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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Jordan Peterson interview on C4

1…138139141143144…201

Comments

  • #4202
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    See below:

    Jaysus, I though you were going to at least go to the effort of regurgitating some of Ruth Dudely Edwards efforts.


    He wrote a poem about having two sons, do you think he was a Mother as well?


  • #4203
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,065 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Bambi wrote: »
    Jaysus, I though you were going to at least go to the effort of regurgitating some of Ruth Dudely Edwards efforts.


    He wrote a poem about having two sons, do you think he was a Mother as well?

    If people want to see him as a sacred cow who should never be criticised then that's their call. The thread is not about him so I'm not going to go any further with this. I was just dropping whatever examples first entered my head in my above post.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • #4204
    Rodin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,130 ✭✭✭Rodin


    This interviewer is awful.

    She's inherently biased.
    Probably thinks he's sexist.

    Awful, awful stuff.

    Equal opportunity not outcome should be the target.


  • #4205
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,906 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    If people want to see him as a sacred cow who should never be criticised then that's their call. The thread is not about him so I'm not going to go any further with this. I was just dropping whatever examples first entered my head in my above post.

    Well, to be fair, the accusation has been made which is interesting, but I won't make any conclusions about PP based on the accusation and the poem. It's interesting though.


  • #4206
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,065 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Well, to be fair, the accusation has been made which is interesting, but I won't make a by conclusions about PP based on the accusation and the poem. It's interesting though.

    Well, when someone's response is as above then I do not see any point in continuing. I've not read biographies of Pearse, just giving my opinion on what I do know.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Advertisement
  • #4207
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,906 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    Well, when someone's response is as above then I do not see any point in continuing. I've not read biographies of Pearse, just giving my opinion on what I do know.

    That's fair enough for you because you've done the reading. I haven't so I don't know.

    Edit, I thought you said you had read biographies.
    Anyway, we've gone off topic.


  • #4208
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,065 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    That's fair enough for you because you've done the reading. I haven't so I don't know.
    Anyway, we've gone off topic.

    Indeed. Let's leave it there.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • #4209
    EmmetSpiceland
    Registered Users Posts: 10,521 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    Well, to be fair, the accusation has been made which is interesting, but I won't make a by conclusions about PP based on the accusation and the poem. It's interesting though.

    As far as I’m aware there is no evidence that Pearse was an “active” abuser. No allegations or anything like that.

    I’ve heard the poetry and plays he wrote being used as proof but, when it comes down to it, all it can really prove is that he might have “fantasised” about it.

    Still, it doesn’t look great. Stephen Fry has some “questionable” stuff in his back catalogue too, but none of it is proof of anything.

    And I’m sure if we were to look at some of the songs written from the 50s on through the 70s we’d see numerous examples of “creepy” lyrics regarding young teenage girls.

    The tide is turning…



  • #4210
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    I read 12 rules. It's a mix of old school Dad advice, ranting about lefties and likening them to Stalinists and some truly bizarre Grandpa Simpson-esque nonsense about existence.

    I also read it. I'm quite big into the area of personal development, and I wouldn't really consider 12 steps to be particularly good. A few good ideas, but most of them can be found in other self-help books or management books going back two/three decades. So nothing particularly new.

    And generally when it comes to personal development books, it is the perspective that is different while the techniques remain mostly the same. The score is when you find an author who describes the technique, but does it in such a manner, that it clicks with your personality or general outlook. I didn't like Petersons writing style, and his political ranting at the end, just ended the book for me. All I could think was WTF? Where did this crap come from?
    Karl Marx was a notorious antiSemite, even for his time and spent his life sponging off of Friedrich Engels, Padraig Pearse was almost certainly a child molester, Dr. Seuss was a notorious philanderer whose wife took her own life, etc... While it's not hard to find many more such examples, a lot of these people make significant cultural and philosophical contributions. I see none of this from Peterson.

    Neither would I, but what exactly are we elevating him into? In terms of personal development, he's not saying anything new. He's simply rehashing other peoples revelations and using a different format to describe them. In terms of current affairs, feminism, etc. he's promoted male rights and sought to reduce the impact of feminism or PC thinking.. but he's hardly charismatic enough to generate a platform to push his beliefs effectively.

    I think his achievements match the age that we live in. The age of technology, skepticism, and willful ignorance. A world of social media crusader knights and agendas (from minorities) driving policy for the majority. It's an age of misinformation, and confusion...

