Page 10«..9101112

Archive for the ‘Jordan Peterson’ Category

Jordan B Peterson – YouTube

Posted: February 6, 2020 at 6:51 pm

without comments

My wife, Tammy, and I toured Australia and New Zealand in February 2019. I was lecturing about the topics covered in my book, 12 Rules for Life (and also Maps of Meaning, my first book). I had a number of the lectures professionally filmed. This highlight from my lecture in Auckland focuses on what might be done about crippling feelings of guilt.


Donations: https://www.jordanbpeterson... Merchandise:

--- BOOKS ---

12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief:

--- LINKS ---

Website: 12 Rules for Life Tour: Blog: Podcast: Reading List: Twitter: Instagram: Facebook:

--- PRODUCTS ---

Self Authoring Suite: Understand Myself personality test: Merchandise: Show less

Read more:

Jordan B Peterson - YouTube

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

How dangerous is Jordan B Peterson, the rightwing …

Posted: at 6:51 pm

without comments

I hit a hornets nest at the most propitious time ... Jordan B Peterson giving a lecture at the University of Toronto. Photograph: Rene Johnston/Toronto Star/Getty Images

The Canadian psychology professor and culture warrior Jordan B Peterson could not have hoped for better publicity than his recent encounter with Cathy Newman on Channel 4 News. The more Newman inaccurately paraphrased his beliefs and betrayed her irritation, the better Peterson came across. The whole performance, which has since been viewed more than 6m times on YouTube and was described by excitable Fox News host Tucker Carlson as one of the great interviews of all time, bolstered Petersons preferred image as the coolly rational man of science facing down the hysteria of political correctness. As he told Newman in his distinctive, constricted voice, which he has compared to that of Kermit the Frog: I choose my words very, very carefully.

The confrontation has worked wonders for Peterson. His new book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos has become a runaway bestseller in the UK, US, Canada, Australia, Germany and France, making him the public intellectual du jour. Peterson is not just another troll, narcissist or blowhard whose arguments are fatally compromised by bad faith, petulance, intellectual laziness and blatant bigotry. It is harder to argue with someone who believes what he says and knows what he is talking about or at least conveys that impression. No wonder every scourge of political correctness, from the Spectator to InfoWars, is aflutter over the 55-year-old professor who appears to bring heavyweight intellectual armature to standard complaints about social-justice warriors and snowflakes. They think he could be the culture wars Weapon X.

Despite his appetite for self-promotion, Peterson claims to be a reluctant star. In a sensible world, I would have got my 15 minutes of fame, he told the Ottawa Citizen last year. I feel like Im surfing a giant wave and it could come crashing down and wipe me out, or I could ride it and continue. All of those options are equally possible.

Two years ago, he was a popular professor at the University of Toronto and a practising clinical psychologist who offered self-improvement exercises on YouTube. He published his first book, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, in 1999 and appeared in Malcolm Gladwells bestseller David and Goliath, talking about the character traits of successful entrepreneurs. The tough-love, stern-dad strand of his work is represented in 12 Rules for Life, which fetes strength, discipline and honour.

His ballooning celebrity and wealth, however, began elsewhere, with a three-part YouTube series in September 2016 called Professor Against Political Correctness. Peterson was troubled by two developments: a federal amendment to add gender identity and expression to the Canadian Human Rights Act; and his universitys plans for mandatory anti-bias training. Starting from there, he railed against Marxism, human rights organisations, HR departments and an underground apparatus of radical left political motivations forcing gender-neutral pronouns on him.

This more verbose, distinctly Canadian version of Howard Beales mad as hell monologue in Network had an explosive effect. A few days later, a video of student protesters disrupting one of Petersons lectures enhanced his reputation as a doughty truth-teller. I hit a hornets nest at the most propitious time, he later reflected.

Indeed he did. Camille Paglia anointed him the most important and influential Canadian thinker since Marshall McLuhan. Economist Tyler Cowen said Peterson is currently the most influential public intellectual in the western world. For rightwing commentator Melanie Phillips, he is a kind of secular prophet in an era of lobotomised conformism. He is also adored by figures on the so-called alt-light (basically the alt-right without the sieg heils and the white ethnostate), including Mike Cernovich, Gavin McInnes and Paul Joseph Watson. His earnings from crowdfunding drives on Patreon and YouTube hits (his lectures and debates have been viewed almost 40m times), now dwarf his academic salary.

Not everybody is persuaded that Peterson is a thinker of substance, however. Last November, fellow University of Toronto professor Ira Wells called him the professor of piffle a YouTube star rather than a credible intellectual. Tabatha Southey, a columnist for the Canadian magazine Macleans, designated him the stupid mans smart person.

Petersons secret sauce is to provide an academic veneer to a lot of old-school rightwing cant, including the notion that most academia is corrupt and evil, and banal self-help patter, says Southey. Hes very much a cult thing, in every regard. I think hes a goof, which does not mean hes not dangerous.

One person who has crossed swords with Peterson declined my interview request, having experienced floods of hate mail

So, what does Peterson actually believe? He bills himself as a classic British liberal whose focus is the psychology of belief. Much of what he says is familiar: marginalised groups are infantilised by a culture of victimhood and offence-taking; political correctness threatens freedom of thought and speech; ideological orthodoxy undermines individual responsibility. You can read this stuff any day of the week and perhaps agree with some of it. However, Peterson goes further, into its most paranoid territory. His bete noire is what he calls postmodern neo-Marxism or cultural Marxism. In a nutshell: having failed to win the economic argument, Marxists decided to infiltrate the education system and undermine western values with vicious, untenable and anti-human ideas, such as identity politics, that will pave the road to totalitarianism.

Peterson studied political science and psychology, but he weaves several more disciplines evolutionary biology, anthropology, sociology, history, literature, religious studies into his grand theory. Rather than promoting blatant bigotry, like the far right, he claims that concepts fundamental to social-justice movements, such as the existence of patriarchy and other forms of structural oppression, are treacherous illusions, and that he can prove this with science. Hence: The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory. Islamophobia is a word created by fascists and used by cowards to manipulate morons. White privilege is a Marxist lie. Believing that gender identity is subjective is as bad as claiming that the world is flat. Unsurprisingly, he was an early supporter of James Damore, the engineer fired by Google for his memo Googles Ideological Echo Chamber.

Cathy Newman was wrong to call Peterson a provocateur, as if he were just Milo Yiannopoulos with a PhD. He is a true believer. Peterson is old enough to remember the political correctness wars of the early 90s, when conservatives such as Allan Bloom and Roger Kimball warned that campus speech codes and demands to diversify the canon were putting the US on the slippery slope to Maoism, and mainstream journalists found the counterintuitive twist what if progressives are the real fascists? too juicy to resist. Their alarmist rhetoric now seems ridiculous. Those campus battles did not lead to the Gulag. But Petersons theories hark back to that episode.

Peterson was also shaped by the cold war; he was obsessed as a young man with the power of rigid ideology to make ordinary people do terrible things. He collects Soviet realist paintings, in a know-your-enemy way, and named his first child Mikhaila, after Mikhail Gorbachev. In Professor Against Political Correctness, he says: I know something about the way authoritarian and totalitarian states develop and I cant help but think that I am seeing a fair bit of that right now.

In many ways, Peterson is an old-fashioned conservative who mourns the decline of religious faith and the traditional family, but he uses of-the-moment tactics. His YouTube gospel resonates with young white men who feel alienated by the jargon of social-justice discourse and crave an empowering theory of the world in which they are not the designated oppressors. Many are intellectually curious. On Amazon, Petersons readers seek out his favourite thinkers: Dostoevsky, Nietzsche, Solzhenitsyn, Jung. His long, dense video lectures require commitment. He combines the roles of erudite professor, self-help guru and street-fighting scourge of the social-justice warrior: the missing link between Steven Pinker, Dale Carnegie and Gamergate. On Reddit, fans testify that Peterson changed, or even saved, their lives. His recent sold-out lectures in London had the atmosphere of revival meetings.

Such intense adoration can turn nasty. His more extreme supporters have abused, harassed and doxxed (maliciously published the personal information of) several of his critics. One person who has crossed swords with Peterson politely declined my request for an interview, having experienced floods of hatemail, including physical threats. Newman received so much abuse that Peterson asked his fans to back off, albeit while suggesting the scale had been exaggerated. His fans are relentless, says Southey. They have contacted me, repeatedly, on just about every platform possible.

