

[Anonymous No.9118608]

Where do I start with him?

[Anonymous No.9118609]

closeted transwomyn

[Anonymous No.9118611]

>>9118549
Fair enough, good point. I grew up in Ontario but I've never lived in Toronto. Fuck the climate here.

[Anonymous No.9118619]

>>9118608
Watch this all the way through.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Ys4tQPRis&

[Anonymous No.9118626]

>>9118482
No.

He's a product of the very thing he criticises.


>hur dur Tolstoy and Christianity, now along me to collect my 15000 dollar paycheck from my youtube video kiddies online

[Anonymous No.9118637]

>>9118609

>yfw you realize traditionalists like Peterson have suppressed their shadow feminine for thousands of years so it incarnates as statism, child molestation, and SJWism

[Anonymous No.9118638]

>>9118637
>traditionalists like Peterson

[Anonymous No.9118661]

>>9118638

>I vigorously study and practice traditonal religions, mythologies, and cultures and integrate this into my beliefs and practices as a core feature of my personality and public image but its silly to call me a traditionalist

[Anonymous No.9118666]

>>9118571
Sure, and I'd agree with that, but that's the Post-Structuralist critique. There were structuralist thinkers who came before them and it's a little unfair to group in a whole bunch of thinkers who were not saying that at all (Levi-Strauss etc.)

And I understand and agree with that interpretation of the ubermensch. I just think he also treats Nietzsche proclamation of the Death of God as an unambiguously tragic statement, rather than something that Nietzsche thought was something that was both a danger and an opportunity.

But like I say, I really do like Peterson and those are minor issues. Has he ever said anything about Kierkegaard?

[Anonymous No.9118669]

>>9118437
It is full of multi-cultural endorsing cucks

[Anonymous No.9118678]

>>9118661
I could be wrong about this but don't traditionalists not seek to integrate those old patterns of belief with the new, instead simply rejecting the new and seeking a return to the old?

[Anonymous No.9118692]

>>9118393
he keeps red pill in his mouth but can't bring himself to swallow it

[Anonymous No.9118694]

>>9118666
>Has he ever said anything about Kierkegaard?

He certainly has. Look up his personality lectures on Youtube. He talks about Kierkegaard there.

[Anonymous No.9118705]

>>9118619
This

[Anonymous No.9118742]

>>9118549
Ontario is god's country and the weather is amazing and not nearly as miserable as you make it sound.

[Anonymous No.9118744]

>>9118678
>rejecting the new

Well considering that's exactly why Peterson is famous, you're correct, regardless of whether you like the acceptance of trans/queer and feminist culture its certainly a /new/ pattern.

Not only does Peterson reject the archetypes generated by progressives and socialists, he also rejects Nietzsche's self-creating Ubermensch, perhaps coincidentally he's never spoken about the dangers of transhumanism, likely because he's still dealing with the cultural shock of the 60s as if that were the most pressing issue at hand.

I find also funny that Peterson virtue signals as a humanist but rejects socialism in an era (total automation, 40% youth unemployment, 80% youth underemployment), where collectivist structures may be the only thing that keeps humanity intact in another hundred years.

[Anonymous No.9118766]

>>9118744
Peterson isn't "rejecting the new".

He is objecting to being forced by the state to use specific words.

This just happens to be the gender pronoun issue.

I have no doubt in my mind, that if Canada that created a law that said you had to address someone as "sir" or "ma'am" in public, he would object to that too.

Also, he was a Social democrat, and is as far as I know, still a Social democrat, as he has said in an interview that he was a member of the NDP in Canada for 20 years.

Now of course, social democrats are seen as useful idiots by socialists and communists, but that does not mean that he is a traditionalist and a right-winger.

[Anonymous No.9118769]

>>9118567
Pleb detected.

[Anonymous No.9118781]

>>9118766
>He is objecting to being forced by the state to use specific words.

I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about his rejection of postmodernism and socialism, which are the only /new/ games in town that isn't a repackaging of older traditions.

>Peterson isn't "rejecting the new".

Please read my previous post, and if you haven't listened to his non-controversy related lectures enough to understand what I'm talking about then we don't have much to discuss.

