Can we please admit Jordan Peterson is a bullsh1tter?

Brid Hegarty

I wouldn't feel the need to post this if it was for the constant references from boardsies to how he was of help. He's verbose and long winded, and this mesmerizes his dumb audience. He gets annoyed with people unfairly associating him with politics even though he keeps weighing in on issues like immigration, climate change, economics, inequality, marxism, the relationship between poverty and crime, etc. Isn't discussing politics what made the guy famous in the first place. And he only really grew in popularity when he became an anti SJW activist.

The problem with him is that is self help advice is inseparably tied to his philosophical and political outlook. At a wild guess I'd say many of the other self help gurus out there actually offer the exact same advice but could well have completely different political views. He may well have given a lot of young men a pick me up, but it could well be as a consequence of fuelling hatred toward the left. I don't get the impression that he ever had ever had a problem with crazy right wingers misunderstanding what he preached.

He also says that men who approach women for no other reason than hope of having sex, are sociopathic! I never knew I was a sociopath.

mr.anonymous

Go clean your room ;)

emo72

Jordan is grand. It's Sunday, take the day off

Why is it that women feel the need to attack him. Is it that he often appeals to younger men.

Danzy

He has been a Professor in probably the 2 leading universities for psychology in the world and has a very significant body of peer reviewed research.

You might disagree with him politically, I do on many things but he has proven himself.

Fred Astaire

I hate this "Can we" nonsense. Who talks like this? - It's embarrassing.

Why do you need other people to validate your own thoughts?

May as well have made a thread titled - 'Can everybody please agree with my own personal views of Jordan Peterson'. Absolute LOL.

Or was this thread some roundabout way of telling everyone you approach women?

Roger the cabin boy

"Dumb audience".

Way to kill your own post in the 1st sentence.

Dinner

A 'straight shooter' for the slow. An intellectual for the moronic.

A beacon for those that want to be smarter than they are. That's our Jordan.

Enjoy yourselves, but what a waste.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167571#Comment_118167571

Who would you recommend dinner? Yourself maybe, are you on twitter?

Dinner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167580#Comment_118167580

Absolutely, you can find me at @Literallyanyonebut,

You're welcome in advance. Hoping to reinforce pathetic masculinity with your (i'm sure) impressive assistance

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167610#Comment_118167610

I think you know a lot more about him than i do. I wonder why that would be?

HildaOgdenx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167395#Comment_118167395

I think OP is a man. Despite the user name.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167669#Comment_118167669

Maybe that's why (s)he has such an issue with Peterson..

He generally doesn't go down well with that crowd..

I'll admit he is a bullshitter if we can also agree bressie, blindboy and the plethora of feminist "opinion" writers are full of ****.

Peterson gives his opinion, as do the rest of the ****. You aren't compelled to follow him or anyone else.

Can you please just admit you don't like his opinion?

Edit... For what it's worth, I find him tiresome and hard to listen to.

You can't possibly put Peterson in the same sentence as the likes of bressie or that other dope..

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167700#Comment_118167700

I can.

I give Peterson props for his stand against self id and for his amazing takedown of Cathy Newman, but some of his **** is tiresome.

The comparison comes when some of his zealots think he can do no wrong.

Like bressie and that other plastic bag twat.

Peterson was right but he has become tiresome.

endacl

He can’t be a bullsh1tter. He’s been on Joe Rogan’s podc...

...

...

oh...

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167706#Comment_118167706

No, you can't..

He's a lecturer, a psychotherapist, has written 3 books, has over a hundred published peer reviewed papers..

Yeah, he's tiresome, but like, he's in a completely different league to those other lads..

And the reason he draws such ire is he was such a major figure in the ideological battle against the left..

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167709#Comment_118167709

No.

I can. I did. I and will continue to do so.

You aren't listening to Jordan enough if you feel I am not entitled to mention him in the same sentence as other prominent personalities who espouse themselves to be teachers.

I'm considered right wing (extreme to some) but I can still recognise that Peterson is a personality akin to the bressies of the world albeit the "wrong" side.

We could all do with a little bit more critical thinking rather than just being critical of the other side.

Peterson came to fame for standing up for his beliefs. He since has monetised it (more power to him) but I have found him less legitimate as he continues.

Couldn't give a **** how many books he has written, how many jobs he had, or how many peers approved his work.

The lad took a stance on pronouns and gender Identity despite the damage it may have done to him professionally. I respect that.

He has since made a career out of that stance and has turned into a boring parody of a counter populist opinion.

I find him boring, I discount most **** he says now as a way of selling a new book. He is a career **** stirrer.

Manach

Given the amount of flak he attracts from a certain policatal spectrum, including being cast as a proxy for the Red Skull, the appeal of his narrative indicates a resonance with those at odds with the current progressive cliches in journalism, academic and government.

I think most people talk bull most of the time :) Myself included. And even when one tries to find and correct the bull one talks - which I genuinely try to do myself - we still end up talking bull a lot of the time. Everything from confirmation bias - to dunning kruger - to merely making genuine human errors from genuine human flaws - leaves us all prone to this.

Threads on people like Peterson and Blindboy and Rogan - can't say I have the remotest idea who "bressie" is - tend to be like discussing Jesus. As if finding one flaw in something they did or said brings the entire personality cult down. Maybe with Jesus or Mo that works given they are "meant" to be perfect. But I am not so sure it works with media personalities. And anyone who thinks such people are perfect - the problem lies with them not the public personality.

