Page 5 of 7 [ 108 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

11 Jun 2018, 9:29 pm

A new one I think.


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

17 Jun 2018, 6:58 pm

As a famous man once said, punch back twice as hard.

Jordan Peterson threatens to sue prof who called him ‘white nationalist,’ ‘incel’

University of Toronto professor Jordan Peterson is threatening a lawsuit against a professor from Bloomsburg University, accusing her of making defamatory statements about him.

According to The Daily Caller, Professor Wendy Lynne Lee called Peterson an “incel misogynist” (“incel” = “involuntary celibate”) and a “committed white nationalist” on Twitter.

After DC education reporter Rob Shimshock contacted Lee about her tweet, she promptly deleted it. However, Shimshock managed to get a screencap of it:

“Jordan Peterson: incel misogynist. Committed white nationalist. See academia.edu: @TPUSA compendium of sources. There’s a whole section devoted to @jordanbpeterson and his decent [sic] into rank bigotry.”


https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/45931/


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

18 Jun 2018, 2:12 am

How does it even make sense to call him an incel? Isn't he married?


_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.


Sea Breeze
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 25 Jan 2018
Age: 24
Gender: Male
Posts: 57
Location: Sweden

18 Jun 2018, 10:32 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
How does it even make sense to call him an incel? Isn't he married?

Yea it dosen’t.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

18 Jun 2018, 1:24 pm

Poopyhead's a classic. Surprised they haven't broken that out yet.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

18 Jun 2018, 1:28 pm

^ Yes, it's just latest feminist hate-speech — the popular new content-free slur.


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


Darmok
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,030
Location: New England

14 Aug 2018, 8:24 pm

This is kind of the generic Peterson thread, so I post this here.


The Left Is Actually Afraid Of Jordan Peterson Because He’s Leading A Revolt Against Their Corruption

...Peterson and many others note rightly that most of our universities, and the other cultural institutions they gatekeep such as media and public schools, are anti-education, anti-culture, and anti-American. They gain power by separating people, by not only refusing to cultivate the capacity for self-government, but also actively cultivating intellectual, economic, and spiritual dependency.

This is why, as Flanagan has noticed, a worthy curriculum, an apprenticeship in the deepest wisdom of our heritage, is typically no longer delivered through the West’s “leading” institutions. To gain any real competence, most people must self-educate through a growing “parallel culture of ideas.” Where have we heard this parallelism language before? Among the anti-Communists of Eastern Europe, for one.


http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/14/the ... orruption/


_________________
 
There Are Four Lights!


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

14 Aug 2018, 9:11 pm

Interesting analysis of Jordan Peterson and the current media moment by Rebel Wisdom:


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Mythos
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 457
Location: England

15 Aug 2018, 3:39 pm

I find it near impossible to take anything Peterson says seriously after he unironically stated on Joe Rogan that people can only beat addictions by having spiritual experiences, and that drugs are evidence of spirituality. Like, wat.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

16 Aug 2018, 8:35 pm

Mythos wrote:
I find it near impossible to take anything Peterson says seriously after he unironically stated on Joe Rogan that people can only beat addictions by having spiritual experiences, and that drugs are evidence of spirituality. Like, wat.


He's said a few things lately that made me cringe. Mostly I haven't been wild about him pushing Shapiro's point that moral atheists aren't really atheists (he did this with Matt Dillahunty and it fell quite flat). As for spiritual experiences and addiction it's probably better to say that they *can* help people beat addiction, and even if he meant 'spiritual' in the sense that anyone taking inventory of their problems and needing to change direction - that would take the word too far from it's meaning to want to say it that way.

My general sense of him though is he's still, net of points like the above where he does self-eviscerate a bit, overall bringing a lot of really important and currently (or at least until he came on the scene) largely not thought of but crucial points to the foreground. A really good example is that we really haven't been taking our own inner mechanics seriously as well as how they effect politics, the way we live, or how emergent patterns form in politics usually in waves of what could be best described as subconscious archetypal themes playing themselves out in the public sphere rather than in a religious setting.

I still think he's going well with that overall, it sounds like he and Sam Harris had some great discussions and got to know each other better as people both during and after their public discussions.

