Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Jordan Peterson interview on C4
Comments
-
-
Mother of Jesus I couldn’t finish reading this. Sorry but most of the above reads like a pile of tripe.
Look I still half hope you may be trying to be straight with us so I’ll do the same for you. Your posting of walls of text isn’t symptomatic of a good arguement. Insulting people isn’t equivalent to winning an arguement.
As to why no one is previously picking up on the points you mention above, well I’d put that down to it being the first time you’ve actually stated many of them. You may feel that the wall of waffle you’ve posted previously says the same thing but it doesn’t, if anything it’s basically an evasive opinion piece. In spite of that a number of posters have attempted to engage with you and indeed challenge some of the assumptions you appear to be basing your rather dogmatic views on. Top tip: Most people would see this as opportunity to engage in debate rather than evasion and insult.
Yeah... I've made points that can't be engaged with in a meaningful way because apparently no one can recognize what my overall intention is here. There's not much of a chance that people who want to occupy strongly polarized positions on complex human reality also occupy untroubled social spaces themselves. The first step to stepping back, (if the need to be destructively polarized is not innate to someone's personality) is to become aware in plan format of the location you're in, relative to the other side, and the large group of people who aren't compelled to take up one side or other of the divide.
I'm also pretty aware that everything I'm saying appears to be an insult, but rest assured, if there was a nice, accepting way to provoke thought around a different axis, I would take it. It's the same story with neo-feminists, another willful faction who resist legitimate points on a completely unrealistic narcissistic basis. If you look into the psychology of narcissism, a defining feature is the need to polarize things into black and white or good and bad. This is not to say everyone's a narcissist, this is clearly nonsense. My contention, (and that of modern psychology) is that boom and bust affected some people in a particular way, a way that increases affective narcissism. That is, it's an affect within the presentation of a personality, not a structural part. This kind of thing is behind neo-feminist shameless truth-denial, and apparently part of the outlay here, and across the swathes of American teenagers on the likes of 4-chan and who love Peterson, who've grown up with the effects of strong neo-liberal social values wrecking their conception of the world via their parents, and maybe even their grandparents.
As Peterson is wholesale guiding people into neo-liberal strict meritocracy, all I can ultimately do is recommend working in America to give you a feel for what happens to people in such a system. To say it is an antithesis of how we value and relate to each other in Ireland is a massive understatement. The short version is this: the only people truly at peace and content in this country are psychopaths. There isn't much of a better way to say it
0 -
-
-
Intothesea wrote: »Yeah... I've made points that can't be engaged with in a meaningful way because apparently no one can recognize what my overall intention is here.
The reaponsibility for that lies entirely with you. You’re success at communicating is down to your skill at communicating.....,
a good example of the previous point....There’s not much of a chance that people who want to occupy strongly polarized positions on complex human reality also occupy untroubled social spaces themselves. The first step to stepping back, (if the need to be destructively polarized is not innate to someone's personality) is to become aware in plan format of the location you're in, relative to the other side, and the large group of people who aren't compelled to take up one side or other of the divide.
Notwithstanding that I suspect the simplified expression of the above would be common sense for most people on here who imho aren’t, with a few exceptions, on one side or the other of the divide to any extreme extent
I'm also pretty aware that everything I'm saying appears to be an insult, but rest assured, if there was a nice, accepting way to provoke thought around a different axis, I would take it. It's the same story with neo-feminists, another willful faction who resist legitimate points on a completely unrealistic narcissistic basis.
Maybe try it instead of assuming you have some level of righteous insight that everyone else remarkably lacks
If you look into the psychology of narcissism, a defining feature is the need to polarize things into black and white or good and bad.
curiously enough I’d say you’re actually guilty of this yourself throughout your contributions hereThis is not to say everyone's a narcissist, this is clearly nonsense. My contention, (and that of modern psychology) is that boom and bust affected some people in a particular way, a way that increases affective narcissism. That is, it's an affect within the presentation of a personality, not a structural part. This kind of thing is behind neo-feminist shameless truth-denial, and apparently part of the outlay here, and across the swathes of American teenagers on the likes of 4-chan and who love Peterson, who've grown up with the effects of strong neo-liberal social values wrecking their conception of the world via their parents, and maybe even their grandparents.