[Anonymous No.9118788]

>>9118781
He doesn't reject postmodernism entirely. Read this post>>9118571

[Anonymous No.9118798]

>>9118393
he stared the abyss too much

[Anonymous No.9118807]

>>9118788

attempting to reconcile bits and pieces of postmodernism (which parts has Peterson accepted?) with previous traditions does not separate Peterson from being a traditionalist

[Anonymous No.9118829]

>>9118781
He rejects the end result of postmodernism and associates it with Marxism because they've both left nothing but failures in their wake. The point is that neither of them are new or useful anymore even if they're touted as such by fools who don't know the history of these movements to the point of thinking they've never been tried in just the right way.

[Anonymous No.9118836]

>>9118829
>He rejects the end result of postmodernism

which is?

>associates it with Marxism because they've both left nothing but failures in their wake

the internet and personal computers were developed by state funding and hippiest of hippies

>The point is that neither of them are new or useful anymore

What's your plan if you are made completely irrelevant or non-competitive by automation?

[Anonymous No.9118840]

>>9118589
He isnt, they just love him. Which is good because if anyone can talk them out of thinking fascism is good its him.

[Anonymous No.9118844]

Petersonfags are an embarrassment to this board. He's reddit as fuck. Brainlet philosophy.

[Anonymous No.9118850]

>>9118844
sam harris is the reddit
jordan is /our guy/

[Anonymous No.9118851]

>>9118393
he has tasted life and knows that his repetition of life is a mild lie to keep the real memory away from him and the monster of the abyss that lurks down below Pinocchio

[Anonymous No.9118853]

>>9118850
b2r, brainlet

[Anonymous No.9118856]

>>9118836
Marxism and state funded research are not the same thing. If you guys would actuslly listen to this guys lectures youd know that peterson is not some libertarian anarchist free market worshipper. He regularly states that leftist ideas of welfare and progressivism have their place.

[Anonymous No.9118860]

>>9118421
Do you ever stop and think, man, I sure hope I used an equal number of parenthesis on both sides of the word, better check that so it's right. Then you count the parenthesis on the left side and the ones on the right side and feel a bit better about yourself when you add a missing parenthesis on the right side, because that's the one you write last.

Good times.

[Anonymous No.9118861]

>>9118844
Stop pretending to hate everything to feel smart. Its so fucking transparent.

[Anonymous No.9118867]

>>9118626
What's wrong with getting paid for your work you communist faggot?

[Anonymous No.9118869]

>>9118861
stop projecting senpai. People on this board point out thread after thread why peterson is for plebs. At this point i can shitpost at petersonfags without much effort. His followers and he himself have already been exposed as a pseud.

[Anonymous No.9118883]

>>9118856

>Marxism and state funded research are not the same thing

state funded /implementation/, the inventions and mathematics that companies like Microsoft, Facebook, and Google have built their capital on were almost entirely subsidized by taxpayers.

My question still remains unanswered, exactly what features of postmodernism has Peterson successfully integrated into his beliefs (not beating up gays and having a neoliberal standard of welfare is hardly postmodern)?

[Anonymous No.9118888]

>>9118836
The end result of postmodernism is a set of self-defeating, self-destructive principles with no backbone in anything sustainable in the long term or even meaningful in a trasient sense because postmodernism on its own is a means without a logical or symbolic end.

[Anonymous No.9118895]

>>9118883
Peterson is a reactionary, his answer to postmodernism is to undo postmodernism. His assimilation of truth and archetypes, are essentially a strategy to eliminate the complexities of existance, to create a simple order, give clear answers.

That's why it's so appealing to angsty /pol/tards or guilt-ridden right-wingers, who don't want to admit they're rightwingers.

[Anonymous No.9118908]

>>9118895

holy shit, that comma, placement, , I don,t think, you understand what, ',' are used, for,

[Anonymous No.9118909]

>>9118888

You're using a lot of resources to transmit a lot of words but saying very little how very postmodern of you.

[Anonymous No.9118913]

>>9118908
I think, you just can't keep up, with my postmodernist syntax.

[Anonymous No.9118919]

>>9118909
That's exactly the point though. It's a deliberately wasteful ideology.