Peterson's audience includes Christian conservatives, atheist libertarians, centrist pundits and neo-Nazis

While Peterson does not endorse such attacks, his intellectual machismo does not exactly deter them. He calls ideas he disagrees with silly, ridiculous, absurd, insane. He describes debate as combat on the battleground of ideas and hints at physical violence, too. If youre talking to a man who wouldnt fight with you under any circumstances whatsoever, then youre talking to someone for whom you have absolutely no respect, he told Paglia last year, adding that it is harder to deal with crazy women because he cannot hit them. His fans post videos with titles such as Jordan Peterson DESTROY [sic] Transgender Professor and Those 7 Times Jordan Peterson Went Beast Mode. In debate, as in life, Peterson believes in winners and losers.

How does one effectively debate a man who seems obsessed with telling his adoring followers that there is a secret cabal of postmodern neo-Marxists hellbent on destroying western civilisation and that their campus LGBTQ group is part of it? says Southey. Theres never going to be a point where he says: You know what? Youre right, I was talking out of my ass back there. Its very much about him attempting to dominate the conversation.

Petersons constellation of beliefs attracts a heterogeneous audience that includes Christian conservatives, atheist libertarians, centrist pundits and neo-Nazis. This staunch anti-authoritarian also has a striking habit of demonising the left while downplaying dangers from the right. After the 2016 US election, Peterson described Trump as a liberal and a moderate, no more of a demagogue than Reagan. In as much as Trump voters are intolerant, Peterson claims, it is the lefts fault for sacrificing the working class on the altar of identity politics. Because his contempt for identity politics includes what he calls the pathology of racial pride, he does not fully endorse the far right, but he flirts with their memes and overlaps with them on many issues.

Its true that hes not a white nationalist, says David Neiwert, the Pacific Northwest correspondent for the Southern Poverty Law Center and the author of Alt-America: The Rise of the Radical Right in the Age of Trump. But hes buttressing his narrative with pseudo-facts, many of them created for the explicit purpose of promoting white nationalism, especially the whole notion of cultural Marxism. The arc of radicalisation often passes through these more moderate ideologues.

The difference is that this individual has a title and profession that lend a certain illusory credibility, says Cara Tierney, an artist and part-time professor who protested against Petersons appearance at Ottawas National Gallery last year. Its very theatrical and shrewdly exploits platforms that thrive on spectacle, controversy, fear and prejudice. The threat is not so much what [Petersons] beliefs are, but how they detract from more critical, informed and, frankly, interesting conversations.

Consider the media firestorm last November over Lindsay Shepherd, a teaching assistant at Ontarios Wilfrid Laurier University, who was reprimanded for showing students a clip of Peterson debating gender pronouns. Her supervising professor compared it to neutrally playing a speech by Hitler, before backing down and apologising publicly. The widely reported controversy sent 12 Rules for Life racing back up the Amazon charts, leading Peterson to tweet: Apparently being compared to Hitler now constitutes publicity.

Yet Petersons commitment to unfettered free speech is questionable. Once you believe in a powerful and malign conspiracy, you start to justify extreme measures. Last July, he announced plans to launch a website that would help students and parents identify and avoid corrupt courses with postmodern content. Within five years, he hoped, this would starve postmodern neo-Marxist cult classes into oblivion. Peterson shelved the plan after a backlash, acknowledging that it might add excessively to current polarisation. Who could have predicted that blacklisting fellow professors might exacerbate polarisation? Apparently not the most influential public intellectual in the western world.

The key to Petersons appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything, without qualification or error. On Channel 4 News, he posed as an impregnable rock of hard evidence and common sense. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of subjects, including postmodernism, gender identity and Canadian law, that lie outside his field of expertise. Therefore, there is no need to caricature his ideas in order to challenge them. Even so, his critics will have their work cut out: Petersons wave is unlikely to come crashing down any time soon.

Read the original post:

How dangerous is Jordan B Peterson, the rightwing ...

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Jordan Peterson | Podcast

Posted: at 6:51 pm

without comments

Podcast Producer2020-01-31T11:22:21-05:00 S2 E44: Playing the Hierarchical Game Part one

Podcast Producer2020-01-31T11:22:21-05:00February 2nd, 2020|

Part one of Jordan Peterson's 2019 lecture from Melbourne, AU Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of

Podcast Producer2020-01-24T19:13:30-05:00January 26th, 2020|

A 12 Rules for Life lecture from Jordan Peterson in Australia on Feb. 11, 2019 Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps

Podcast Producer2020-01-16T13:44:12-05:00January 19th, 2020|

A 12 Rules for Life lecture from Australia. Thanks to our sponsor: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Dr Jordan

Podcast Producer2020-01-10T13:25:02-05:00January 12th, 2020|

Here is the first episode of 2020. A Jordan B. Peterson 12 Rules for Life lecture from Australia. Recorded 02/082019 Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An

Podcast Producer2019-12-20T21:21:31-05:00December 22nd, 2019|

A Jordan B. Peterson lecture from San Diego. Recorded January 25 2019. Thanks to our sponsor! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The Architecture

Podcast Producer2020-01-21T11:48:59-05:00December 15th, 2019|

A 12 Rules for Life lecture recorded in Riverside on Jan. 24, 2019. Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps

Podcast Producer2019-12-02T11:31:33-05:00December 8th, 2019|

Resolving the Science Religion Problem is a 12 Rules for Life lecture by Jordan B. Peterson from January 2019. Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote

Podcast Producer2019-11-27T13:51:55-05:00December 1st, 2019|

A 12 Rules for Life lecture by Dr. Jordan B. Peterson Thanks to our sponsor: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of

Podcast Producer2019-11-21T18:55:28-05:00November 24th, 2019|

A 12 Rules for Life lecture from Vancouver in December of 2018. Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The

Podcast Producer2019-11-15T22:01:58-05:00November 17th, 2019|

A 12 Rules for Life lecture from Jordan B. Peterson. Recorded in Olso (Norway) November of 2018. Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first

Podcast Producer2019-11-07T08:53:53-05:00November 10th, 2019|

"Competence Hierarchies" is a Jordan Peterson 12 Rules for Life lecture recorded in Birmingham UK (November of 2018). Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to

Podcast Producer2019-11-01T23:02:34-05:00November 3rd, 2019|

Set Your House in Order is a 12 Rules for Life lecture from Jordan B. Peterson. Recorded Nov. 1, 2018 in Cambridge UK. Thanks to our sponsors: Helix: Try Basis: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12

Podcast Producer2019-10-25T09:36:21-05:00October 27th, 2019|

A standout 12 Rules for Life lecture from Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Recorded in Edinburgh 10-28-2018. Thanks to our sponsors: Ancestry eToro Try Basis Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote

Podcast Producer2019-10-22T08:28:13-05:00October 20th, 2019|

Legendary Canadian commentator and author, Rex Murphy... interviews Jordan. This episode is truly unique! More from Rex Murphy: Big thanks to our sponsors! Butcher Box: Eero: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life:

Podcast Producer2019-10-10T14:58:08-05:00October 13th, 2019|

The Crisis of Masculinityis a lecture from Jordan's 12 Rules for Life Tour on Oct. 25, 2018 in Manchester. Thanks to our sponsors: Linkedin: Helix Sleep: E Toro: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules

Podcast Producer2019-10-04T03:09:59-05:00October 6th, 2019|

Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules for Life lecture from Dublin, Ireland. Recorded on Oct 2018. Thanks to our sponsor: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning:

Podcast Producer2019-09-29T20:32:22-05:00September 29th, 2019|

Dr. Peterson visits Texas for a lecture on his 12 Rules for Life! This episode is a standout from his 2018 tour. Thanks to our sponsors! Try Basis: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new

Podcast Producer2019-09-20T13:30:35-05:00September 22nd, 2019|

Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules for Life lecture from Westbury, NY. Thanks to our sponsor: Try Basis: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The Architecture

Podcast Producer2019-09-13T19:07:52-05:00September 15th, 2019|

Dr. Peterson's 12 Rules for Life lecture in Rochester, NY. Recorded Sept. 5th, 2018 Thanks to our sponsors: Ancestry! Try Basis here! Linkedin! E-Toro! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An