Perhaps on aspect. However Peterson also represents an aspect of modern psychology
As Peterson is wholesale guiding people into neo-liberal strict meritocracy, all I can ultimately do is recommend working in America to give you a feel for what happens to people in such a system. To say it is an antithesis of how we value and relate to each other in Ireland is a massive understatement. The short version is this: the only people truly at peace and content in this country are psychopaths. There isn't much of a better way to say it
Except Peterson doesn’t appear to most people to actually be doing that, or at least not to the way and degree you imply. Seeking equality of opportunity is not the same as neo liberalism. Nor is it a particularly American view (from either side of the spectrum there).0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Intothesea wrote: »Yeah... I've made points that can't be engaged with in a meaningful way because apparently no one can recognize what my overall intention is here.
No one want's to engage with you because you're poorly socialized, you're only concerned with soapboxing about your own hobbyhorses even though they're entirely tangential to topic
Peterson could probably help you
Banned.0 -
-
-
No one want's to engage with you because you're poorly socialized, you're only concerned with soapboxing about your own hobbyhorses even though they're entirely tangential to topic
Peterson could probably help you
It might be tangential to your polarized topic, but not to the topic that matters the most, which is the fate of people invested in this position, and the rest of society.
And this is why the rest of your effort is ignorable, it reflects a lack of perspective, or a lack of care for it.
As well, the only thing Peterson can help is disaffected young men prepare for neo-liberal self-sacrifice, and being functionally deaf and blind in the meantime.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Intothesea wrote: »It might be tangential to your polarized topic, but not to the topic that matters the most, which is the fate of people invested in this position, and the rest of society.
And this is why the rest of your effort is ignorable, it reflects a lack of perspective, or a lack of care for it.
As well, the only thing Peterson can help is disaffected young men prepare for neo-liberal self-sacrifice, and being functionally deaf and blind in the meantime.
So what is the alternative?
You've got the alt-right (who are correct on an awful lot of things but culminate in vicious tribalism based mostly on the idea of race and my "people") on one hand, and the alt-left (who are also correct on an awful lot of things and which will also culminate in vicious tribalism based mostly on the idea of identity politics/being a minority/not being able to compete with other men) and everyone else floating around because it's time for pints and I've a job to go to.
And forget any floaty fùcking, let's be in the middle flowery look at the reasonable centrist Lovely Leo novelty sock wearing answer, cause that just translates into, without clear action, smug, self satisfied bum. When that's your answer, the left and right tend to fight it out and then you're just put in a camp. I think the left will win, but that's for another post.
I don't agree with Peterson on everything (like I said, I think what we're seeing has been building up for a long time, and there are are biological/spiritual reasons for that, it ain't just a bunch of postmodern french dickheads), but his avocation of the logos and the celebration of the individual (in the classic liberal sense, we're not talking Randian objectivism* here), is one of the better, sounder more practical setups that I've heard.
*I can go head to head with any of you lads on academic dry shìte writing.
0 -
-
-
-
-
pumpkin4life wrote: »So what is the alternative?
You've got the alt-right (who are correct on an awful lot of things but culminate in vicious tribalism based mostly on the idea of race and my "people") on one hand, and the alt-left (who are also correct on an awful lot of things and which will also culminate in vicious tribalism based mostly on the idea of identity politics/being a minority/not being able to compete with other men) and everyone else floating around because it's time for pints and I've a job to go to.
I agree with this assessment, though I'd put floating contingent as more a vitally important 'earth' for the super-charged relative nonsense that goes on.And forget any floaty fùcking, let's be in the middle flowery look at the reasonable centrist Lovely Leo novelty sock wearing answer, cause that just translates into, without clear action, smug, self satisfied bum. When that's your answer, the left and right tend to fight it out and then you're just put in a camp. I think the left will win, but that's for another post.