[Anonymous No.9118923]

>>9118869
It genuinely makes me sad that people like you exist. It's not just that the other guy is obviously right about you, it's that all that hate and insecurity inside of you make you badmouth someone who isn't just a lot smarter than you but who is actually doing incredibly important work to help people and society.

But one bad word about a writer you like or a religion you dislike and you go full contrarian.

[Anonymous No.9118926]

>>9118919

That's the problem of the machine age, not postmodernism you/humans are a deliberately wasteful ideology.

[Anonymous No.9118927]

>>9118923
upvote desu
>you badmouth someone who isn't just a lot smarter than you but who is actually doing incredibly important work to help people and society.
lmfao

[Anonymous No.9118940]

>>9118926
Transhumanists are just furries with a robot fetish instead of an animal one.

[Anonymous No.9118956]

>>9118940

Transhumanists are going to turn your children into meaty legos m8

[Anonymous No.9118974]

>>9118956
That's just a fantasy of theirs (yours?) In reality they're just going to be the weird kids who eat lunch alone once the novelty of all these innovations fades.

[Anonymous No.9118980]

>>9118940
Garbage time is running out, friend.

[Anonymous No.9118982]

>>9118927
not an argument

[Anonymous No.9118986]

>>9118867
You do realise shilling Christianity whilst being paid literally 15000 a month and simultaneously being a university professor (part of the establishment) makes you a charlatan, correct?

>criticism wealth = communism

Are all Peterson fans brainlets ;^)?

[Anonymous No.9118991]

>>9118869
If you had any idea....

[Anonymous No.9118995]

https://youtu.be/1gdpyzwOOYY

[Anonymous No.9119013]

>>9118986
There is a legal argument to be made about whether professors should be entitled to the proceeds of their lectures via youtube etc.
But that's a huge grey area and most professors do way worse without any criticism. You're also an idiot if you think he started putting his lectures online to get money.

I don't see anything at all wrong with asking for voluntary donations. I also don't know what being part of the establishment has to do with anything. Or why it's a problem when a professor doesn't teach that everything about Christianity is terrible.

I really don't get why anyone would have a problem with him. You don't need to follow any of his stuff on mythology or religion, we all know it's not exactly an objective field.

[Anonymous No.9119020]

>>9118986
In what way is he "shilling Christianity" ?

Stupidest thing I've ever heard.

[Anonymous No.9119022]

>>9119013
>proceeds
>youtube
Good joke.

[Anonymous No.9119025]

>>9119022
Not sure what you mean but maybe I used the wrong word, not my first language.

[Anonymous No.9119035]

>>9119020
He is a shill for Christianity. Not a true Christian.

He is like the other right-wing charlatans. He sees Christianity as a vice for other things, he uses it to give himself an identity he doesn't have.

[Anonymous No.9119036]

>>9119020
By being religious he's oppressing innocent atheists in his vicinity, just by existing.

[Anonymous No.9119056]

>>9119025
I mean that youtubing is a terrible way to make money.

[Anonymous No.9119061]

>>9119056
>I mean that youtubing is a terrible way to make money.


https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson

>17,000

[Anonymous No.9119074]

>>9119061
what are you trying to prove? that's his patreon. he may have 17000 backers because of his youtube videos, but it's still his patreon that is making him money, not his youtube account.

[Anonymous No.9119079]

>>9119035
My friend, you're really not a smart person. I don't think you should keep seeking argument swith people.
Also
>like the other right-wing charlatans
He's left-of-centre.

>>9119056
Ah, well that was my point.

>>9119061
You realise patreon isn't youtube, right? And if people are voluntarily donating to this man because they appreciate his content, or his fight against a fucked up law, or just want to support someone at risk of losing his job for sticking to his principles, then what exactly is wrong with that?

[Anonymous No.9119083]

>make a thread with nothing but a pic of an intellectual celeb and a meme phrase
>100+ posts

[Anonymous No.9119090]

>>9119079
>My friend, you're really not a smart person.

Not an argument.

Also,
>My friend

Back to >>>/r/eddit you go

[Anonymous No.9119125]

>>9118850

At least harris can articulate ideas without instantly sperging out

[Anonymous No.9119200]

>>9119125
>At least harris can articulate ideas without instantly sperging out

[Anonymous No.9119214]

/lit/ is filled with post-structualist/postmodern/critical theorists
it's only natural they would stormpost anything related to him, because he discredits their whole ideology.

[Anonymous No.9119219]

>>9119214
The only thing Peterson discredits is the people who idolize him.

[Anonymous No.9119221]

>>9118387
>love his lectures on psychology, religon, existentialism, etc
>accidentally stumbled onto one of his political videos
>unironically uses terms like "cultural marxism"
>believes marxism is just as bad as fascism
>rants about "muh evul sjws taking over uni!"
>thinks post modernists are in some sort of conspiracy
Woops

[Anonymous No.9119225]

>>9119090
>>Not an argument.
>
>Also,
>>My friend
>
>Back to >>>/r/eddit you go
none of this is an argument fucking faggot

[Anonymous No.9119226]

>>9119214
t. guy who hasn't studied the history of philosophy

Peterson is a post-modernist himself. He just doesn't like to admit it.

[Anonymous No.9119231]

>>9119225
Neither was your post.

In other words, >>>/r/eddit

[Anonymous No.9119235]

>>9119231
stop shilling for reddit

[Anonymous No.9119240]

>>9119235
>Stop point out I'm a redditor

In other words, >>>/r/eddit

[Anonymous No.9119251]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VwpwP_fIqY

Has anyone else seen his most recent video?
It spooked me out when I first saw it. Looks like he's pretty much gone off the deep end.

[Anonymous No.9119259]

>>9119221
I'm honestly curious what your background is because while one can find flaws in the first lectures you mention, I have no idea how you could listen to the latter ones and not find them convincing.

>unironically uses terms like "cultural marxism"
Frankfurt school etc. weren't secretive about taking the now-redundant economic marxism and applying the class warefare on culture.

>believes marxism is just as bad as fascism
And he explains in great detail why, while knowing a lot more about Marxist systems than you.

>rants about "muh evul sjws taking over uni!"
He rants about it because they literally want to fire him over criticising a law that can put you in jail for refusing to acknowledge another person as a squirrelkin.

And I'm not just trying to argue, I really want to know the people who are blind to these things.

[Anonymous No.9119280]

>>9119225
>>9119240
>>9119235
>>9119231
Just to clear it up, those posts aren't made by the guy you were talking to earlier. I tried to be friendly with you despite thinking you're an idiot so I stopped bothering when you insisted on being edgy.

>>9119251
He's been kind of losing it in general since it all started, it's really taking a toll on him. In early discussions he was always calm and collected, now he's always irritated. I'd be too though if I was going through that shit.

[Anonymous No.9119320]

>>9119259
>Frankfurt school etc. weren't secretive about taking the now-redundant economic marxism and applying the class warefare on culture.
Cultural marxism is a conspiracy theory term used to imply that theres a marxist plot to destory western culture. The frankfurt school is neo marxist, but really, cultural marxism is just used as an empty insult directed at leftist movements such as the womens march. First you have to prove the people you are even refuting actively subscribe to the frankfurt school, and then explain why using marxist principles is inherently wrong

>And he explains in great detail why, while knowing a lot more about Marxist systems than you.
Link? Ive never heard him talk in detail about marxism. Ive only heard him make refrences to Gulag Archipelago, without going into detail about how the USSR isnt marxist. Marxist communism lacks a state (or state is all of the people), its anything but the dictatorship that was the USSR. Theres a reason the term Stalinism was created to distingush from Marxism

>He rants about it because they literally want to fire him over criticising a law that can put you in jail for refusing to acknowledge another person as a squirrelkin.
Yes, some sjws "want to fire him", but they have no ability to do so because sjws are a fucking nonissue. They hold 0 power

[Anonymous No.9119328]

>>9119320
>The frankfurt school is neo marxist

This is not true. They are not marxists. They utilize aspects of marxist theory, and they doesn't even mean everyone who was part of the institute.

[Anonymous No.9119332]

>>9118482
Yes

[Anonymous No.9119345]

>>9119251
Uggh, hes gone full reactionary.
>muh "Islam is evil but Christianity is fine!"
>"The violence commited in the name of Islam has nothing to do with the political climate or socioeconomic climate, its just cause the Quran is evil!"
>"And for the sake of my argument Im going to interpret the Quran very literally unlike I do for the bible, because the bible is all metaphors ya know!"

