AndrogenicJB
Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2021
- Messages
- 567
exactlyNone of this means anything. It is vague accusations that do not refer to anything that he has actually said. I can say the same about you with as much validity.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
exactlyNone of this means anything. It is vague accusations that do not refer to anything that he has actually said. I can say the same about you with as much validity.
Listen to what Dr. Gabor Mate claims about Jordan Peterson's advice for disciplining a 2 year old child. Then watch an actual video about Joran Peterson on disciplining a two year old child. Just because Gabor Mate has a "Dr" in front of his name doesn't mean he is being honest.I found this interesting. Thought id share. Less than two minutes long.
View: https://youtu.be/oiGt9Xon3yM
I found this interesting. Thought id share. Less than two minutes long.
+1he's too obsessed with power, hierarchy, struggle, and suffering. he looks miserable. everyone who views power as the main dominating force of life goes down a mistaken path. compare his ideas with people like Ray, buddha, jesus himself, etc. it's one of wholeness, oneness, love, kindness, cooperation. JP is too focused on the individual and he resonates with people because we live in an alienated, lonely, and isolated world where we have to stare at screens to find faces to listen to. the natural state of life is supposed to be pleasant and fluent, not a struggle and constant suffering. it reminds me of people trying to tell someone who feels miserable to fight through it and just go run 2 miles to lose weight. when it might just be a gluten allergy or something and once they cut it out they feel completely normal and happy. and the information on health is so bad from marketing and industry propoganda that it's impossible to expect someone to come across the information they really need on their own. our relationship with our environment, our work, other people, our food is what shapes us, putting too much of the focus on invidual responsibility ignores larger issues that cannot be handled alone or through willpower.
I have to disagree with this. Jordan Peterson has spoken out in favor of free speech and freedom in general on many occasions. I would describe Jordan Peterson as a liberal if I had to apply a label.He is quite authoritarian,
Exactly.A lot of people liked him because he seemed like the man to rally behind as "opposition" to identity politics so they seem to easily overlook a lot of these things.
I have to disagree with this. Jordan Peterson has spoken out in favor of free speech and freedom in general on many occasions. I would describe Jordan Peterson as a liberal if I had to apply a label.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBLVXfBVp1E
If you are talking Authoritarian vs Libertarian on the political compass I would put Jordan Peterson horizontally in the middle and vertically about 3/4 of the way down towards libertarian. I know there are people who have scored him differently but I disagree with those people.Authoritarian is a relative term. I did state he is a good man, and I do like him. However he still blindly believes in the authoritarian structures such as listening to psychiatrists.
Authoritarianism is also a psychological quality. Political compass is useless, real world is not a computer game with alignments.If you are talking Authoritarian vs Libertarian on the political compass I would put Jordan Peterson horizontally in the middle and vertically about 3/4 of the way down towards libertarian. I know there are people who have scored him differently but I disagree with those people.
The Political Compass - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Being authoritarian has nothing to do with one's personal beliefs. It has everything to do with forcing one's personal beliefs upon others. A libertarian will say that you can believe whatever you want as long as you don't physically hurt anyone. An authoritarian will desire punishment for those who hold beliefs that differ from the authoritarian.
If Jordan Peterson choses to believe psychiatrists are actually a legit/beneficial profession and chooses to see one himself, that is not authoritarian. If Jordan Peterson were to force others to see psychiatrists or support the government forcing people to see psychiatrists then that would be in fact be authoritarian. Jordan Peterson doesn't force others or support forcing others to see a psychiatrist.
A non Jordan Peterson example can be made with the COVID vaccines. If one chooses to take one of the COVID vaccines that are pushed by an authoritarian government, that would not make the individual taking the vaccine authoritarian if the individual actually believe in the efficacy of the vaccine. But if an individual supports and encourages the government to force others to take the COVID vaccine against their will, then that individual would be authoritarian.
Peterson is the definition of a useful idiot. His overarching theme is driven by his high estrogen, high serotonin, low thyroid state. Which is: the current power structure is something natural and good, it's something that you can't do anything about, because nature wants it to be that way, so you should not only accept it, but support it. That's why he's being pushed in the media.
This is not an accurate representation of what JP argues.
There is a reason he's being supported by the powers that be (for example to speak for the Trilateral Comission). The authoritarians/technocrats/bankers just love his message.
These specific quotes don't seem to have anything to do with policy except for his warnings against Communism when he speaks of absolute equality. I perceive his message as a warning against removing free markets and allowing a totalitarian government to enforce equal amounts of resources for all. I know from other lectures that Jordan Peterson believes that a communist system will always lead to a tyrannical government.
Jordan Peterson has spoken extensively on equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome. He strongly believes in equality of opportunity. He strongly opposes government enforced equality of outcome.
In our society in the last year or two the language of this discussion has changed. Now people often use the word "equality" to mean equality of opportunity and the word "equity" to mean equality of outcome or what Jordan Peterson described as "absolute equality" in his quote you quoted.
He believes hierarchies are part of the human brain and evolved millions of years ago - that is what is implied by the lobster analogy.He talks about hierarchy (ruling class/peasants, authority/obedient, man/woman, adults/children, doctor/nurse, etc ). He doesn't have to speak it out (even though he does sometimes as in those quotes), but it's always implied in his lobster analogy.
Different people have different skill sets and skill levels. Not all people are capable of managing other people and not all people want to. Ideally I think it is desirable for people to rise up in the hierarchy of whatever organization they are in based on their skills and talents. Of course hard work is important too.He says if someone is high up in the "hierarchy" it's because the person or entity is competent and it should be that way.
I don't think his position is that it's "good". I believe his position is that there is no better system for organizing society. Jordan Peterson has made the point that world wide (under our current globalist system) that record numbers of people have escaped poverty. Also, the poor people are living better than they have at any other time in history. There is no better system than what we have now to switch to. Any change will catapult millions of people into poverty as has happened in Venezuela.He says our culture is good because nature decided it should be that way.... we know our culture is highly manipulated to serve a small group of people.
I don't think that statement is authoritarian at all. Naturally the most talented people will rise to the top and that makes for a more efficient and productive society. The idea is merit based advancement not authoritarian control.His is pro authoritarianism.
JP: "Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted."
I don't think the ruling elites care about this. The ruling elites only care about keeping power. But I don't know any ruling elites so I cannot ask them personally.There are more things that he talks about that the ruling elites love, like "life is suffering".
JP: “The purpose of life, as far as I can tell… is to find a mode of being that’s so meaningful that the fact that life is suffering is no longer relevant.”
It's suffering, when you are physically sick and don't understand what is going on. Otherwise life is pretty blissfull in my opinion.
His message if for a libertarian power structure, not an authoritarian power structure. He has studied the Nazis and Soviet Union and has talked in length about how horrific those systems are. He thinks we must do whatever we can to prevent anything like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union from happening again. From that perspective, he does want to keep things as they are.He might say some good things, but it doesn't matter, his message carries a certain implication with it, and that is that the existing power structure should stay how it is, and that is exactly what they want.