One of the things I've learned over the years is that I can't, or at least would never want to, tune someone out over one or two missteps. I can take apart the value of what they're saying by cogitating it, holding it against the social or political anomalies that I see where what people say and what they do or what is happening don't match, and see if it stacks up. There are people both to the left and right who make plenty of missteps who I'll still listen to because occasionally they say something I hadn't thought of up that point and on evaluation it rings true.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

16 Aug 2018, 8:35 pm

Jordan w/ Douglas Murray:


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


Mythos
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 457
Location: England

16 Aug 2018, 10:51 pm

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Mythos wrote:
I find it near impossible to take anything Peterson says seriously after he unironically stated on Joe Rogan that people can only beat addictions by having spiritual experiences, and that drugs are evidence of spirituality. Like, wat.


He's said a few things lately that made me cringe. Mostly I haven't been wild about him pushing Shapiro's point that moral atheists aren't really atheists (he did this with Matt Dillahunty and it fell quite flat). As for spiritual experiences and addiction it's probably better to say that they *can* help people beat addiction, and even if he meant 'spiritual' in the sense that anyone taking inventory of their problems and needing to change direction - that would take the word too far from it's meaning to want to say it that way.

My general sense of him though is he's still, net of points like the above where he does self-eviscerate a bit, overall bringing a lot of really important and currently (or at least until he came on the scene) largely not thought of but crucial points to the foreground. A really good example is that we really haven't been taking our own inner mechanics seriously as well as how they effect politics, the way we live, or how emergent patterns form in politics usually in waves of what could be best described as subconscious archetypal themes playing themselves out in the public sphere rather than in a religious setting.

I still think he's going well with that overall, it sounds like he and Sam Harris had some great discussions and got to know each other better as people both during and after their public discussions.

One of the things I've learned over the years is that I can't, or at least would never want to, tune someone out over one or two missteps. I can take apart the value of what they're saying by cogitating it, holding it against the social or political anomalies that I see where what people say and what they do or what is happening don't match, and see if it stacks up. There are people both to the left and right who make plenty of missteps who I'll still listen to because occasionally they say something I hadn't thought of up that point and on evaluation it rings true.


You bring up some interesting points, and I agree that people shouldn't be entirely shunned for a mistake or two. However, for me it's a bit bigger than that. It's not solely because I don't trust Peterson for being a useful tool for the alt right, but the increasing concerns of his views on the holocaust and the like are largely what sell me the idea that he isn't to be trusted. There's also some beliefs that slip ups of him "accidentally" saying fourth reich instead of third reich could be attributed to a dog whistle for neonazis or holocaust deniers. Seems speculative no doubt, but it does definitely make me wonder. I don't know how likely it is that somebody just accidentally says fourth reich instead of third, especially a public speaker like Peterson.



techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

17 Aug 2018, 6:52 am

Mythos wrote:
You bring up some interesting points, and I agree that people shouldn't be entirely shunned for a mistake or two. However, for me it's a bit bigger than that. It's not solely because I don't trust Peterson for being a useful tool for the alt right, but the increasing concerns of his views on the holocaust and the like are largely what sell me the idea that he isn't to be trusted. There's also some beliefs that slip ups of him "accidentally" saying fourth reich instead of third reich could be attributed to a dog whistle for neonazis or holocaust deniers. Seems speculative no doubt, but it does definitely make me wonder. I don't know how likely it is that somebody just accidentally says fourth reich instead of third, especially a public speaker like Peterson.


I think that conclusion could only come from the outside looking in, which is where I think most people are at - ie. they've heard the name in the media a few times, they've heard what some people say about him, and where there's smoke there's probably fire. I started listening to him well before any of these narratives about him came up so I got to hear what he had to say as well about the fascists, Nazi Germany, Hitler, etc.. To the extent that he speaks substantially more about communism he seems to do so partly having grown up in the cold war rather than WWII (where the Nazis and Italian fascists were directly relevant) and what fascinated him in his youth was trying to tease apart whether the 'West' and Russia simply had arbitrary systems of value that they were fighting over, if so what did it say about human beings that we'd do such a thing, and if not what allowed for such a departure from normal human reasoning. Part of why he brings up Gulag Archipelago so often is because Solzhenitsyn did such a good job of describing what the big dreams of communism decayed into.

I also think Jordan as an academic has seen much more leftist overreach than anything on the right (add he's Canadian - they don't have any kind of substantial far-right) and he's also somewhat awestruck in the asymmetry we have culturally where we'd pillory someone for waving the nazi flag or wearing a Hitler t-shirt OTOH the hammer and sickle, t-shirts of Che Gueverra, etc. are perfectly okay where they should both be viewed as dimly as the person waving the nazi flag (ie. we have it at least half right).