    So what has he achieved? Very little, except that he stands out as one of the more reasonable opponents of both feminist/SJW agendas, and PC movements.

    I tend to look at the area(s) of male rights/anti-pc, and consider the progression of those who fight against the movements. The first few generations of speakers were muppets. Extremists. Full of hate, bile, or out to trigger responses. Milo springs to mind. Very interesting, but a complete troll. Alienated his supporters as much as his opponents. And there's a pile of other similar speakers who were borderline nutjobs, but still raised the issues that shouldn't be spoken of.... because many of those topics were taboo due to the influence of feminists/sjw aggression. Next we have Peterson, and while he's not perfect, he's a more logical and reasonable face for the movement. And the person who replaces him will be even better.

    Personally, I'd imagine Peterson is part of a movement that is evolving. His value is that the movement is moving away from the likes of Milo, or MTGOW and giving a more reasonable image, and far more focus on logical thinking.


  • #4211
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,336 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    What outrageous statements?

    I don't think he is consistently outrageous, at least in my limited experience of him. So I am not going to suggest he is AS BAD as some people here might. Most of what he says is not outrageous, just..... devoid of any real content. He has a Deepak Chopra like skill of saying a lot of fancy sounding stuff without seemingly saying anything at all.

    But he has definitely come out with SOME absolute howlers of supreme nonsense. But sure haven't we all???? I would hardly hang him for it. No one is perfect and the more a man like him speaks the more he is gonna eventually say nonsense.

    But if you want some examples I could offer as few. For example he straight up said he believes that you can not be an artist.... or over come addiction (a little more relevant given recent news).... without a god. What nonsense is that?

    In conversation Matt Dilahunty pulled him up on this. The best he could do to defend his view is just to indicate the godless people are deluded and only THINK They are godless:
    Dillahunty: "What are you afraid of if we lose religion, demonstrate to me any benefit"
    Peterson: "Oh you would lose art, poetry, drama, narrative and story telling".
    Dillahunty: "Oh why, are there no godless artists and poets?"
    Peterson: "There are artists and poets who THINK they are godless."
    That is outrageous nonsense in my book for a start. Without religion we could not tell stories? BULL. Absolute bull. The creation and formation of stories is what the human brain does. Religious nonsense does not give us stories. Stories give us the religious nonsense.

    He plays the William Craig Lane move on thinking gods are required for morality too. In fact he claims that atheists are not really atheists because if they were they would all be like straight out of Dostoyevsky and the fact they are not means they can not actually really be atheist. They are just lying that they are atheist. So seemingly mind reading is in his repertoire. En Masse.
    Dillahunty: "I agree people take drugs and report experiences they describe as mystical. We have no way to confirm something supernatural actually happened".
    Peterson: "It stops people from smoking"
    Dillahunty: "Well you can stop smoking without supernatural intervention".
    Peterson: "No, not really"
    Dillahunty: "You CANT stop smoking without supernatural intervention?????"

    Finally his claim that through the use of drugs people obtained, long before science discovered it, a knowledge of the Double Helix nature of DNA is probably the biggest howler I have heard him spew out. His evidence for this? An image of art showing two snakes intertwined. And solely by looking at this piece of art he decided that these tribes used Ayhuwascha (sp?) and it told them about the double helix nature of DNA.

    I mean..... really.

    But all that said, so the hell what? Get well soon old man. I think underneath a few howlers you are a decent sort, heart mostly in the right place, and you likely have sorted 1000s of young people onto a better path in their life. No one deserves your suffering, least of all you. Come back to us alive and well!


  • Advertisement
  • #4212
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,065 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I also read it. I'm quite big into the area of personal development, and I wouldn't really consider 12 steps to be particularly good. A few good ideas, but most of them can be found in other self-help books or management books going back two/three decades. So nothing particularly new.

    And generally when it comes to personal development books, it is the perspective that is different while the techniques remain mostly the same. The score is when you find an author who describes the technique, but does it in such a manner, that it clicks with your personality or general outlook. I didn't like Petersons writing style, and his political ranting at the end, just ended the book for me. All I could think was WTF? Where did this crap come from?

    Pretty much my reaction as well, K. It's just a load of waffle based on an answer he gave once on Quora.com that someone persuaded him to turn into a book which he mentions in the introduction or preface to 12 rules.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    Neither would I, but what exactly are we elevating him into? In terms of personal development, he's not saying anything new. He's simply rehashing other peoples revelations and using a different format to describe them. In terms of current affairs, feminism, etc. he's promoted male rights and sought to reduce the impact of feminism or PC thinking.. but he's hardly charismatic enough to generate a platform to push his beliefs effectively.