Hmm, I'm pretty sure that I was putting forward and appealing for constructive thinking and sketches of answers to the complex economic and social system as it appears in Ireland, and how it related to the neo-liberal yonder. In order to undertake such a consideration, it's necessary to accept the damage that neo-liberal policy can produce; it's also necessary to accept that co-complainants are similarly situated, and both have a legitimate core to their complaints, regardless of how ridiculously and illogically those complaints are formed and presented. There was no uptake of these ideas.
This is why it wasn't possible to open any discussion about 'what to do'.
I'm no economist nor a politician, but the best I can make of it, more or less, is:
That the electorate would have to force the government to tow an exceptionally well-researched and clever line between neo-liberal and social democratic concepts. The route to this is massively complicated by the damage the government has already wrecked on the normal people of Ireland. From what I can perceive now, the government is happy to continue down the neo-liberal path as dictated to them by the IMF. Realistically, there's no reason to do this.
When Ireland is finally under full glare of neo-liberal international investment, to maintain pole position against a host of developing and well-equipped countries (and particularly when Ireland tows the Euro tax line), unions will be mandated out of existence (happening already thanks to the general call for 'efficiency'), working conditions will likely exceed the un-livability of zero-hour contracts, and dependent people will take most of the brunt.
These downsides can be fleshed out by looking at America. Random blood testing by your employer, mandatory background checks on candidates, 2 weeks total holiday per year, intense competition that centers on fair and relevant and unfair and irrelevant details of your person. In short, when a nameless, faceless international band of big-money players are indirectly dictating conditions, those conditions reduce the worker to the status of living robot. I wish this was an overstatement.
Anyway, part of the answer then, relates to opposing apparent answers in the situation, like approaching efficiency by canning unions. The idea would be to preserve or rebuild key social democracy structures, and not go down the long slide to neo-liberalism, forever From what I can see, the feel-good all-rights-for-all government of Ireland would need to be coerced into formally agreeing this as an approach. Just on the basis that the house market is yet again being used to kindle the hot air of success -- at the expense of hardworking people who are daunted by the unapproachability of the whole set-up.
If you look into England's frustrations with the results of neo-liberal policy, there is plenty told of peoples' lives belonging to the businesses they work for, that the line is disturbed and blurred between private and public world. Surveying all of England's complaints is an excellent guide to the downfalls more likely to happen in Europe, so that's likely a good guide on how to formulate rules and regulations on exactly how much work-related and social negative effects Irish people will absorb in the name of cash.
In the end, any answers put up tend to take away from the perfect neo-liberal answer of all significant objects protecting workers and interfering with money transfer upwards obliterated. This underlines the unwinnable nature of neo-liberal servicing of a world economy -- you can't please all of the people all of the time, but you certainly have to. I think there has to be a national dialogue, including the government, about what the level of interaction with the world market will be, and what type of venturing-but-protective stance can be taken before Ireland gets blown up into the wind like an empty crisp packet again.
And a simple step, like opening up the possibility for a continuous debate on where the system is headed -- during the boom there wasn't much evidence of intellectual debate about the system. It was likely career suicide to risk such a heretical position. So, whatever it is about a small island with people prone to brainwashing each other suffering an apparent mass delusion -- I'd hope there can be a rising consciousness of what created this last time.
Anyway, hopefully people with brains for this type of topic will take it up post haste and in a way that gets the people of Ireland thinking about it, instead of waiting for a giant wave of phoenix wing to bring us back to 2006.I don't agree with Peterson on everything (like I said, I think what we're seeing has been building up for a long time, and there are are biological/spiritual reasons for that, it ain't just a bunch of postmodern french dickheads), but his avocation of the logos and the celebration of the individual (in the classic liberal sense, we're not talking Randian objectivism* here), is one of the better, sounder more practical setups that I've heard.