Podcast Producer2019-09-06T12:14:38-05:00September 8th, 2019|

Jordan's 12 Rules for Life tour continues from Regina SK. Recorded August 14, 2018. Dr. Peterson focuses on Rule 10. Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote

Podcast Producer2019-08-30T12:56:43-05:00September 1st, 2019|

Jordan's 12 Rules for Life lecture from Winnipeg. Recorded July of 2018. Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning:

Podcast Producer2019-08-23T14:22:35-05:00August 25th, 2019|

Jordan's 12 Rules for Life lecture from July, 28 2018 in Edmonton, AB. Thanks to Helix Sleep! Also: Jordan's 12 Rules for Life lecture from July, 28 2018 in Edmonton, AB. Thanks to Helix Sleep! Also: Relevant Links 12

Podcast Producer2019-08-19T15:49:52-05:00August 18th, 2019|

Jamil Jivani (recorded 01/09/19) joins Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Jamil is the author of, Why Young Men. About Jamil's Book: Jamil Jivani recounts his experiences working as a youth activist throughout North America and the Middle East, drawing striking parallels between ISIS recruits, gangbangers, and Neo-Nazis

Podcast Producer2019-08-10T08:23:49-05:00August 11th, 2019|

Territory, Hierarchy, Security, and Fear Jordan B. Peterson's "12 Rules for Life" lecture from Calgary, AB Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first

Podcast Producer2019-08-01T12:06:21-05:00August 4th, 2019|

Steven Pinker returns for a conversation with Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Steven Arthur Pinker is a Canadian-Americancognitive psychologist,linguist, andpopular scienceauthor. He is a professor in the Department of Psychology atHarvard University, and is known for his advocacy ofevolutionary psychologyand thecomputational theory of mind. Thanks to our

Podcast Producer2019-07-26T12:05:01-05:00July 28th, 2019|

Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules for Life lecture from Ottawa on July, 23 2018. Big thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of

Podcast Producer2019-07-19T10:33:05-05:00July 21st, 2019|

Jordan Peterson's recent discussion with special guest, Ben Shapiro. Thanks to our sponsors: Try Basis! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The

Podcast Producer2019-07-14T07:43:36-05:00July 14th, 2019|

Jordan Peterson's 2018 lecture on the 12 Rules for life from London, Ontario. Thanks to our sponsors! Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning:

Podcast Producer2019-07-02T12:36:08-05:00July 7th, 2019|

Dr. Jordan Peterson delivered this talk at the Prager Summit in May in Santa Barbara. However, it's really an extended commentary on a lecture from Sydney, Australia, Feb 26, 2019, entitled Who Dares Say He Believes in God? To conclude this episode, Jordan also talks with

Podcast Producer2019-06-30T04:28:20-05:00June 30th, 2019|

"I have been asked many times by many people if I believe in God. I don't like this question. I generally respond by stating that I act as if God exists, but that's not sufficiently true. Who could do that? Who could conduct themselves with the

Podcast Producer2019-06-23T08:45:29-05:00June 23rd, 2019|

For Ep 14, we present Dr. Peterson's highly anticipated conversation with Bishop Barron. Word On Fire: Thanks to our sponsors: Stamps: Basis: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:51:26-05:00June 16th, 2019|

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's "12 Rules For Life" lecture at theCenter inthe Square in Kitchener, Ontario, recorded on July 21, 2018. Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life:

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:51:01-05:00June 9th, 2019|

Part two of Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's interview with Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan is an Americanstand-up comedian,mixed martial arts(MMA)color commentator,podcasthost,businessman, television host, and actor. Visit Mikhaila Peterson here: Visit Dr. Peterson here: Thanks to our sponsors: Try Basis! Relevant Links 12 Rules

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:51:53-05:00June 2nd, 2019|

Part one of Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's interview with Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan is an Americanstand-up comedian,mixed martial arts(MMA)color commentator,podcasthost,businessman, television host, and actor. Thanks to our sponsors: Summary Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book:

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:52:30-05:00May 26th, 2019|

Today, were presentingDr. Peterson's 12 Rules for Lifelecture at the Chan Centre in Vancouver, British Columbia, recorded on July26, 2018. Thanks to our sponsors: Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T11:39:09-05:00May 19th, 2019|

Today we present Dr. Peterson's conversation with journalist, performance artist, and comedian, Milo Yiannopoulos, recorded April 11, 2019. Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:53:46-05:00May 12th, 2019|

Lecture: Hamilton, Ontario - July 20, 2018 Today, we're presenting Dr. Jordan B. Peterson's 12 Rules for Life Lecture at the First Ontario Concert Hall in Hamilton, Ontario. Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:54:22-05:00May 5th, 2019|

Today, werepresenting Dr. Peterson'sconversation with Stephen Hicks, recorded on March 27, 2019. Stephen R. C. Hicks is Professor of Philosophy at Rockford University, Illinois, USA, ExecutiveDirector of the Center for Ethics and Entrepreneurship, and Senior Scholar at The Atlas Society. Relevant

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:55:14-05:00April 28th, 2019|

For this episode, were presenting Jordans lecture at the Civic Arts Plaza in Thousand Oaks, California on June 30, 2018. Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:58:01-05:00April 21st, 2019|

For this episode, were presenting Jordans lecture at The Community Theatre in Sacramento, California on June 27, 2018. Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to My first book: Maps of Meaning: The

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:57:01-05:00April 15th, 2019|

On this episode, were presenting a conversation with Akira The Don, a British musician who has used parts of Dr. Peterson's lectures in his music. Relevant Links 12 Rules for Life Live My new book: 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:58:34-05:00April 9th, 2019|

In this lecture, I describe the surprising popularity of long-form philosophical discussions, making reference to my talks with Sam Harris on science and value and religion and atheism, the vital and biologically-influenced role that temperament and personality play in determining individual interest and ability, and the

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T10:59:10-05:00April 1st, 2019|

I had the opportunity to speak recently with General Stanley McChrystal, retired four-star general, former Commander of the International Security Assistance Force and Commander, US Forces, Afghanistan. Since 2010, he has taught courses in international relations at Yale University as a Senior Fellow of the University's

Podcast Producer2019-06-16T11:34:23-05:00March 25th, 2019|

For this episode, were presenting Dr. Petersons12 Rules for Life Tour lecture at the Moore Theatre in Seattle, WA on June 21, 2018. The lecture covers the evolution of religion thinking, a true human universal. Everyone has to deal with the problem of value. Everyone has to

Dr. Jordan Peterson2019-03-11T11:53:28-05:00March 12th, 2019|

A conversation between Dr. Jordan Peterson and Sir Roger Scruton, moderated by Dr. Stephen Blackwood, introduced by Professor Douglas Hedley, presented by The Cambridge Centre for the Study of Platonism and Ralston College, held on Nov 2,2018in Cambridge, England. God willing (so to speak) I

Dr. Jordan Peterson2019-02-26T12:01:27-05:00February 21st, 2019|

Dr Jordan Peterson speaks with Dr Stephen Blackwood about Solzhenitsyn, our cultural inflection point, higher education, and the hunger of the young for meaning. Dr Stephen Blackwood is the president of Ralston College, a new university being founded in Savannah, Georgia. Ralston College is committed

Dr. Jordan Peterson2019-02-26T12:02:09-05:00January 22nd, 2019|

Happy New Year. This is the first of this year's Q and A's. I am going to answer audience questions, as usual, as well as discussing my next book, my impending departure from Patreon, and my upcoming tour to Switzerland, California, Australia and New Zealand.

Dr. Jordan Peterson2019-02-26T12:02:16-05:00January 2nd, 2019|

On December 13, 2018, I was a guest on Femsplainers with Christina Hoff Sommers and Danielle Crittenden. We discussed, among other topics, the secrets of a long marriage, the problems with dating apps, how to handle a belligerent toddler, and the motivation of my radical

Dr. Jordan Peterson2019-02-26T12:02:21-05:00December 8th, 2018|

On December 7, 2018, I spoke with Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, author and President of Copenhagen Consensus Center, a singularly innovative and influential US-based think tank. Dr. Lomborg and his team have done the hard conceptual and empirical work necessary to turn good intentions for global

Dr. Jordan Peterson2019-02-26T12:02:27-05:00November 6th, 2018|

Continue reading here:

Jordan Peterson | Podcast

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Why Can’t People Hear What Jordan Peterson Is Actually …

Posted: at 6:51 pm

without comments

Perhaps she has used that tactic to good effect elsewhere. (And the online attacks to which shes been subjected are abhorrent assaults on decency by people who are perpetrating misbehavior orders of magnitude worse than hers.)

