Jordan Peterson is finally coming around (to Christ)

gaze

Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
2,270
he'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.
 
Last edited:

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
I don't understand all the hate Jordan Peterson receives. He shares his opinions of the world without any sort of hate. Isn't that what we should be striving for?

Whether or not people agree with his thoughts, they should take note on how he delivers his thoughts to the world. If everyone engaged as Jordan Peterson does then we would be able to live in a world of differing opinions without conflict.
 

Peatful

Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2016
Messages
3,582

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
I found this interesting. Thought id share. Less than two minutes long.
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.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH8XPT8cLQU
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,648
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal

View: https://youtu.be/oiGt9Xon3yM


I found this interesting. Thought id share. Less than two minutes long.

I agree with Mate. Peterson is a good man, and deeply flawed. He is quite authoritarian, which got him into plenty of trouble since he listened to the doctors and ended up basically insane for a time. Still, I like how he emphasized order and discipline, flaws and all. I understand where he is coming from being a man with a lot of rage I need to deal with. Peterson's solution to child rearing is good, miles better than anything I experienced and at the same time the better solution is typically to sit with the kid and listen to them.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
1,790
he'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.
+1

It's a reflection of the serotonergic state he's in, and he got used to being in it. I guess Jordan is an example of what happens when someone doesn't understand the effect that physiology has on the mind and then tries to rationalize/ normalize it through sick doctrines, such as meritocracy and neo- darwinism. The latter's view on reality/ life is basically: the most powerful/ meanest has success, the "weak" ones die or become slaves; if you're at the bottom, you're meant to be there because randomness. Great for the ruling class, terrible for most other people.

Jordan was once asked on an live interview about his daughter's improvements with eliminating problematic foods from her diet, specifically being asked if it made sense to him, as a psychologist. He said "no", adding that he never thought about it because it looked like neurotic behavior. This is how far from reality these technocrats are. They are anti- Science. On the other hand, the Russians always took into account the importance of the brain wrt calorie consumption, and how an interesting place can be very stimulating for the brain, making the person burn more calories than when they are doing boring, aerobic exercise. In this view, the body is seen as a whole, including the brain and it's perception of the environment and the place the entire organism is occupying. If the gut or any other part is sick, then it simply makes sense that the brain will suffer the effects of that as well, but the psychologists can't see this.
 

kyle

Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2016
Messages
399
He seems to want to enjoin his idea of Christ and Jungian psychology and Darwin. I dont think that works.

@nomoreketones

I think partly it was his strong support of SSRI's for a start. When it came out he had a terrible benzo addiction it seems to put his credibility of "life coach" in question to say the least.

He deserves some credit for challenging some of the nuttiness going on in the campuses but he took that and quickly pivoted into a kind of public intellectual which makes it, imo, some type of publicity stunt. I dont know how much he seriously cares or effectively accomplished.

He was marketing rugs to his followers for hundreds of dollars.

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.

@gaze

Through the power of marketing he was made as some kind of outsider - meanwhile he got a lot of mainstream press, speaking tours and book deals.

It's hard to find what he said that poses any fundamental criticism of the status quo. Darwinian/Nietzschean ideas are quite easy positions to hold and still be favored by the status quo.

You get to the top by being the chief lobster or whatever. It erases any discussion of morality and economics.
 

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
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.
Exactly.

He has spoken out against both left wing identity politics as well as right wing identity politics. He has been consistently against all identity politics which is why people stood behind him.

What baffles me the most is the media constantly labeling him as "right wing". That makes no logical sense given his positions on many issues.
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,648
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal
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

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.
 

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
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.
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.

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.
 

Hugh Johnson

Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
Messages
2,648
Location
The Sultanate of Portugal
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.

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.
Authoritarianism is also a psychological quality. Political compass is useless, real world is not a computer game with alignments.
 

Soren

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
1,648
Jordan Peterson is not perfect (duh no one is) but he has done a lot more good than harm.

Putting aside his life advice (which is very good for the most part in my opinion). Even his high profile disaster with BENZOs and anti-depressants is probably one of the best things to ever happen in the fight back against these dangerous drugs. The fact he is so high profile and so openly questions these drugs now is probably the most scrutiny these drugs have had in the west ever. Think how many people have chosen to NOT take these drugs after hearing what happened to him.
 

boris

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,345
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.
 

Soren

Member
Forum Supporter
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
1,648
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.
 

boris

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,345
This is not an accurate representation of what JP argues.

“And this brings us to a third erroneous concept: that nature is sometimes strickly segregated from the cultral constructs that have emerged within it. The order within the chaos and order of Being is all the more "natural" the longer it has lasted. This is because "nature" is "what selects", and the longer a feature has existed the more time it has had to be selected—and to shape life. It does not matter whether that feature is physical and biological, or social and cultural."

"We (the sovereign we, the we that has been around since the beginning of life) have lived in a dominance hierarchy for a long, long time. We were struggling for position before we had skin, or hands, or lungs, or bones. There is little more natural than culture."

“All that matters, from a Darwinian perspective, is permanence—and the dominance hierarchy, however social or cultural it might appear, has been around for some half a billion years. It’s permanent. It’s real.”

"We experience almost all the emotions that make life deep and engaging as a consequence of moving forward successfully towards something deeply desired and valued. The price we pay for that involvement is the inevitable creation of hierarchies of success, while the inevitable consequence is difference in outcome. Absolutely equality would therefore require the sacrifice of value itself—and then there would be nothing worth living for. We might instead note with gratitude that a complex, sophisticated culture allows for many games and many successful players, and that a well-structured culture allows the individuals that compose it to play and to win, in many different fashions.”

-Jordan Peterson



... 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.
 

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
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.
 

boris

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
2,345
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 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. 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. 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.


His is pro authoritarianism.
JP: "Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted."


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.


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.
 
Last edited:

nomoreketones

Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
1,237
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.
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 says if someone is high up in the "hierarchy" it's because the person or entity is competent and it should be that way.
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 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 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.


His is pro authoritarianism.
JP: "Hierarchies of competence are desirable and should be promoted."
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.


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.
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.


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.
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.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom