Posted on 08/09/2018 11:05:39 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Thus, the author might have been onto something, but is just as inclined to the intellectual laziness as are all the other folks who slide into this intellectual slop.
She acknowledges that even Obama recognized that identity politics had reached the end of the road and there was no place to go once they decided that whites had nothing to say and should be forbidden from saying it. That is a good starting point for a real inquiry into what has transpired, how Trump arose - not presuming that it is a rascist backlash of marginalized smelly idiot deplorables - but that there is solid and sound reasoning behind it.
But all of that is just too much for Ms Caitlin who simply struggles with getting her head around the fact that her son listens to those from the intellectual dark web and reaching the conclusion that Peterson is arguably ok since he doesn’t endorse Trump and can be interpreted as calling him to account.
Now of course I am to some extent misreading Caitlin, but she is so all over the board, that any reading of her is going to misread her.
No it’s not a brilliant essay. It could have been, but the author has adopted the intellectual laziness of the left and falls into many of the usual traps. Peterson is ok, in her view, but she doesn’t know how she got there, why it matters or what it says about our state of affairs. You can’’t get there if you have to force an interpretation into an anti-Trump screed, whither she eventually wobbles.
Have the net-dictators banned him yet?
Bookmarked the veritable cornucopia of great links in this thread.
Bookmark
No?
Perhaps it will help.
As I understand it, his point is that so many people today are willing to take a firm stand on what they believe is right or wrong with society and yet the same people are unwilling and incapable of organizing their own lives.
Consider the lack of humility displayed by the Canadian government in mandating the use of certain recently-created pronouns and providing punishment for those who dared to question their authority to do so.
Peterson, rightly I think, cautions that our freedom of speech is not just a tool for expressing ideas but is an essential tool for formulating and refining ideas, by allowing us to introduce our ideas to others, hear their responses, and incorporate improvements. At the same time, the person with whom we are conversing gets an opportunity to refine his own ideas.
Without the ability to expound on defective ideas, we risk never being able to improve our lives with new ideas.
bfl
I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not.
Very good article from beginning to end. I enjoyed it much. Thanks for posting!
The left doesn’t like him because he describes, psychologically and scientifically, what exactly is wrong with SJWs thinking, and the evil of post-modern social sciences.
So he’s really attacking the philosophical basis for most Leftist thought, and does so very intelligently and logically.
Very well stated.
I would add. Peterson does more than “describe, psychologically and scientifically, what exactly is wrong with SJWs thinking”, he gets in their head before they ever have a chance at a rebuttal.
He knows what they are thinking and what drives their beliefs well before those thoughts are ever stated. He states them before they do and then destroys those ideas before they can ever get started.
It’s infuriating to the left.
FWIW, it’s also a very successful sales tactic. State their objection before they do and overcome that objection so you can take it off the table and move on.
The Leftist doesn’t process information in the same way as Conservatives.
Conservatives will make general assumptions and work through a logical process of elimination until they reach a conclusion or position that may or may not be finalized.
The Leftist starts with a conclusion that is a necessary component of their worldview, their foundation of belief. Any new information the leftist is exposed to will either conform to their presuppositions or will be rejected as a personal attack on their freedom.
Intellectual Dark Web is the leftist name for people who ideologically oppose them and are intellectuals.
Brilliant Teachers is my name for them.
Never use leftist names.
Don’t give them that power.
J. Peterson is effective and popular to millennial young men because he is laser sharp in his breakdown of how screwed up leftist thought is and cuts it to the bone. He offers timeless and sage advice on how to be a responsible, respectable man and not some punk.
This just shows how hungry this particular generation of men are for a real man’s guidance, and not some lefty pajama boy.
I am hoping you are just drunk or drugged out...cause you certainly aren't making sense.
No. Not drugged or drunk.
I have studied it for years also with advanced degrees as well.
What is your background and do you have any type of substantive comment?
A brief introductipn as to what this thread is about would have been helpful.
THAT is profound...imho
Read “12 Rules” and you’ll discover that Peterson only sows progress to a conclusion, based entirely on teaching the ability to critically think and reason. But Peterson is not going to take you by the hand and lead you to the conclusion - you have to do the hard, methodical work yourself. He is a deep thinker whose work remains highly accessible, and that is what most terrifies the left.
Bingo...this is the whole point of Logos. Btw, I think Peterson has called himself a classical liberal, which is for the most part pretty much western thought. I think a lot of us could call ourselves classical liberals. Peterson also argues that the is the need of the left, they have the purpose of being a check on hierarchy system which ultimately becomes corrupt without being pulled back. It is a constant balancing act, a tug and pull so to speak between the dispossessed and those that are part of the hierarchy. Classical liberalism is that attempt at balancing the two poles.
Thanks. Do you think all his videos accomplish such leading?
He seems to me to be using a modified Socratic method, except that rather than waiting for you to work around to your next questions, he anticipates it and shows where it goes next and this for several more levels. We are talking about YouTube videos of lectures mostly, but they reveal that he has spent a lot, a lot, (I mean a lot) of time as a clinical therapist listening, as in yes, really listening. He deliberately tries to think out loud for his students and carry them along. I think of it as a re-enactment of his meditations and conversations but without the names and details, only the progression of ideas and the personal decisions that result.
He seems to rely heavily on Nietzsche and often urges people to read “The Gulag Archipelago” by Solzhenitsyn.
I also was confused by your comment and am very interested in which presentation gave you that impression. If you would, please watch this one http://www.ideacityonline.com/video/jordan-peterson-political-correctness-postmodernism/ and give us your reaction. Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.