But in the interview, Newman relies on this technique to a remarkable extent, making it a useful illustration of a much broader pernicious trend. Peterson was not evasive or unwilling to be clear about his meaning. And Newmans exaggerated restatements of his views mostly led viewers astray, not closer to the truth.

* * *

Peterson begins the interview by explaining why he tells young men to grow up and take responsibility for getting their lives together and becoming good partners. He notes he isnt talking exclusively to men, and that he has lots of female fans.

Whats in it for the women, though? Newman asks.

Well, what sort of partner do you want? Peterson says. Do you want an overgrown child? Or do you want someone to contend with who is going to help you?

So youre saying, Newman retorts, that women have some sort of duty to help fix the crisis of masculinity. But thats not what he said. He posited a vested interest, not a duty.

Women deeply want men who are competent and powerful, Peterson goes on to assert. And I dont mean power in that they can exert tyrannical control over others. Thats not power. Thats just corruption. Power is competence. And why in the world would you not want a competent partner? Well, I know why, actually, you cant dominate a competent partner. So if you want domination

The interviewer interrupts, So youre saying women want to dominate, is that what youre saying?

The next section of the interview concerns the pay gap between men and women, and whether it is rooted in gender itself or other nondiscriminatory factors:

Newman: that 9 percent pay gap, thats a gap between median hourly earnings between men and women. That exists.

Peterson: Yes. But theres multiple reasons for that. One of them is gender, but thats not the only reason. If youre a social scientist worth your salt, you never do a univariate analysis. You say women in aggregate are paid less than men. Okay. Well then we break its down by age; we break it down by occupation; we break it down by interest; we break it down by personality.

Newman: But youre saying, basically, it doesnt matter if women arent getting to the top, because thats what is skewing that gender pay gap, isnt it? Youre saying thats just a fact of life, women arent necessarily going to get to the top.

Peterson: No, Im not saying it doesnt matter, either. Im saying there are multiple reasons for it.

Newman: Yeah, but why should women put up with those reasons?

Peterson: Im not saying that they should put up with it! Im saying that the claim that the wage gap between men and women is only due to sex is wrong. And it is wrong. Theres no doubt about that. The multivariate analysis have been done. So let me give you an example

The interviewer seemed eager to impute to Peterson a belief that a large, extant wage gap between men and women is a fact of life that women should just put up with, though all those assertions are contrary to his real positions on the matter.

Read this article:

Why Can't People Hear What Jordan Peterson Is Actually ...

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Jordan Peterson: What You Should Know About the Alt-Right …

Posted: at 6:51 pm

without comments

If you hang around intellectuals or academics long enough, one of them will make the joke that they wish they were conservative because there is a lot more money in it.Jordan Peterson is living proof of that.

The Koch Brothers and the Heritage Foundation are eager to fund and promote the brightest minds conservatism has to offer. They intend to use the free market language of the right, there is a high demand for intellectuals who will defend conservative ideas, but there is a very low supply.

So if youre wondering how 55-year-old Canadian psychology professor Jordan B. Peterson became an overnight sensation, going from obscure academic to international bestseller lauded in the New York Times as most influential public intellectual in the Western world right now, you dont have to look much further than that old academic joke.

Jordan Peterson is famous because in the era of the resurgent alt-right, the loose collection of conservatives that align with white supremacists, there are few intellectuals willing to align themselves with the movement. The alt-right is in need of intellectuals to justify their fascist worldview, and Peterson has been ready.

Until 2016, Peterson languished in relative obscurity. He taught at Harvard and then at the University of Toronto after earning a Ph.D. from McGill. In the fall of 2016, he became embroiled in a controversy that would cost him his teaching position, but would ultimately launch him to stardom.


In Canada, as in America, the rights of transgender people have been a hotly debated issue.

Peterson found himself a viral star after opposing a bill known as C-16, which sought to add gender identity and expression to laws regarding discrimination. Peterson began his now thriving YouTube career with a series of lectures arguing that asking people to refer to others by their preferred gender pronouns infringes on free speech. His stance on this issue led to an interview with Channel 4s Cathy Newman which also went viral (the video currently has nine million views).

Suddenly, Peterson was a star with a platform and an eager audience. His views include an Ayn Randian focus on the individual and masculinity, as well as darker viewpoints including anti-Social Justice Warrior screeds, critiques of feminism, the suggestion that political correctness is the undoing of Western culture, and even the implication that violence against women is okay if the woman deserves it.

If Peterson were to advocate these views outright, without a carefully constructed academic veneer, he would be treated like Richard Spencer or Milo Yiannopoulos. Even more likely, he would be largely barred from the public square. But Peterson cleverly follows the playbook of respectability, cloaking his views in Jungian archetypes, fatherly self-help diatribes, and labored academic language. He lends himself an aura of intellectual seriousness his ideas do not deserve. Beneath all the layers of pretense and respectability, Peterson is making an argument you can find at any bar in America. Its a hard world out there, he argues, so get whats yours.

Prior to this year, Petersons only published book was a tome titled Maps of Meaning. In this text, Peterson relied heavily on Swiss psychologist Carl Jung whose work involved interpreting life through mythic archetypes or deeply rooted characters and symbolic motifs that reappear in art, dreams, myths, and religions.

The primary project of Maps of Meaning was to prove modern culture is natural. By this, he means that the structures of society are in place because of how humans are meant to exist in terms both intellectual myth and evolutionary science. This is an incredibly niche subject, but it isnt hard to see why this would be appealing to conservative defenders of the status quo. His argument boils down to Make Western Civilization Great Again.

In January, Peterson released 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote for Chaos. Several hundred pages slimmer than his earlier work, the book mixes his ideas about masculinity, individualism, and mythic destiny with a self-help style manual for living.

12 Rules breaks up his long academic and philosophical digressions into chapters with titles fitting of a book like The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, like Stand Up Straight with Your Shoulders Back and Be Precise In Your Speech. With this book, Peterson rebranded as a kind of Malcolm Gladwell of the right, boiling down varied, complicated concepts into digestible chunks that support generally accepted ideas that he can then use to bolster his misogynistic, bigoted, reactionary worldview.


In the book and lectures, Peterson contends that a man should be a dominant figure. It is feminine aspects, Peterson argues, of society that prevent men from self-actualizing. Boys are suffering in the modern world, he cautions his audience. The only way to stop the suffering is to toughen up. He refers to his female critics as rabid harpies.

Taking into account Petersons audience and particular appeal, this approach makes sense. Whether you want to talk about the alt-right, Proud Boys, Pepes, gamers (Peterson counts PewDiePie among his fans), or the economically anxious, there is a mass of young, underemployed white men who chafe at the modern liberal answers society provides. Peterson offers them a role model, a mentor, and even a father figure to look up to and affirm their isolated and often prejudiced worldview.

Understanding Petersons intellectual and cultural project will also help you understand his popular YouTube videos a little better. For example, why does Peterson spend some much time talking about Disney movies? Famously, Petersonlikes to tear into Frozen for being SJW propaganda. Remembering that Peterson is setting out to affirm a more traditional view of masculinity, free of the influence of things like Marxism, postmodernism, leftists, or what many people might call social progress, his anger makes complete sense.

While Peterson has a long list of the forces of modernity he is generally opposed to, writers like Shuja Haider of Viewpoints have pointed out that he declines to engage in direct criticism of the work of the various authors he critiques. Essentially, he rails against modernity without ever really bothering to define it. If he did, he would have to admit he is speaking of things like civil rights and gender equality. This is just one example of the kind of lack of intellectual rigor that led Macleans Tabetha Southey to call Peterson, the stupid mans smart person.

Peterson is careful not to explicitly align himself with fascists. But it isnt a giant intellectual leap from Petersons words to the actions in Charlottesville. How does one toughen up if not through violence? He says he is not of the alt-right, but he has said, If men are pushed too hard to feminize, they will become more and more interested in harsh, fascist political ideology.