    I'm not really elevating him into anything myself, either good or bad. He's not much more than an old guy with opinions, some old school Conservative, some religious and some barmy.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    I think his achievements match the age that we live in. The age of technology, skepticism, and willful ignorance. A world of social media crusader knights and agendas (from minorities) driving policy for the majority. It's an age of misinformation, and confusion...

    Culture war is the term that comes to mind.
    Deleted User wrote: »
    So what has he achieved? Very little, except that he stands out as one of the more reasonable opponents of both feminist/SJW agendas, and PC movements.

    I tend to look at the area(s) of male rights/anti-pc, and consider the progression of those who fight against the movements. The first few generations of speakers were muppets. Extremists. Full of hate, bile, or out to trigger responses. Milo springs to mind. Very interesting, but a complete troll. Alienated his supporters as much as his opponents. And there's a pile of other similar speakers who were borderline nutjobs, but still raised the issues that shouldn't be spoken of.... because many of those topics were taboo due to the influence of feminists/sjw aggression. Next we have Peterson, and while he's not perfect, he's a more logical and reasonable face for the movement. And the person who replaces him will be even better.

    Personally, I'd imagine Peterson is part of a movement that is evolving. His value is that the movement is moving away from the likes of Milo, or MTGOW and giving a more reasonable image, and far more focus on logical thinking.

    There's way worse than Peterson. The one thing that I think he's complete unreasonable with is his climate change denialism. That aside, he's just some guy with opinions to me.

    I'd also question your usage of the term "movement". I was part of a few online ones until I realized that all these people cared about was whining and moaning. The Damascene moment for me was on a mens' rights page where a woman described her struggle to open up a Men's Shed in her area. Not one of the feckers ever offered to help. No offer of a donation, a hand with painting or anything like that. Zip. Nada.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • #4213
    Dyr
    Registered Users Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    If people want to see him as a sacred cow who should never be criticised then that's their call. The thread is not about him so I'm not going to go any further with this. I was just dropping whatever examples first entered my head in my above post.


    So the first example to enter your head was a bull**** one that you won't defend, why not try again? Gwan. :o


  • #4214
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    I'd also question your usage of the term "movement". I was part of a few online ones until I realized that all these people cared about was whining and moaning. The Damascene moment for me was on a mens' rights page where a woman described her struggle to open up a Men's Shed in her area. Not one of the feckers ever offered to help. No offer of a donation, a hand with painting or anything like that. Zip. Nada.

    I'd use the term movement in the same way as someone would say "feminism". A wide range of organisations with different beliefs, but all promoting a common element of male/female rights. To boost the need for public recognition of those needs.

    I'm part of a few smaller organisations for male rights but they're pretty minor, and don't have much influence (mostly helping each other with legal fees, advice, moral support etc). I tend to shy away from the bigger groups because there tends to be more extremists, politics, and massaging each others bitterness involved.

    I see it as a "movement" similar to how feminism developed over time. Feminism has gone through many stages of evolution, and so too do these male groups and the messages to be promoted. The circumstances and the environment is different and so there's different challenges involved. I'd see Peterson's contribution to be that he encouraged others to speak out against the injustices that society pushes against males... which is definitely a positive, since many people previously felt obliged to stay quiet out of fear of being targeted. He's just another person who has been a positive step for the "movement" to get away from extremist or emotionally bitter idiotic bitching.

    Agree with everything else you said.


  • #4215
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,895 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    That's horrific, if true.

    I wonder what his next book will be about...

    Anyone know what's the story with going to Russia for treatment?

    Free healthcare?


  • #4216
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,895 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Ahh I dunno FT. Ignoring Peterson for a while I could never get with this notion that someone is, or should be a perfect reflection of their works. The message isn't always the man. It often isn't. I mean Ghandi was a pervert with a god complex, Martin Luther King was a philanderer. Many of the greatest geniuses of humanity that moved us forward as a species in science, philosophy, art were as people complete weirdos and pricks. To the degree that it often seems to be a prerequisite.

    I understand your point Wibbs, but if someone is making a living preaching to folk and telling them how to live their lives, while living a dubious existence themselves, it sours the message to a very large degree.

    Hypocrites aren't trusted for a valid reason.

    BTW, I don't think Jordan Peterson can really be mentioned in the same para as the other people you've highlight. I don't think he's really done all that much.