That is even if the thread gets so far as to discuss their genuine flaws or errors - rather than merely throwing out words like "twat" or "dope" - or irrelevantly mention some aspect of their media persona like "plastic bag" and pretend like some kind of point has been made about them - when in fact that approach probably says nothing about anyone but the speaker and their own rhetorical capabilities.

Or the discussion often tends into areas where the speaker seems to be psychic. Claiming to know the motivations or agendas or reasoning of people like Peterson. Inventing incentives and agendas on their behalf which do not actually come from anything they did or said. The majority of claims I ever see that someone is "just doing it for the money" for example seem to be evidenced by nothing but the fact they are managing to make money.

Peterson certainly has come out with some doozies of absolute bull though. A litany of them. My favourite being one that I was shown on here by another boardsie about how he thinks some ancient people knew about the double helix nature of DNA because they "discovered" it by taking ayahuasca. And peterson's "evidence" for this was that they had a tendency to draw pictures of snakes eating their own tails or something that evoked the idea of the double helix in him. Not to mention his absolute crap about atheists all being theists really - or that no one can overcome addiction if they are not theist which he claimed in an interview with Matt Dillahunty. And that's only a short cross section of examples.

But I have also ended up listening to a few of his very long form conversations. And with the exception of the absolute car crash of a podcast where he first spoke with Sam Harris - for the most part I can get through 2/3 hours of listening to him without finding much at all to take exception to. His appearances on Jokko Willink for example are roughly 95% A-OK with me - and I would have to listen to them again to even recall the relatively benign 5% I even thought at the time was nonsense or potentially harmful.

I think as I have gotten older I try not to judge people by isolated example of bull - nor expect great things of the next words out of their mouth because they have a long litany of published books or papers either. For me that is like expecting to know how a football team like Manchester United are going to perform tomorrow by looking solely at their results from 60 years ago when they had different management - players - trainers - fans - and support teams. Some scientists have been lauded for a discovery or idea - who then went on to come up with absolute nonsense after that. That nonsense should be judged on it's own merits not on the merits of previous work or statements.

What I tend often these days to try and judge is whether I think overall the world is a better place - even if only slightly - because certain people are in it. And despite their occasional bull - including some real doozies - I genuinely think the world is a slightly better place with Rogan and Peterson and Blindboy in it doing what they do - than if they weren't and they just disappeared entirely off the radars. Blindboy talks absolute crap sometimes. But I still use his mental health podcasts as a resource when helping others - and the people I use it to help find it accessible, understandable, and relatable and ultimately beneficial. How many of the detractors of such people can make such claims about the impact they themselves have on the world? Could it potentially even be that the most strident of such detractors - are the ones least qualified with such credentials of impact on others? I do not know.

As for his motivations - sure we many of us settle into what we are competent at or comfortable with to make our living. I would not hold a media personality to a different standard than I hold myself or others in that regard. As a user said above - he stood up for some things and managed to make a living out of it - so more power to him. I can't relate to this "stuff he says is just trying to push a book" mentality at all - and I do not see much reason to doubt his motivations and he has on numerous occasions recently broken down in visible tears when discussing some of the effects his work has had on individuals or groups. He genuinely does seem to care deeply about a lot of issues dear to him - even the ones where I think the things he says on those issues are either absolute nonsense or even positively harmful.

Sure for the most part I only do the work I do because I am paid for it. That does not mean I do not aim to do my best - care about my work and the company I work for - the well being and success of my colleagues - and the impact the company I work for has on the world around it.

For me firstly many people make a lot of money out of doing what they care about - that does not mean they are only doing it for the money. But secondly and most importantly I think - if such people actually were solely doing it for the money - that neither adds to nor detracts from the value of what they are doing at all. The value of what they are doing lies in what they are doing and it's effect - not their motivations for doing it. The value of any art for example - for me at least - lies in the art itself. And if my favourite musician or author came out tomorrow saying "Everything I ever created or produced I did solely for profit and personal gain" I would struggle to find a single reason to care. Rather I would be thinking "How nice for you - now could you just get on and make more of it please?".

Brid Hegarty

@Danzy He has been a Professor in probably the 2 leading universities for psychology in the world and has a very significant body of peer reviewed research.

Oh he certainly has:

Procedural knowledge generated in the course of heroic behaviour is not organised or integrated within the group or the individual itself as a consequence of simple accumulation. Procedure A appropriated in situation 1, and procedure B appropriated in situation 2, may clash in situation 3, under certain circumstances interphychic interpersonal conflict immerges and morally evaluated decisions become necessary where behavioural options are ranked and ordered, and this organisation in its concrete abstract interphychic and interpersonal variants, occurs as a consequence of quote "war".

Brid Hegarty

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118167419#Comment_118167419

So you agree with me but you don't want to give me the satisfaction. Fair enough

Mantis Toboggan

Jordan who?

Brid Hegarty

@[Deleted User] Everything from confirmation bias - to dunning kruger - to merely making genuine human errors from genuine human flaws - leaves us all prone to this.

Kruger national park?

Never been and do not understand the question sorry :)

Mister Vain

He's like Oprah for men. Or is that Joe Rogan?

Fred Astaire

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118169444#Comment_118169444

No, nowhere did I give any indication that I agreed with what you said.

Your satisfaction levels, positive or negative, on anything whatsoever, couldn't matter less to me.

I think his positions on feminism, identity politics, ideology and self-help are well considered, well articulated, and correct. My eyes glaze over when he talks about religion, symbolism and mythology and I turn him off.