Peterson tries to duck out of taking responsibility for the political actions of his followers. One of his 12 Rules is Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world. But everything is especially political when you are positioning yourself as a cultural theorist. As the world develops around us, we are impacted every day by the worlds political realities. We pay rent on that house we have to put in order.

Nathan J. Robinson is the author of perhaps the most thorough dismantling of Petersons intellectual credibility so far. As he concludes his argument, he makes exactly this point:

Peterson speaks to disaffected millennial men, validating their prejudices about feminists and serving as a surrogate father figure. Yet hes offering them terrible advice, because the individual responsibility ethic makes one feel like a failure for failing Millennials struggle in part because of a viciously competitive economy that is crushing them with debt and a lack of opportunityBut if you cant pay your student loans, or your rent, and you cant get a better job, what use is it to tell you that you should adopt a confident lobster-posture?

Here Robinson refers to an anecdote in 12 Rules in which Peterson explains that human males, like lobsters, are subject to a rigid hierarchy of dominator and dominated. While he is welcome to indulge in whatever metaphors he likes, the sad view dominates his work. He may sound smarter than your average fascist, but his wordsare little more than furious, insignificant bluster.

The only thing you can really learn from Jordan Peterson is that while being a conservative academic might be lucrative, it certainly isnt worth it.

Here is the original post:

Jordan Peterson: What You Should Know About the Alt-Right ...

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

5 People Who Tried the Carnivore Diet – Muscle & Fitness

Posted: at 6:51 pm

without comments

Weve been told our whole lives that fruits, vegetables, and whole grains are the keys to a healthy diet. But what if thats all wrong, and the true key to health lies in animal-based products and nothing else?

Thats the idea behind the carnivore diet, an extreme eating regimen that limits people to only meat, eggs, and certain dairy products.

Again, it sounds crazy considering that countless scientific studies have found that diets high in red meats lead to cancer and other diseases. Despite that, countless people have preached the benefits of a carnivore dietsaying its helped them lose weight, heal their digestive tracts, increased their testosterone, and more.

The latest celebrity to endorse the diet is popular podcast host and UFC commentator Joe Rogan. In an Instagram post, he revealed that sticking to it for the month of January helped him shed 12 pounds and lose his belly and love handles. He added, Lots of aches and pains went away, and I have improvements in my vitiligo. Im impressed. Vitiligo is a skin condition Rogan suffers from, which causes skin discoloration.

Take a look at Rogans results.

Rogans unsure if hell continue the carnivore diet, but called the month very beneficial. It should also be noted he admits the diet made him take several trips to the bathroom, which is apparently normal on the diet.

"The explosive uber diarrhea stopped around 2 weeks in. Its been totally normal last two weeks, he wrote.

Rogans far from the only celebrity to try the carnivore diet. Here are four other big-time names who ate like cavemen.

See the article here:

5 People Who Tried the Carnivore Diet - Muscle & Fitness

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:51 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Is bragging about sex to other women ’emotional cheating’? –

Posted: at 6:50 pm

without comments

DEARPETRA:I have been in a long distance relationship with a man for ninemonths. We met online (we live in different countries). We've visited each other three times over the ninemonths.

By sheer coincidence, I found out that my boyfriend was allowing himself to be introduced to single women who wanted to get to know single men.

In particular he's been going out on dates with one girl, texting her things like "good night sleepyhead," and bragging about his sexual prowess to her, saying that he makes women orgasm very easily.

I confronted him. He said he was making a new friend, nothing happened, and if they had gone out, he would have told me. He accepted he made the comments about sexual prowess but said it was a joke. Then he accused me of only seeing the bad in him.

READ MORE: * There's no spark that should be there, especially when I look at other couples * He lied about his flatmate, who turned out to be his ex: How do I trust him? * I know it's wrong, but I hate what my boyfriend wears * Still a virgin at 24 - and I want to get it over with

So, Petra, should I keep him or dump him? Does this constitute emotional cheating?

I'm aware he sounds like a d**khead in this story and you might question why I'm dating him. To be fair, we have chemistry and he's always been respectful to me, and I feel like I've now invested a lot of time and energy into the relationship.



Even if nothing happens, getting emotionally cosy with another's lover is still cheating, says Petra.

PETRASAYS:Lalitha, my lovely lambkin. Here is a list of activities that would represent a better use of your time than dating this guy:

- Standing in a static queue at the post office listening to an elderly lady at the head of the line argue relentlessly with the sales assistant about the cost of parcel post;

- Picking at a tantalisingly dry piece of dead cuticle skin, then going too far and making it bleed;

- Watching The Bachelorette NZ;

- Reading every bit of The Bachelorette NZ commentary you can find on the web;

- Reading a Jordan Peterson book.

So, you get the picture. This guy sucks. Every minute you spend with him from this point on is a minute too long.

What he did was not "emotional cheating," it was straight-up, old-fashioned cheating, regardless of whether he did anything physical with the other woman or not.

And not only was there cheating, but said cheating was utterly tasteless and cringe-inducing. Lalitha, you're asking me whether you should keep him or dump him. Tell me, do you really want to hold onto a guy who hits on other women by boasting about how easily he can make them orgasm then, when confronted by his girlfriend, tries to gaslight her into thinking that she is the problem by accusing her of "only seeing the bad in him"?

Nellie Ryan

Dump him as quick as you can, says Petra.

I think you've got a fair bit of cognitive dissonance going on here, Lalitha. On a gut/instinctual level, you know he's a grackle and that you should leave him.

However, your conscious mind is feeding you untrue and unhelpful thoughts like "You don't want the past nine months to have been for nothing!" and "What if there's no one better out there?!" and "Being single sucks," which is causing you to rationalise and minimise his behaviour so you can justify carrying on with the relationship. Hence you telling me that he's "always been respectful to you," when quite plainly nothing could be further from the truth, and feigning confusion as to whether his behaviour constitutes cheating.

Lalitha, in this situation your gut is right on the money. Your boyfriend "sounds like a d**khead in this story" because he IS a d**khead, both in this story and out of it.

There are four possible answers to your question "Should I keep him or dump him?":

a) dump him b) dump him right now c) dump him five minutes ago d) all of the above.

* Petra Quinn is a 28-year-old professional living and working in Auckland, New Zealand. She uses a pseudonym for this column to protect her personal and career opportunities. To send Petra a question, email her with "Dear Petra" in the subject line.


See the rest here:

Is bragging about sex to other women 'emotional cheating'? -

Written by admin

February 6th, 2020 at 6:50 pm

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Dear Jordan Peterson Fans, Try to Actually Be More Like Him – Merion West

Posted: February 1, 2020 at 8:43 am

without comments

Peterson is neither sacrosanct nor untouchable. He would agree with that statement himself.

Whenever there is a reaching down into innermost experience, into the nucleus of personality, most people are overcome by fear and many run awayThe risk of inner experience, the adventure of the spirit, is in any case alien to most human beings. The possibility that such experience might have psychic reality is anathema to them. Memories, Dreams, Reflections by Carl Jung and Aniela Jaff

On January 7th, an assistant professorand anti-fascistfrom the University of Calgary by the name of Ted McCoy tweeted his thoughts on the well-known Canadian psychologist, Jordan B. Peterson, in the form of a (McCoys words) joke. McCoy stated in his since-deleted tweet that: I heard it rumoured students will fail my class if they cite Jordan Peterson and Id like to clarify that this is absolutely correct. After much feedback, McCoy revisedhis view on Peterson by tweeting that he acknowledges his students right to hold a dissimilar political viewpoint than his own. Whether this is truly McCorys actual belief, however, remains unclear.

My issue is less with McCoy and people like him, who frequently criticize Peterson with little depth to their criticisms. (This is not to say, of course, that these people and their freedom-injuring attitude belong in academia.) However, any personal animosity that I have had towards Petersons critics is being increasingly redirected: towards Petersons followers and those of public intellectuals similar to Peterson. A portion of Petersons fanscertainly not all of themmake use of a method of argumentation by attacking disagreements with empty Petersonisms, which I define as thoughts, arguments, or ideas that Jordan Peterson has once articulated. Empty is the way that many deliver these sayings; they often amount to little more than grateful gestures towards Peterson, without fundamentally agreeing with the underlying ideas.

Nevertheless, Petersons views should be scrutinized and defended in a thought-out and considered manner. Unfortunately, the polarizing effects of Petersons work can be especially problematic for those seeking to engage with his ideas in a thorough way, given all of the knee-jerk assumptions about his body of work. However, engaging with his ideas superficially only serves to further polarize Peterson, as well as his followers (including those who are trying to engage with his ideas thoughtfully) by reinforcing stereotypes about Peterson and his followers. This further polarization alsodiminishes the significance of being an authentic Peterson follower.

In one of his lectures, Peterson mentions this idea of paying attention to what youre sayingresembling Rule 10 in his book 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: Be precise in your speech by describing a dichotomization of his mind between a judging part and a talking part. The former part was, as Peterson put it, watching the part that was talking and going: That isnt your idea; you dont really believe that; you dont know what you are talking about; and, that is not true. The same could be said when engaging with Petersons own ideas: Reconsidering your current alignment with Petersons views can be more beneficial than mindlessly reciting his work.

Now, Petersons latest book (12 Rules), as well as his Youtube lectures and debates, have proved helpful to many people. Without being redundant, the beneficial element of Petersons work has already been described in great detail at Merion West. Whether one supports Peterson or not, this part of his work is eminently significant and should not be seen as trivial or be discredited by those seeking to portray him as destructiveor immoral. To separate the wheat from the chaff an idiom often used by Peterson himselfis a crucial process when analyzing controversial thinkers like Peterson.

When we ignore this process, we risk becoming incapable of considering other points of viewlike how the 15-year-old teenager in the film The Rise of Jordan Peterson described it: After following him [Peterson] so much, he becomes like a legendary figure in your mind. One of the teenagers presumable friends (also 15 years of age) acknowledges that its understandable to hold such a view of Peterson in an environment where his ideas are less tolerated. The polarizing essence of Peterson, however, can result in one becoming trapped in a Peterson-vacuum.

To prevent that from happening, one ought to expose himself to refined criticisms of Petersons work. Many have triedor are tryingto produce such articles, videos, or books that contain constructive criticisms of Petersons ideas. Yet, a great many have failed to do so, resulting in numerous ad hominem attacks of Peterson himself, rather than engagements with his works. In November, 2019, four authors at Merion WestBen Burgis, Conrad Hamilton, Marion Trejo, and Matt McManusattemptedto comprehensively critique Petersons work, without dipping into thead hominem. This attempt is still ongoing; their upcoming book, Myth and Mayhem: A Leftist Critique of Jordan Peterson has yet to be published. Unfortunately, the annunciation of their book has mostly been met with backlash. However, both Petersons allies and adversaries may benefit from sophisticated criticisms of his work. Those attempting to criticize Peterson, however, should avoid exerting a fault-finding approach as a reply to the previous lack of effective critique on Peterson. If there is no smoking gun, its probably a signal that Petersons critics have to look somewhere else. Engaging in such a manner with any intellectual one disagrees with results in the tendency to act as an empty skeptic. (The empty skeptic is a concept I described in an earlier articleof mine at Merion West. This form of skepticism invokes thoughtlessly critiquing anothers thinking by using different fallacies in order to avoid actual confrontation with the opponents actual, fundamental ideas (e.g. Straw man fallacy or Red herring).)

Nevertheless, McManus and his colleagues have undertaken an ambitious task. They introduced the article by mentioning the many different approaches fellow left-leaning critics have taken when addressing Petersons mistakesand how these commentators have failed in discussing the complete Peterson-encyclopedia. I wont get into the different ways McManus and his colleagues have not (yet) met their promises; this can be read at length in the comment section. As Ive stated at the beginning, I am less interested in the critics themselves; however, for the sake of argument, it might be interesting to examine a bit their incentives to produce this bookbesides just their political disagreements with Peterson. One of the reasons stated by the authors was their, belief that it is necessary to argue against political opponents in as sustained a manner as possible. Not many will refute this justification. Both left-right or any other dichotomy prefers strong players on both sides of the game, irrespective of the type of game.

Furthermore, they proceed by reminding readers about Petersons relevance in todays intellectual climate: Peterson is the most significant anti-leftist critic in the Western world today, and answering his charges in a reasonable and popular manner is necessary if progressivism is to be convincing both practically and intellectually. These motives so far are not illogical by any means. In my opinion, we should give it time to see how the authors continue to analyze Petersons ideas. Jordan Peterson is not going away anytime soon.

Per contra, adopting the notion that Jordan Petersons frequent misinterpretations are unalterable and that we should just move onas someone suggested in the comment section of McManus article on a sample chapter of the bookis simply admitting that Peterson is unable to be criticized. Peterson is neither sacrosanct nor untouchable. He would agree with that statement himself. In his earlier book, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, Peterson describes different satanic traits, including arrogance:

It is not that easy to understand why the act of presuming omniscience is reasonably construed as precisely the opposite to the act of creative exploration (as the adversary is opposite to the hero). What knowing everything means, howeverat least in practiceis that the unknown no longer exists, and that further exploration hast therefore been rendered superfluous (even treacherous). This means that absolute identification with the known necessarily comes to replace all opportunity for identification with the process that comes to know [Petersons italics]. The presumption of absolute knowledge, which is the cardinal sin of the rational spirit, is, therefore, prima facie equivalent to rejection of the heroto the rejection of Christ, of the Word of God, of the (divine) process that mediates between order and chaos.

What unifies the so-far ineffective different criticisms of Peterson is that they usually take the form of the Poisoning the Well Fallacy, which describes using irrelevant, negative information related to a certain figureor what a certain figure has saidto discredit him as an individual, or to discredit his ideas. Weve seen this happening with Peterson regarding his stance on transgender pronouns, woman wearing lipstick in the workplace, and, of course,enforced monogamy. These mischaracterizations are not only ineffective, but they also act counterproductively if one is actually interested in assessing the essence of Petersons ideas.

Much of what Peterson espouses is seemingly politically neutral. Let us, for instance, take his eminent advice: clean your room (or in the book: Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world). Whether one is on the Left or the Right should not impact ones decision to take that advice. Yet, in the May, 2019 debatebetween Jordan Peterson and Slavoj iek entitled: Happiness: Marxism vs. Capitalism, iek made the remark that it could be the case Petersons aforementioned piece of advice could not be practiced because of the way society is deranged. That is, much of the reason why they [someones house/room] are in disorder, is that there is some crisis in our society. Notably, ieks point does not imply that societys status is a justification for your chaotic room; rather, the understanding is that your personal choices are not the only factors that determine if such a state exists. ieks critique does not detract from the effectiveness of Petersons adviceor the reality that it has benefited many people who have taken his advice to heart. And, then there is the further important point that many of Petersons followers began to learn about psychology through Peterson and then embarked on a further exploration of the discipline.

Some of the means by which Peterson teaches others to view the world are theoretical constructs (e.g. paradigmatic assumptions or statistical information). These are mostly taken from his experience as a successful clinical psychologist. Petersonin both his latest book and his online Youtube lecturespresents information about the field of psychology in a truly accessible manner. Those who immerse themselves in Petersons work do indeed consume part of the theoretical (and religious) knowledge linked to Petersons expertise. On top of that, our intuitive psychology makes us predisposed towards information associated with the understanding of ourselves and others (the latter being known as folk psychology or theory of mind). These innate modulesas the cognitive psychologist Steven Pinker names them in his 1997 book How the Mind Worksare the underlying mechanisms that support the acquiring of knowledge. To clarify this function, Pinker makes a (relatively) dated comparison:

Learning involves more than recording experience; learning requires couching the records of experience so that they generalize in useful ways. A VCR is excellent at recording, but no one would look to this modern version of the black slate as a paradigm of intelligence.

This does not suggest that any psychologist who utters statistical knowledge related to the relation between IQ and job complexity, for example, is on the road to stardom. Most of Petersons listeners/followers presumably didnt initially come to follow a 2-hour long psychology 101 lecture. Titles like: How To Stop Procrastinating or What Women Dont Understand About Men are subjects that get you intrigued and before you know ityoure hooked on watching psychology lectures all day long. (I must mention that these videos and titles are often from third party channels, actively using clickbait titles without Petersons involvement.)