[Anonymous No.9119356]

>>9119221
>unironically uses terms like "cultural marxism"

Where? I've never seen him use that term.

[Anonymous No.9119357]

>>9119251
So this is /lit/'s flavour of the month's intellectual? Impressive.

[Anonymous No.9119376]

>>9119356
https://mobile.twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/795687163367161857?lang=en

[Anonymous No.9119380]

>>9119345
Except hat's not what he says at all, you flaming faggot.

[Anonymous No.9119387]

>>9119356
http://www.therebel.media/prof_jordan_peterson_neo_marxists_have_invaded_the_campuses

>Prof. Jordan Peterson: “Bloody neo-Marxists have invaded the campuses and the rest of the culture”

[Anonymous No.9119393]

>>9119376
Well he's said quite clearly that not everything he retweets is an endorsement of the content.

[Anonymous No.9119395]

>>9119320
Again, I will try to stay friendly, but you really have no idea what you are talking about.

1. I don't like using the term either because of those reasons but just because dumb people sometimes use it doesn't make the ideas behind it wrong. And ironically, the people originally demanding to apply Marxist class principles to culture and to make art political weren't shy about it - they said it openly. It's only now that the people influenced by it are denying it.
And they are not "Marxists" in the original sense - they realised that Marxism (economic) was dead. So they applied the concept of class struggle on new "classes" that were no longer economically defined but rather through gender, privilege, cultural influence etc.

2. He talks about it really a lot of times - I think with Joe Rogan, in the Toronto Free Speech debate, in the debate hosted by a student club, and others. He acknowledges that the USSR wasn't "true Marxism" or "socialism". But he explains very convincingly why Marxist ideas inevitably lead to forms of Stalinism. Really, you can learn a lot from him. He isn't ideological at all, he acknowledges that capitalism is a shitty system and that the axioms of Marxism are good in theory. But he doesn't stop there and neither should you.

3. You are really delusional if you believe this. SJWs got a highly regarded scientist fired just a bit earlier at a Toronto clinic. The university sent him a warning. Students defending him have been physically attacked. And SJWs have gotten a lot more people fired.

I'm glad you can discuss calmly and you make decent points - but you're ultimately wrong about all of them. Which is okay, it's a long road and the younger people are, the more optimistic they are about left ideals and intentions.

[Anonymous No.9119398]

>>9119380
Its exactly what he does you flaming faggot

[Anonymous No.9119404]

>>9119393
See >>9119387

[Anonymous No.9119405]

>>9119387
>Bloody neo-Marxists have invaded the campuses

Well this is indisputable though, even though Marxists try to evade any responsibility for the hellhole that is postmodernism and post-structuralism.

[Anonymous No.9119410]

>>9119398
He's talking about a Canadian notion. His whole objection to the pronoun thing, and now this, is about the legal imposition of tolerance. You're either baiting or you literally didn't watch the video.

[Anonymous No.9119421]

>>9119410
Half this thread are contrarian shitposters baiting.

Peterson has become too famous now, so 4chan can't accept anything he says.

[Anonymous No.9119438]

>>9119395
>And they are not "Marxists" in the original sense - they realised that Marxism (economic) was dead. So they applied the concept of class struggle on new "classes" that were no longer economically defined but rather through gender, privilege, cultural influence etc.
Who are these people? All Im seeing is broad generalizations. And why are these people wrong?

>He talks about it really a lot of times
Ok, can you link me to it?

>But he explains very convincingly why Marxist ideas inevitably lead to forms of Stalinism
Ive seen the Joe Rogan video, but he never fleshes out that connection from what I remember.

