Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Brian?

Akrasia wrote: »

For the record, let it be stated that my thanking this post is not an endorsement of anchovies in Cesar Salad.

Bleurgh

(just my personal tastes)

Honestly. You’re probably getting the wrong anchovies. If they’re not zingy, they’re the wrong ones.

Professor Moriarty

Brian? wrote: »

My salad was delicious, in case anyone was wondering. Really zingy anchovies, a rare delight. PM me for details.

I’m very open to expanding on the idea. But I’m wondering if I’ll do it justice. How would you feel about a reading list?

I take a position that on the balance of probabilities there is no Devine creator being controlling the universe. I.e. a “god” like the Judeo-Christian-Muslim Yahweh/Holy trinity/Allah doesn’t exist.

Does a prime creator exist? Possibly. Is it worth finding out? Probably not, there are far bigger fish to fry locally and whatever form hat god takes isn’t going to a give a fiddlers if we know or worship them.

Anchovies get more zingy as they rot.

CerebralCortex

Brian? wrote: »

My salad was delicious, in case anyone was wondering. Really zingy anchovies, a rare delight. PM me for details.

I’m very open to expanding on the idea. But I’m wondering if I’ll do it justice. How would you feel about a reading list?

I take a position that on the balance of probabilities there is no Devine creator being controlling the universe. I.e. a “god” like the Judeo-Christian-Muslim Yahweh/Holy trinity/Allah doesn’t exist.

Does a prime creator exist? Possibly. Is it worth finding out? Probably not, there are far bigger fish to fry locally and whatever form hat god takes isn’t going to a give a fiddlers if we know or worship them.

If God exists why does cancer exist?

Brian?

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Anchovies get more zingy as they rot.

The source of their zing is immaterial to me. I love it.

2 Scoops

Giraffe Box wrote: »

"Cathy Newman was unfairly ridiculed"
"She did a reasonably good job"
"Her big 'mistake' was being honest enough"

professore

I think there are a lot of people who like calling JP stupid and a charlatan because they think by implication it makes them look smarter. Ehh no it doesn't. He's clearly a very intelligent man, and I believe he is trying to be honest.

Brian?

professore wrote: »

I think there are a lot of people who like calling JP stupid and a charlatan because they think by implication it makes them look smarter. Ehh no it doesn't. He's clearly a very intelligent man, and I believe he is trying to be honest.

Who’s calling Peterson stupid?

Giraffe Box

professore wrote: »

I think there are a lot of people who like calling JP stupid and a charlatan because they think by implication it makes them look smarter. Ehh no it doesn't. He's clearly a very intelligent man, and I believe he is trying to be honest.

He's definitely not stupid, he must be coining it in at this stage.

Akrasia

Brian? wrote: »

Who’s calling Peterson stupid?

He certainly isn't stupid, neither is he the genius some of his supporters make him out to be

AfterLife

I think the bigger issue here is why Peterson is relevant at all? He's another religious moralistic preacher that I thought Ireland was finished with. Maybe we're not ready to think by ourselves yet. Some of us anyway, mainly male and mainly young.

manual_man

AfterLife wrote: »

Maybe we're not ready to think by ourselves yet.

That's exactly the market that the Religion of Progressivism targets.

SEPT 23 1989

Should parents sent their children to university?

No send them to trade school was the professors answer

That caught my attention

AfterLife

manual_man wrote: »

That's exactly the market that the Religion of Progressivism targets.

Why is it a market? Why are people paying to go see him? Its nuts. I went to see Noam Chomsky speak on a live link in UCD 15 years ago. It was free.

7aubzxk43m2sni

AfterLife wrote: »

I think the bigger issue here is why Peterson is relevant at all? He's another religious moralistic preacher that I thought Ireland was finished with. Maybe we're not ready to think by ourselves yet. Some of us anyway, mainly male and mainly young.

Do you think the majority of people think for themselves? Do you think most of those who are not young and male think for themselves?

manual_man wrote: »

That's exactly the market that the Religion of Progressivism targets.

What is the religion of progressivism?

7aubzxk43m2sni

AfterLife wrote: »

Why is it a market? Why are people paying to go see him? Its nuts.

Do you find any of his youtube content engaging?

Would you pay to see a comedian?

AfterLife

Parker Fat Ladyfinger wrote: »

Do you find any of his youtube content engaging?

Would you pay to see a comedian?

No! I think he's a toad. I wouldn't go see a comedian either but that's down to personal taste. I would pay 100 odd quid to see Black Sabbath in the Point let's say. That's entertainment. If you're willing to pay to see anybody discussing religious, sociological, political theory you are cracked. We have free education in this country.

manual_man

AfterLife wrote: »

Why is it a market? Why are people paying to go see him? Its nuts.

Because more and more people have become sick of a toxic progressivism where asking questions and trying to understand different life issues is greeted with vicious verbal attacks and shaming and in some cases people losing their actual jobs when quote unquote progressive mobs circle on them, all for daring to question any particular issue. Peterson is one of a growing number of people railing against this. He is against mob mentality, whether on the left or right of the political spectrum. He values the idea of the sovereign individual above everything else. And a LOT of people are relating to this. Now he talks about a lot of other stuff too. I doubt most people who enjoy listening to Peterson agree with every single thing he says - but that's kind of the point. As individuals we are nuanced and with many different takes on many different topics. And in my opinion that's what makes life interesting.