The thing that I think Jordan and other guys in the IDW like Bret and Eric Weinstein are doing a wonderful job on is tackling the mendacity and sloppiness problem - and as of lately that's been an absolute killer. It's not just politicians or Marxist anthropology professors who don't care what's true and want to hold their tribe up as the supreme tribe, it's most people unfortunately on the street, and I'm deeply concerned that our tribalism could take us right back to another WWI or WWII type of discomfort. It wouldn't happen the exact same way again, technology being completely different, but we're seeing the rattling apart of both right and left and the identity politics game, really accelerated on the left right now with the right only starting to test the waters, is about compound fracturing of society and really the destruction of common ground. This is where I think what Jordan has to say about lobsters, ie. getting back to evolutionary roots of hierarchy as well as tribalism, really illustrates that we're trying to fight nature the way a Catholic priest tries to perform an exorcism and if we keep doing things this stupidly and telling ourselves that what we don't like about reality doesn't exist or that we can simply willfully beat our faces into it until it submits - we'll far sooner turn on each other and errupt into civil war because opinions on the matter will fractionate and the people doing this have to absolutely shut their ears and minds to facts that go against their dogmas or aren't sufficiently hammer-headed to keep up the fight to beat the territory into conformity with the map. It's a REALLY dangerous game people are playing politically and I think anyone who can speak at length should be up front with the IDW right now and having that discussion at the forefront of our culture.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,150
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi

23 Aug 2018, 8:58 am

This is interesting, and I think it helps illustrate what he's tapping into. I get the impression more and more that a lot of people can't tell the difference between holistic thinking (people who'd take inventory of every factor) and what they might reflexively coin new-age woo. Perhaps it's true that when people are really used to one format of speaking sounding like one group, and another format of speaking sounding like another, they may hear someone whose like neither or some much more respectable place between the two camps that's really more nuanced with both but - not even knowing the particular viewpoint exists or could exist they'll drag that viewpoint in and lump it with whatever it most superficially sounds like.

It'll be interesting to see, over the next few years, whether more people than not say 'you know, professionals in every area he touches say he's either dead aim or only making errors in side details' and if that gets traction vs whether people will just say 'Oh, he sounds like x' and never try to figure out if they were correct in their guesswork.


_________________
“Love takes off the masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. I use the word "love" here not merely in the personal sense but as a state of being, or a state of grace - not in the infantile American sense of being made happy but in the tough and universal sense of quest and daring and growth.” - James Baldwin


shlaifu
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 May 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,659

29 Aug 2018, 3:33 pm

Oh dear. A few weeks or months have passed, in which I kept reading and learning and now I feel confident in saying: JP understands Jung, and not much else.
He does analyze everything through Jung, through the terminology of Jungian psychoanalysis and... Well... Everything turns into epic, personal battles of good vs. evil through that.
It's funny, because Jung isn't really considered much more than an esoteric, even by Freud. But worse, it's esotericism from a hundred years ago...

I find his views on the Nazis quite troubling, since he's only analyzing Hitler - one person - without historical context. Which means, he doesn't talk about the German people, who saw their tradition and values threatened after the rapid change in society and were all to happy about a new story about the world, which connected to their old, no longer functioning story, which gave them an enemy and allowed them to stage a conservative answer to times of radical change.

I'm really worried about someone, in times of radical change, giving people a story that connects to their old, no longer functioning story, that comes with an enemy, and a hundred-year old image of how the world should be.
I'm not saying JP is as nuts as Hitler was, but they are, to some extent, doing similar things in times of comparable social upheaval (and economic crisis. Caused by the inner workings of the capitalist system. And I don't think trying to explain changes in society without looking at the economy and the way society is organized around production and exchange can lead very far. But that's exactly what JP is doing - looking only at psychology, and overinterpreting everything through the Jungian lens.)


Another thing that bugged me is his idea that a Pareto distribution of wealth is a 'natural law'. I.e., this idea that in a variety of human endeavors, distribution follows the 80/20 rule. 20% of podcasts get 80% of the listeners, and so on.
Well, if you keep 80/20ing wealth distribution, you'll find that 0.8% of people end up with 51,2% of wealth.
And the bottom 60% of people end up with 4% of wealth.
Now, JP's use of the phrase 'natural law' to describe this distribution suggests that, well, you can't break it. Like the law of gravity.
But if you broke the law of gravity, it would just cease to be a 'natural law'.

I'd like to state a 'natural law' here:
If a society allows 60% of people to own merely 4% of wealth, while 0.8% own more than half, it will create violent tensions.


_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

29 Aug 2018, 6:33 pm

Another person is Hitler :roll:


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"