>He isn't ideological at all
Hes staunchly opposed to concepts of post modernism and relativism and asserts there are universal religious truths. Thats pretty ideological

[Anonymous No.9119454]

>>9119410
>moses was a murderer
>christ was a bastard
>muhammad did nothing wrong
Hes creating a manufactures distinction for why islam is worse than christianity through pure sophistry. Islamic texts are no more vile or weird than christian ones. All of the reasons so many muslims treat the quran so differently than the bible is because of social conditons. The christians treated the bible the same way when they were in similar socioeconomic conditons. It also largely has to do with quality of education

[Anonymous No.9119461]

>>9119454
>Hes creating a manufactures
Hes manufacturing a distinction*

[Anonymous No.9119508]

>>9118412

>all the Solzhenitsyn

Mission: Impossible

[Anonymous No.9119516]

>>9119438
>Who are these people?
Like I said, it is ironic that you complain about broad generalisations and act like we try to paint these people in a light they don't deserve - when at the same time, these people openly state their goal of destroying Western civilization, the patriarchy, of people having to take up the fight against "white oppressors", "male oppressors", and so on. We are being divided into new classes in these very days. Once again it is not anymore about YOUR character, YOUR ability, YOUR need, you are defined by characteristics of the group you allegedly belong to - except now instead of overthrowing the "bourgeoisie", there's a new enemy. And if you see nothing wrong with that, well..

>Ok, can you link me to it?
YT/watch?v=2KWXdDYEz10
First ten minutes of this talk, for example. Obviously the whole thing is a lot more complex so if you're willing to stay open, you can pick up a lot by listening to longer debates or doing research on your own.

>Thats pretty ideological
Like I said, I would understand if someone disagrees with the stuff about religion. But he isn't at all ideological when it comes to left vs. right, traditionalist vs. progressive and so on. He always gives both sides credit and says we need both sides in a good balance.
"Postmodernism" etc. are also big, vague words. He refers to a very specific group of postmodernists, he isn't hating on DFWallace's novels.

[Anonymous No.9119520]

>>9118393
poor physiology leads to poor ideas and not the reverse

[Anonymous No.9119535]

>>9119454
>Hes creating a manufactures distinction for why islam is worse than christianity through pure sophistry

No he's not. He's making an argument for why free speech is essential, and that includes blasphemy you moron.

[Anonymous No.9119540]

>>9119516
>He always gives both sides credit and says we need both sides in a good balance.
That's ideological as fuck

[Anonymous No.9119547]

>>9119454
Dude, watch the WHOLE video.

[Anonymous No.9119550]

>>9119454
I'm fairly sure he is biased in favour of Christianity, but almost every academic that isn't affiliated with any religion does make that distinction and sees them as inherently different.
The people who deny it are usually religious apologists or brainwashed people who also swallow how "crime has nothing to do with culture, it's only about socioeconomic status".

Also, he gives a lot of reasons for his distinction. He's obsessed with how Christianity enlightened the world through logos and individuality.
So the religious stuff is where I stop defending his logic as flawless and where it largely comes down to opinions. The political stuff is spot on though.

Just one quick comment though: Christians and Muslims share the same socioeconomic circumstances in many, many countries from Africa to South East Asia and even in Europe to a big degree. And under the same circumstances, Islam proves far more radicalizing, far more likely to suppress individuality, far more brutal.
But obviously there are many factors in that, like certain countries financing a very conservative type of Islam, and so on.

[Anonymous No.9119574]

>>9118482

si

[Anonymous No.9119581]

>>9118482

took me a good minute to realize there's a visual pun

top to the kek

[Anonymous No.9119583]

>>9119540
how so?

[Anonymous No.9119593]

>>9119540
Don't act stupid by playing with sophisms. If you take the widest possible definition, then yes, holding any set of beliefs is "being ideological".

Obviously here it means: Not being blind to criticism from the other side, not being a fanatic, not accepting anything as written in stone, prefering reason over the "party line".

[Anonymous No.9119597]

>>9119593
>Obviously here it means: Not being blind to criticism from the other side, not being a fanatic, not accepting anything as written in stone, prefering reason over the "party line".

pure ideology

[Anonymous No.9119609]

>>9118609

context?

[Anonymous No.9119615]

>>9119597
I'd start to look like a zombie too if I had spent months debating idiots like you.

[Anonymous No.9119638]

>>9119615
:^^^^^)

[Anonymous No.9119663]

>>9118464
>i dont want to redistribute ALL your money/capital therefore im not a socialist

[Anonymous No.9119696]

>>9119251