AfterLife

manual_man wrote: »

Because more and more people have become sick of a toxic progressivism where asking questions and trying to understand different life issues is greeted with vicious verbal attacks and shaming and in some cases people losing their actual jobs when quote unquote progressive mobs circle on them, all for daring to question any particular issue. Peterson is one of a growing number of people railing against this. He is against mob mentality

Jesus, you could have fooled me because after that Cathy Newman interview all I saw was "mob mentality" and "viscous verbal attacks" against her from his supporters.

manual_man wrote: »

whether on the left or right of the political spectrum. He values the idea of the sovereign individual above everything else. And a LOT of people are relating to this. Now he talks about a lot of other stuff too. I doubt most people who enjoy listening to Peterson agree with every single thing he says - but that's kind of the point. As individuals we are nuanced and with many different takes on many different topics. And in my opinion that's what makes life interesting.

There was a go at starting a Libertarian party 5 or 6 years ago. Why not get involved? Hopefully you're rich and all your friends and family are rich too because you're ****ed otherwise.

manual_man

Parker Fat Ladyfinger wrote: »

What is the religion of progressivism?

I think if you asked most people to describe their idea of a religious nutjob, they'd say something like this:

- "Continually repeats the same things in relation to their beliefs."
- "Looks down on and shames anyone who doesn't agree totally."
- "Is un-open to any ideas outside of the strict doctrine which they follow."

Many would argue that this is the kind of ideology that Progressivism has turned in to. Highly intolerant in nature (though which ironically claims to champion tolerance - it's kind of a mind-trick designed to confuse and dis-invite debate). More and more people have had enough of this. Peterson and others have risen to popularity because they have criticized these aspects of Progressive ideology.

manual_man

AfterLife wrote: »

Jesus, you could have fooled me because after that Cathy Newman interview all I saw was "mob mentality" and "viscous verbal attacks" against her from his supporters.

It depends whether you consider just criticism as "mob mentality" and "vicious verbal attacks" i suppose? I read a tonne of online comments relating to the Cathy Newman interview and the vast majority weren't malicious. Most gave just criticism or made fun of the manner in which she "conducted" the interview. A very small percentage of comments were genuinely nasty and these kind of comments should never be defended - the suggestion from channel 4 that there was a high % of these comments was simply untrue and was simply an attempt to deflect from the issue at hand (ie. the hitjob interview that Newman attempted - and failed - with Peterson).

AfterLife

manual_man wrote: »

It depends whether you consider just criticism as "mob mentality" and "vicious verbal attacks" i suppose?

There's a lot of that on both "sides" I suppose. You say that any questions are met with mob mentality but are you perceiving it that way because it upsets you?

manual_man wrote: »

"I read a tonne of online comments relating to the Cathy Newman interview and the vast majority weren't malicious. Most gave just criticism or made fun of the manner in which she "conducted" the interview. A very small percentage of comments were genuinely nasty and these kind of comments should never be defended - the suggestion from channel 4 that there was a high % of these comments was simply untrue and was simply an attempt to deflect from the issue at hand (ie. the hitjob interview that Newman attempted - and failed - with Peterson).

You might say a small percentage but it was fairly nasty as far as I could see. I don't have a massive problem with Peterson. I think he's just another Libertarian along to soak up the angst of young men. He's a bit like Anton Levay and his "Church of Satan" in the 90's. Lots of middle class selfishness but nothing that his followers won't grow out of.

The Legend Of Kira

manual_man wrote: »

I think if you asked most people to describe their idea of a religious nutjob, they'd say something like this:

- "Continually repeats the same things in relation to their beliefs."
- "Looks down on and shames anyone who doesn't agree totally."
- "Is un-open to any ideas outside of the strict doctrine which they follow."

Many would argue that this is the kind of ideology that Progressivism has turned in to. Highly intolerant in nature (though which ironically claims to champion tolerance - it's kind of a mind-trick designed to confuse and dis-invite debate). More and more people have had enough of this. Peterson and others have risen to popularity because they have criticized these aspects of Progressive ideology.

" Highly intolerant in nature (though which ironically claims to champion tolerance "

+1 spot on, Some on the left preach about " tolerance " & " diversity "- Yet in practice they re intolerant of people who hold opposing political views to their own, they go on about " diversity " but don,t believe in diversity of different opinions.

In recent years there has been incidents of left wing campaigns to pressure venues into cancelling public meetings by new right wing parties & pro life groups, meetings to discuss Israel/Palestine issue blocked from taking place. Anyone or anything deemed a bit too right wing they will seek to no platform & silence but yet preach to be all for " tolerance " & " diversity ", a lot of them have double standards.

http://www.thejournal.ie/tcd-israeli-ambassador-protest-3250146-Feb2017/

AfterLife

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

+1 spot on, Some on the left preach about " tolerance " & " diversity "- Yet in practice they re intolerant of people who hold opposing political views to their own, they go on about " diversity " but don,t believe in diversity of different opinions.

