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
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Giraffe Box wrote: »But it was you who brought your own personal interpretation of another poster's - El_Duderino 09 - reasons for disagreeing with JP into the debate, and I think you were incorrect to so do.
I could just as easily say that you yourself only agree with Petersen because you like him, but that would be equally as silly.
When I said that I think his dislike of the guy taints all his opinions of what he says? I clearly say that it's my personal interpretation of things so not sure why it would be "incorrect to do so". Maybe you disagree but that's a different thing.
Was your point that he dislikes Peterson because of what he says and not the other way around? Maybe. But the tone of his posts have not changed since early in the thread so I don't see much evolution in opinion going on. Maybe he had watched and read enough by then to have formed such strong opinions but that rarely seems to be the case these days.
You'd be right to question if I only agree with Peterson because I like the guy. You should always question that (from either side of the coin). People opinions are fickle and very open to bias so it would be unwise to just trust the opinions of a random internet stranger. I am still open to the idea that he could be a complete lunatic, but so far I haven't seen anything to make me come down on that side.
P.S I don't "agree with Peterson". I agree with some of what he says (as far as I've seen/heard to date). I also don't agree with left or right extremism in case that needs to be explicitly stated
0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
When I said that I think his dislike of the guy taints all his opinions of what he says? I clearly say that it's my personal interpretation of things so not sure why it would be "incorrect to do so". Maybe you disagree but that's a different thing.
Was your point that he dislikes Peterson because of what he says and not the other way around? Maybe. But the tone of his posts have not changed since early in the thread so I don't see much evolution in opinion going on. Maybe he had watched and read enough by then to have formed such strong opinions but that rarely seems to be the case these days.
You'd be right to question if I only agree with Peterson because I like the guy. You should always question that (from either side of the coin). People opinions are fickle and very open to bias so it would be unwise to just trust the opinions of a random internet stranger. I am still open to the idea that he could be a complete lunatic, but so far I haven't seen anything to make me come down on that side.
P.S I don't "agree with Peterson". I agree with some of what he says (as far as I've seen/heard to date). I also don't agree with left or right extremism in case that needs to be explicitly stated
Good post. You seem like a reasonable person who's unashamedly unsure of Petersen, and definitely not a reverential acolyte.
Speaking of which, you might want have a listen to this interview which is very interesting, it includes a surprisingly candid remark from JP, which, in my opinion, is dictionary definition 'bite the hand that feeds you': ''18 year old students don't know anything, they seriously don't know anything''.
12.29 approx.
Enjoy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/play/b0b3fk630 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
El_Duderino 09 wrote: »You're right. The topic was responsibility. So when he talks about freedom of expression or responsibility, he really only talks about them as left problems. He could use Colin Kapernick as as example of someone who has been shut out of his job and 'no platformed'. Bullied by the POTUS who traditionally upheld the right to free speech. But I wouldn't hold my breath because his audience doesn't want to hear that so he won't be selling it. He'll package 'the left' as the problem because that's the product he's selling.
On the interview, don't you think it's amusing that he spent so much time giving g out about young people and then they had young people who explicitly agreed with everything he said? If 'the kids today' are such responsibility dodging little cretins as Peterson describe them, why didn't they get some of those responsibility Dodgers to take part in the discussion?
Do I believe that the young people today abdicate responsibility? I've no idea. I don't actually have any way to compare it. I know 'young people today aren't as good as back in my day' is something old people say. It's said by every generation, ever.
This quote is attributed to Sacrates about 400BC: "The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room"
I suppose the most interesting thing about old people being so intent on talking down the youth, is the fact that they think they're discovering something new. They don't seem to know that they're assuming the most cliche mantra of old people. The day will never come when Peterson can't flog 'young people and the left are doing it wrong' to old conservative people.
I'll be honest and admit that I tuned out for parts of it because I was working while listening
Ya you're completely right; everyone thinks things were better/harder/whatever when they were young and todays youth are the worst. It's all bollocks. Part of me feels like todays youth are harder working than my generation was (mid-30's). My point was more that they've been let down by the adults who have created a system that 1) spoon-feeds them everything while they're growing up and 2) doesn't equip them with the skills to thrive mentally and emotionally (and physically too I guess). Anybody that blames kids for how they turn out is blind to the fact that they're a product of their upbringing, which is the responsibility of adults.
A lot of what I've seen of Petersons advice (12 Rules, etc.) seems to be trying to offset this gap. He espouses some somewhat obvious cliches like "clean your room" that promote taking control of your own life. If you talk to teachers at any level of education, they'll all complain about the Helicopter Parenting thats become so common. Kids aren't being left to deal with small problems themselves while they grow up and then don't know how to deal with bigger issues when they grow up. His "cliched" advice speaks to them.
Peterson claims to have young people coming up to him wherever he goes and telling him how much his work has improved their lives and relationships and given them direction. If true it's a worthy achievement.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
I'll be honest and admit that I tuned out for parts of it because I was working while listening
Ya you're completely right; everyone thinks things were better/harder/whatever when they were young and todays youth are the worst. It's all bollocks. Part of me feels like todays youth are harder working than my generation was (mid-30's). My point was more that they've been let down by the adults who have created a system that 1) spoon-feeds them everything while they're growing up and 2) doesn't equip them with the skills to thrive mentally and emotionally (and physically too I guess). Anybody that blames kids for how they turn out is blind to the fact that they're a product of their upbringing, which is the responsibility of adults.
A lot of what I've seen of Petersons advice (12 Rules, etc.) seems to be trying to offset this gap. He espouses some somewhat obvious cliches like "clean your room" that promote taking control of your own life. If you talk to teachers at any level of education, they'll all complain about the Helicopter Parenting thats become so common. Kids aren't being left to deal with small problems themselves while they grow up and then don't know how to deal with bigger issues when they grow up. His "cliched" advice speaks to them.
Peterson claims to have young people coming up to him wherever he goes and telling him how much his work has improved their lives and relationships and given them direction. If true it's a worthy achievement.
Kids today might be as hard working as generations before they (I suspect the type of work has changed). But the kids today don’t get the same benefits as generations past.
Things like chances of home ownership, job stability, financial stability in retirement and pensions, not to mention the fact that lots of young people can’t afford to start a family. This means the demands, prospects and rewards for ‘the kids today’ are very different from the past.
Peterson doesn’t spend time discussing those factors, he jumps straight to ‘kids were better in the old days, amiright?’
He talks about a very specific set of things but it’s on no way supposed to be an impartial look at things. It’s about justifying the conclusion that the kids and the lift are wrong.
It’s the intellectual side of the Fox News message. But it’s no more honest.0
Advertisement