I agree with this, and definitely understand the intense need that people have, I just wish someone with less apparently overtly political aims was supplying the necessary. Hopefully a suitable contender will appear soon.0 -
Not sure if posted before but this is the latest JRE which discusses the interview with cathy.
If you want a detailed insight on Jordan - youtube "jre jordan peterson" and start at the lowest number - There is about 4 of them - bout 14hrs in total!
0 -
Not sure if posted before but this is the latest JRE which discusses the interview with cathy.
If you want a detailed insight on Jordan - youtube "jre jordan peterson" and start at the lowest number - There is about 4 of them - bout 14hrs in total!
His interviews with Sam Harris show him up to be a charlatan in parts. He is a bright man but some of the comparisons he makes and his use of mythology are ridiculous at times. His knowledge of microbiology and biology is also incorrect no matter how confident he sounds.
All that said I don't think he is a bad actor. The free speech stick is being over emphasised in a world that is crumbling around us as a result of climate change. He has latched on to right wing biases and is obsessed with things which are inconsequential. His latest rant on Fox and friends was about Daddy Daughter dances becoming less popular. He also wonders if men and women can work in the same workplace at all.0 -
Advertisement
-
So instead of just saying he is wrong, actually critique his arguments. If you are correct in your assessment then prove it, I'm sure many would love to know.Not sure if posted before but this is the latest JRE which discusses the interview with cathy.
If you want a detailed insight on Jordan - youtube "jre jordan peterson" and start at the lowest number - There is about 4 of them - bout 14hrs in total!
His interviews with Sam Harris show him up to be a charlatan in parts. He is a bright man but some of the comparisons he makes and his use of mythology are ridiculous at times. His knowledge of microbiology and biology is also incorrect no matter how confident he sounds.
All that said I don't think he is a bad actor. The free speech stick is being over emphasised in a world that is crumbling around us as a result of climate change. He has latched on to right wing biases and is obsessed with things which are inconsequential. His latest rant on Fox and friends was about Daddy Daughter dances becoming less popular. He also wonders if men and women can work in the same workplace at all.0 -
@ intothesea He address some of your concerns in the second half of this interview. Its not a full explanation but it certainly gives an insight into his position.0 -
@ intothesea He address some of your concerns in the second half of this interview. Its not a full explanation but it vertainly gives an insight into his position.
Most specifically at 53:20 onward the question the OP is most interested in to ask Peterson is asked by Brand and he gives his view on it (to which he can agree or disagree). It's an interesting interview on the whole though so I'd say to people to give it a all a watch, if for no other reason then considered debates about greater themes feel so rare these days.0 -
Not sure if posted before but this is the latest JRE which discusses the interview with cathy.
If you want a detailed insight on Jordan - youtube "jre jordan peterson" and start at the lowest number - There is about 4 of them - bout 14hrs in total!
Joe Rogan stops just shy of felating guests he agrees with. His interview with Shapiro made me sick. Is this any better? Does he actually challenge Peterson in any way? If not, I doubt I’ll watch it.they/them/theirs
And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek
0 -
-
-
Likewise. I mean, we all know there are people in the world who are just wrong, and we might wish we didn't have to hear them, but we're not all going to agree on just who those people are.WTF
Another example: scientist Charles Murray is due to speak at Stanford University next week. Murray was co-author of The Bell Curve, one of the most controversial books of recent times, since it says that intelligence is a good predictor of success, and in one chapter it describes statistical differences in intelligence between races. So a group wrote to the President of the university in an attempt to "de-platform" him, and published the letter here. This got a robust response from the Stanford Review, here, and so far it looks like the talk will go ahead on the 22nd.Death has this much to be said for it:
You don’t have to get out of bed for it.
Wherever you happen to be
They bring it to you—free.— Kingsley Amis
0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,163 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59091
Grand, but I wish that Brand fcukwit would shut the hell up and let others answer questions he poses.
@ intothesea He address some of your concerns in the second half of this interview. Its not a full explanation but it vertainly gives an insight into his position.Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6T7pUEZfgdI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL61yQgdWeM
Advertisement