In recent years there has been incidents of left wing campaigns to pressure venues into cancelling public meetings by new right wing parties & pro life groups, meetings to discuss Israel/Palestine issue blocked from taking place. Anyone or anything deemed a bit too right wing they will seek to no platform & silence but yet preach to be all for " tolerance " & " diversity ", a lot of them have double standards.

http://www.thejournal.ie/tcd-israeli-ambassador-protest-3250146-Feb2017/

Nobody tried to "no platform" Peterson in Dublin. He's too bland for that.

mcmoustache

AfterLife wrote: »

Nobody tried to "no platform" Peterson in Dublin. He's too bland for that.

He's fairly harmless. There was one eejit live tweeting it going on about "white males" in Ireland but he made a bit of tit of himself.


I can get why people like Peterson, but as an older man who's not lost wondering why the girls don't like me, he has little to offer. I get how people who can't get a ride like the idea of women being wrong and not their inability to compete with the rest of the lads. Everyone loves to be told that it's not their fault that they're failing. It always feels good to have something else to blame



That said, I do find it entertaining when "journalists" try to pin him down and make him look like some cnut. The whole lobster thing is a good example of this. Peterson is no fool and when you see people with an agenda questioning him, he's always prepared.

Raging_Ninja

mcmoustache wrote: »

I can get why people like Peterson, but as an older man who's not lost wondering why the girls don't like me, he has little to offer. I get how people who can't get a ride like the idea of women being wrong and not their inability to compete with the rest of the lads. Everyone loves to be told that it's not their fault that they're failing. It always feels good to have something else to blame

That's the thing though. He's not telling people that "it's not your fault, society is the problem". He's telling them that it is 100% our problem and to get out and fix those problems with their lives - that self improvement actually means changing yourself and your outlook in life, to stop being a victim that bad things happen to and take control of your own life, and that if you want to succeed then you have to go out and earn that success.

AfterLife

mcmoustache wrote: »

He's fairly harmless. There was one eejit live tweeting it going on about "white males" in Ireland but he made a bit of tit of himself.


I can get why people like Peterson, but as an older man who's not lost wondering why the girls don't like me, he has little to offer. I get how people who can't get a ride like the idea of women being wrong and not their inability to compete with the rest of the lads. Everyone loves to be told that it's not their fault that they're failing. It always feels good to have something else to blame



That said, I do find it entertaining when "journalists" try to pin him down and make him look like some cnut. The whole lobster thing is a good example of this. Peterson is no fool and when you see people with an agenda questioning him, he's always prepared.

I don't think his staunch views on religion are really resonating with young Irish men but they are identifying with his libertarian views on society and unless you are born in to serious money its not a healthy way to view society. Young middle class lads might see it as a valid form of some sort of inherent supremacy but when they leave their Ma's house nobody will tolerate that nonsense.

It's real private school Gonzaga bull****. The difference is that the lads that could afford to go to Gonzaga will be alright because they could afford to go to Gonzaga in the first place. Dopes that don't have that societal background behind them can't afford to buy in to his libertarian nonsense. They're the ones paying 60 quid to see him.

Outlaw Pete

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

That's the thing though. He's not telling people that "it's not your fault, society is the problem".

Doesn't matter, the point of that user's post was primarily to suggest that men who like Peterson, can't get laid. Same way we've had few saying there was a pong of BO in the 3 Arena that night. It's all just a way of snidely knocking the same people.

It's quite clear that they haven't a bull's notion what Peterson's advice for young men tends to be.

So why do they keep suggesting they do? Well, they have to as they have little to say in the way of rebuttal to his views on extreme liberalism and that's the real issue here. That's why they're riled.

Yer Da sells Avon

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

It's quite clear that they haven't a bull's notion what Peterson's advice for young men tends to be.

"Clean your room"

kubjones

Jaysus, I find the only people to have a bad opinion on Peterson have an overly negative opinion on him. Its probably because most of you actually won't give him a chance, not because he has things to say that you disagree with, but because there is such a large audience who is interested in what he has to say, and this crowd make up the kind of people that you wouldn't really consider yourselves in alliance with.

Which, to be fair, I totally get that. I don't give Amy Schumer the time of day for the same kind of reason. I have no idea whether she's ACTUALLY funny or not.

Not that I believe I have to, but if I did have to ally myself with any groups in relation to this Peterson/non-Peterson conflict, it'd definitely be with the Peterson side. Anyone who supports him seems to be interested in actually going into debates with logic, whereas the naysayers seem to mostly be going for the angle of comparing him to a religious nut job and attacking his character rather than his ideas.

Bullies, basically.
And to fight fire with fire I find that quite ironic because most of them from what I've seen look like they would start crying when their mammy's would give them a bit of physical labour.

Suppose physical labour is just an activity created by the patriarchy to create a hierarchy based on physicality.;)

7aubzxk43m2sni

AfterLife wrote: »

If you're willing to pay to see anybody discussing religious, sociological, political theory you are cracked. We have free education in this country.

That's a ridiculous statement to make