However, even with all of these upsides to Petersons work, there is still the need to view itin its totalitywith somesoberness. In The Road to Wigan Pier, George Orwell suggests that the only way to decipher Socialismand the reasons why people despised it was to step away from it. Similarly, we ought to play advocatus diaboli when dealing with similar attractive theorieslike Petersonismto save ourselves from groupthink or, worse, group polarization. Anyone familiar with the workings of academia knows that any group resisting criticism is sensitive to dogma. Evaluating your beliefs about a subject, of course, is hardly tantamount to rejecting that subject. If one ends up disagreeing with Peterson on a particular subjects, that does not mean he needs to adopt a complete distaste for everything the man has to say.

All these previously mentioned processescontemplating the strength of your belief in certain ideas or intellectuals, separating the usefulness from the less useful, and playing devils advocatecan be practically referred to as truisms when dealing with public intellectuals of a magnitude like Jordan Peterson. Making someone work on his personality is a complicated task in itself. Labeling it anything other than meaningfulor worthy of attentionhas shownto be ineffective. Yet, those who have benefitted from Petersons advice should be thankful for it in a manner that does not jeopardize their own moral and political attitudes.

Alessandro van den Berg is an economics teacher in the Netherlands.

Read more:

Dear Jordan Peterson Fans, Try to Actually Be More Like Him - Merion West

Written by admin

February 1st, 2020 at 8:43 am

Posted in Jordan Peterson

John Horvat: Social Media, Jordan Peterson, and Returning to Order – Merion West

Posted: at 8:43 am

without comments

Ive read Petersons Twelves Rules for Life, and it has some points that I agree with. But I dont think he goes far enough.

A frequent criticism directed towards modern society is that it suffers from a lack of shared purpose, community, or, more broadly, order. Commentators such as Jordan Peterson, for instance, have gained considerable attention in recent years for discussing topics along these lines. In this interview, John Horvat II, the Catholic scholar and vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family, and Property, joins Merion West and Kambiz Tavana to discuss his bookReturn to Order, as well as to provide suggestions on how best to find structure and purpose in a fast-paced modern economy and culture.

Thank you for your time today, Mr. Horvat. Let me start with this questions first: How did you come to write the book, which is, as you know, a very peculiar book. Its not just a book that you read and put aside; its like a toolboxor like a resource you have to come back to over and over. So how did you come to write this book?

Well, it has a long history. It goes back to 1986, and it was a project that was proposed by an intellectual I knew, whose name was Professor Plinio Corra de Oliveira; he was a Brazilian. He studied a lot about economics and culture and the moral aspects of society, and he proposed this book for me and a commission of people: about five or six others. So I did these studies, and I conducted many studies for years until, finallyin 2008I spent four years writing the book. Together with the commission, I was bouncing around these ideas, and the result was Return to Order.

The title of the book is: Return to Order.Does this suggest thatfor some reason or anotherover some time, weve gotten away from the sort of order a society should have?

Exactly. The central premise [of the book] is that we are in a state of disorder: a disorder thats mainly as a result of what I call in the book, frenetic intemperance. That is to say that where were out of balance. We have a system that works; it produces things, but it produces it in a way that is intemperate and that doesnt have restraint. And, at times, it can go into crisis. So the idea is we need to return to a temperate order that will be more stable and more virtuous.

Could you be more specific when you say unstable, or unbalanced in current life? Do you have an example?

I would say, for example, an economy that is first of allvery muchaddicted to debt. That is one thing that is very disorderly. We put things off. We want to just have the pleasure for the moment and, then, the debt comes, and the system crashes sometimes, like it did in 2008. Also the speed of things. We have an economy that is extremely fast-paced. Everything is fast; everything has to be right now, regardless of the consequences. And I think that also is a factor of instability and breakdown in our economy and, especially, in our society. Economies can work fast, but people are human; and they are limited by how much they can absorb and how much they can take. So that would be another thing: the speed of society. And perhaps another example would be the volume of things; you know were dealing with huge amounts and huge movements of that could be moderated. We want everything, and we dont want any type of restraint.

When I started reading the book, Steven Pinkers bookThe Age of Enlightenment, a very good book, came to my mind. What are your thoughts? Pinker argues that we are progressing constantly, but you argue thatat some pointwe just got off the route of order, and we have to get back at it. I want to know your thoughts.

Right. The point thatlets say, the breaking point, which I mentionedis the Industrial Revolution. Im not against industry or progress. I think we need progress, and certainly it helps a society. However, the Industrial Revolution was a revolution that turned society upside down and reversed the role of the consumer and the producer. Yes, it produced a massive amount of goods and services, but it overturned social structures that are very necessary for our own stability. I think these days we can have a society with a lot of progress and a lot of goods and services, but it should be done in a moderate way. And it can be done in a moderate way. The Industrial Revolution simply didnt do it in that way, and, for that reason, I criticize it.

We are now in a very turbulent time politically. Theres a lot of talk about how the economy is working for some but maybe not all. Some proponents of capitalism might argue that thats just how capitalism works, in that some are made better off than others. Whats your takesince you brought up the economyabout our current times and how the economy is playing out?

Well, I mean we definitely have an economy that produces a lot of goods and services, and a lot of it has helped an enormous amount of people. It has taken people, as well as entire nations out of poverty and want. But it is a very precarious situation because it is very much based on debt (and the issuing of debt). It is also an economy that is fast-paced and leaves a lot of people behindbecause theyre not able to keep up with that pace. So there are definitely problems with our modern economy. And then theres the fact that we dont have a lot of the social structures of family, faith, and community that normally keep a society in balance. Those structures would allow us to keep the same amount of prosperity but would keep it in a balance that would allow many more people to benefit from the goods that come from a prosperous economy.

Theres a chapter in your book thats very interesting; its called Foundation of an Organic Order. It got me thinking, and I bookmarked it so that I could talk to you about it. There was a time in the earlier days of the Internet, for example, that social media and the Internet allowed people to post thoughts and organically reach some sort of audience. Now, its almost impossible because you have to pay to increase your reach (through advertisements and such) or seek to game their algorithms.I always thought that when we talk about the foundations of organic order, with every change or with every new technology, that becomes subject to change. In this day and agewith new technologies coming and goinghow do you keep that kind of organic order that you discuss in the book?

Organic order is basically the order that is according to our nature. We are social beings, so we like to communicate with others. Thats part of an organic order. Were not machines. When were put into machine-like situations, it becomes very awkward for us, and we dont become comfortable in those situations. So thats how I would define an organic order: an organic order is a society where people live according to their nature. And with social relationships, natural leadership, ways of producing, ways of consuming that are familiar, you feel a certain familiarity with what youre dealing with. The modern economy does tend to destroy those things, you know. It creates an environment where youre just a number in the system; youre not really a person with all the nuances that are necessary. As you mentioned, new technologies tend to disrupt those organic rhythms, but they dont necessarily have to destroy them. And were seeing a lot of that destruction today. Were feeling the lack of that human element that is so important, that human touch that is so important to not only our own social life but also to economic life.

When I describe your book to friends, the first question almost everyone asks is: What does the book say about social media? So why dont you share what you think about that?

Social mediaI mean, Im on social media. Not so much for my own personal use; I use it incidentally for the book because you need to have some kind of presence. But I think it is a very shallow medium; it doesnt allow us to really think deeply, and that is much more important than the shallow contacts, where its just a like, some kind of notification. I think it makes for very limited contact. Social media is very limited; it cannot replace personal contact. A lot of people try to replace it, and social media tends to present a distorted reality where the person only presents that which is most favorable to that person, and a person can somehow show off what he or she is doing. So I dont think its an ideal medium, as the more organic ones are. The personal contact is what makes all the difference.

I follow you on Twitter, and I was suspicious as to if it was really you behind the account.

Well, actually, Twitter I use. Facebook I dont, but Twitter I do. On Twitter, the personality of the person does show through because your thinking can show through, and its interesting. The human personality is so strong and so important that even in very mechanical ways, it can show through. Hopefully, my personality shows through on Twitter.

I resisted Twitter for a long time, but eventually I joined because apparently you should have it these days. Also, if some people want to contact you, then thats how they do it. But it always amazes me when I see those with much more practical purposes in life having a social media presence. I think they have much better things to do than spend time on social media.

One of the other things that comes up when I talk about the book is that the book looks like a religious book, but its not a religious book; its a very practical book. How do you account for having a very practical book that looks like its a religious text, but its not a religious text?

Well, I mean, it is. What were talking about are rules that come from our human nature, the way we are. Its just an observation of reality and an observation of societynot only my own but those of people who have written some very brilliant books about these topics. What I wanted to do in the book was not to provide an encyclopedia of everything Ive read but to create a very succinct summary of these things so that you could see what is available out there. These things have been thought out, and its not just some kind of pipe dream that Ive come up with. These things have been done; societies have been organized like this. It does work, to a certain extent. So that was basically my idea.

Whats your take on the state of religion nowadays?

Obviously, there is a decline in religion; we live in a secular society that doesnt recognize religionor makes religion simply a very personal thing. We are social beings, but we are also religious beings; and, its very hard to suppress religion. It always comes up. Everyone has to answer those very basic life questions that a secular society cannot answer, and those questions are, Who am I; Why am I here; What is my purpose? These are questions that require answers, and everybody has to somehow find an answer for himself or herself. And I dont think you can ever really suppress religion, even in a secular society that doesnt recognize it and doesnt give it official citizenship in the national discourse. But I think America is a very, very religious nation, much more religious than you might realize.

One topic that also comes up when I have conversations with people about your book is how to reach and maintain order. I tend to talk with people who are not thinking in the same way as I am, so I can understand my beliefs and also understand their point of view. But the notion of having an orderly, practical lifepeople always say its easier said than doneand from what I understand, its not easy to keep order. But if you want tell people how to approach having order in life and how to maintain it, whats the best practical advice that you could give?

Thats a very difficult questionbecause in an organic society, a lot of these arent spelled out in a systematic and mechanical way. People are very different, and one formula for one person may not work for another person, though there are basic principles you can and must take into consideration. I think one of those principles is that there is an order in society; there is an order that exists in our very nature. And it is necessary to recognize that order as valid for all people, in all types of times. It doesnt change, and there is an order of things, which says you dont lie, you dont steal, and you cant really find a way out of those things. Those are part of our very nature that you cant change. I think the first step would be to recognize that there is a natural order in society, and to see, well, how can I apply that to my own life? And how can I live that? The circumstances around me may be different, may emphasize one aspect over another, but we all have to somehow deal with it.

I wanted to see what your view is on a point Ive been thinking about. Many companies transformed media, entertainment, and such into a very scientific-based method to grab your attention and stop whatever youre doing. And they do it very successfully; they make a lot of money, even from people do not have a lot of power of concentration. However, the things that matter most need deep conversation, and we do not have that. I would say, Why is there no science behind the other side: on how to have discussions in a very deep way?

Well, that is a very interesting question. Ive never really thought about it. You definitely have a pointbecause the other side, the side that likes the spontaneity and unrestraint, they have become experts at it. They study it; they do the science on it, and they know what our reactions will be. So, definitely, were at a disadvantage. Were not in the loop. I see things from the point of view of a Catholic, and thats what I wrote it from: from that point of view. And there are spiritual schools that deal with these topics, of how to live ones life and how to meditate, how to reflect upon God, the contemplation of the universe. It is something actually well-developed, and these things are ways in which people can find a certain kind of happiness, a type of happiness that is very much in contrast with the frenetic intemperance of our modern day world. Its not as if these things have never been studied. I just think they have been put aside, and the modern media has certainly taken advantage of its monopoly on peoples attention to turn people the opposite way.

The argument that I make usually when it comes to the media is that many people still have this incorrect perception that media companies are doing things by the book, or are fair, or balanced, or moral. So I argue that these are money-making machines, so they dont really care about whats fair or balanced. They just see what works to their interests, so, in that case, no one should look at them as sources of justice or impartiality or fairness or morality. Theres nothing there, so we have to change the view. Thats what I tell them about.

There was a series of podcasts by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, and he made the series of Morality in the 21st Century. The main theme was why for example, Adam Smiths book on the economy,The Wealth of Nation, is great, but his book on morality,The Theory of Moral Sentiments,is less known. So what would be the best way to approach the relationship between economics and morality today?

My analysis involves personal decisions that you have to makeand also decisions where youre definitely going to have to give up something, including benefits that you might receive by falling in line with the fast-paced world where everything is completely unrestrained. So those personal decisions are things that will really determine how you are going to put morality into effect. But there are some basic ones, like family. Family is such a natural institution that it adapts to time; it adapts to situations, and it allows a person to feel very fulfilled. At the same time, one feels the restraints of that relationship, as well as the benefits. Family is very important, and if you can live a family life inside our society, then youve gone a long way. And, of course, faith is an important part of that as well. Even a communitythe life of a community is very difficult these days because everybodys isolated in their own little house, and they dont get involved in communities. But communities are very important for our social relationships.

Have you noticed that your book, Return to Order, is very compatible with Jordan Petersons 12 Rules for Life?

[Laughs]. I dont know; Ive read Petersons Twelves Rules for Life, and it has some points that I agree with. But I dont think he goes far enough. There are some criticisms that I have of him because he is not a religious man, and hes very philosophical. He bases himself on a lot of philosophers that I would not agree with, including German philosophers of the 19th century. But the fact that he does talk about responsibility, the fact that he does talk about family relationships, and also the fact that we are always constantly looking for meaningwe only reach a certain degree of happiness when we find meaning. In that sense, I think I definitely agree with him.

Last question, whats the best current book youve read that gives you the best satisfaction as for the point of view of having an orderly life?

Thats a good question.I would go with the book of my mentor, the one who actually proposed this project to me, who is Professor Plinio Corra de Oliveira, and he wrote a book called Revolution and Counter-revolution. It is a perspective on history that put everything in order in my life, and said Well, this how history works. It gave a general outline of the different revolutions in society and how to do a counterrevolution. That book was very important in my life, and I do read it often. I go back to it often.

Thank you so much for your time.

Its a pleasure, anytime.

The rest is here:

John Horvat: Social Media, Jordan Peterson, and Returning to Order - Merion West

Written by admin

February 1st, 2020 at 8:43 am

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Filmmakers Discuss THE RISE OF JORDAN PETERSON On Tom Needham’s SOUNDS OF FILM – Broadway World

Posted: at 8:43 am

without comments

Canadian filmmakers, Patricia Marcoccia and Maziar Ghaderi, discuss their documentary, THE RISE OF JORDAN PETERSON, on Tom Needham's THE SOUNDS OF FILM this Thursday on WUSB. The show is also going to featuring the music of composer Thomas Newman, who is nominated for an Academy Award this year for Best Original Score.

THE RISE OF JORDAN PETERSON provides an intimate glimpse into the life and mind of Jordan Peterson, the academic and best-selling author who captured the world's attention with his criticisms of political correctness and his life-changing philosophy on discovering personal meaning.

Referred to by many as the most influential public intellectual in the western world, University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan Peterson skyrocketed to fame after he published a controversial viral video about political correctness in 2016. Within 2 years, he sold over 3 million copies of his self-help book, 12 Rules For Life, and became simultaneously branded by some as an academic rockstar selling out theatres around the world.

THE RISE OF JORDAN PETERSON intimately traces the transformative period of Peterson's life while visiting rare moments with his family, friends and foes who share their own versions of the Jordan Peterson story.

Patricia Marcoccia is a Toronto-based director, producer, editor and cinematographer nominated for best emerging filmmaker at the Golden Sheaf Awards. Maziar Ghaderi is a multimedia artist, director and producer that works with visual media and interactive technology.

In addition, THE SOUNDS OF FILM, will be featuring the film music of Thomas Newman, who is nominated for an Oscar for his score for 1917. The show will be featuring some his memorable music from movies like FINDING NEMO, SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION, WALL-E and many others.

THE SOUNDS OF FILM is the nation's longest running film and music themed radio show. For the past 30 years, the program has delivered a popular mix of interviews and music to listeners all over Long Island, parts of Connecticut and streaming live worldwide on the internet. Past people interviewed for the show include Don McLean, Nile Rodgers, Jimmy Webb, William H. Macy, Cheech & Chong, Hal Hartley, Carter Burwell, Laurie Anderson and Billy Joel.

Read the original here:

Filmmakers Discuss THE RISE OF JORDAN PETERSON On Tom Needham's SOUNDS OF FILM - Broadway World

Written by admin

February 1st, 2020 at 8:43 am

Posted in Jordan Peterson

Page 10«..9101112