  • #4217
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,320 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    So her dad is sick with addiction issues and the headcase daughter, who preaches to the world about only eating beef, carts him off to Russia where he ends up in a coma, suffers neurological damage and no-one has heard from him.

    Honestly I'd be worried for the poor man. He's not being looked after by people with his best interests at heart.


  • #4218
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Preaching to people what to do with their lives and then getting hooked on benzos himself. That's not a guy to be telling anyone how to do anything.

    I'd be more interested in someone who has made mistakes than a saint, or someone who pretends to be perfect. It's one of things that always bothered me about priests/nuns when I was a teen. That unrealistic belief that they knew/understood everything without any real personal experience of what it entailed.

    Anyway, I would suggest that everything he spoke about with regards to addiction would be taken from modern psychology rather than his own discoveries/theories. He made a big deal about being a psychologist... for him to go nuts talking about stuff that isn't backed by the organisations involved would have been professional suicide..

    But sure, I'd strongly hesitate to follow many of his ideas for how people should live.. It runs counter to my own experiences in life, but then, we are all individuals and lead different lives.


  • #4219
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Getting yourself hooked on drugs is a mess in most people's book.

    Not mine. Now if he was shooting up Heroin, or doing Meth, my opinion would change... but getting addicted to prescription drugs? He joins a rather large percentage of the US population.


  • #4220
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,895 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Not mine. Now if he was shooting up Heroin, or doing Meth, my opinion would change... but getting addicted to prescription drugs? He joins a rather large percentage of the US population.

    That doesn't make it any less messy though.


  • #4221
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    How long was he on them?..he was surely taking the prescribed dose..he was going through some difficult times, and as soon as he realised he was developing a physical issue with them he tried to address it..At least you're not going on about his diet..be thankful for small mercies I suppose..


  • Advertisement
  • #4222
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Tony EH wrote: »
    That doesn't make it any less messy though.

    In what way messy?

    Wouldn't it have been worse if he turned into an alcoholic? that would seem far messier, and yet, it's something tolerated far more for some public figures.


  • #4223
    Tony EH
    Registered Users Posts: 18,895 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Deleted User wrote: »
    In what way messy?

    Wouldn't it have been worse if he turned into an alcoholic? that would seem far messier, and yet, it's something tolerated far more for some public figures.

    An addiction to any drug is messy. An addict loses control over their actions in favour of the drug, which grows to have a major influence on the addicts life.

    He's in Russia right now going through experimental procedures to get him off of the benzos.

    If that's not messy, then I don't know what is.


  • #4224
    QueenRizla
    Registered Users Posts: 222 ✭✭QueenRizla


    Was the induced coma the withdrawal treatment? Or was he put in a coma because of pneumonia? What caused the pneumonia? I’m confused about what happened.


  • #4225
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    He strikes me as a very smart man, and he could certainly afford the best, maybe he reckons the Russians are the ones to provide it.

    Seems to me that every 2nd American is addicted to something because of their doctors. Their whole system seems to be based on a pill for every ill, even when the ill is other pills!

    Some very smart people can be absolute dopes when it comes to personal health problems.

    The most prominent being Steve Jobs. Now before anyone says he had pancreatic cancer which is swiftly fatal and therefore he had nothing to lose - no. He had a much more rare type of pancreatic cancer that carries a much higher survival rate than the common-or-garden one. It’s not for certain that he would have survived had he gone with conventional treatment but he would have had a decent shot at it. Instead he went for alternative medicine, otherwise known as woo and gave himself no chance.


  • #4226
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    I think that people with reactionary views were desperate for a champion with a degree of credibility -- Peterson was a good man for the job, being a Professor and all. Peterson is the personification of an 'appeal to authority' fallacious stance. Peterson is a Professor who has written books, and you're just some dude on the internet, what would you know?


  • #4227
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    you're just some dude on the internet, what would you know?

    I'm considering putting this in my sig..


  • #4228
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,906 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    Tony EH wrote: »
    Free healthcare?

    Through pure coincidence I was chatting with someone who was at an academic conference in the UK today. They said they heard at the conference that the Russian mafia/crime gangs have pumped billions into the addiction services in Russia because their people's addictions have gotten to the point of threatening their crime organisations.

    So as a consequence the Russian health service is now among the best in the world at dealing with drug addiction. If true, that's probably why Peterson has gone there.


  • #4229
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,906 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Not mine. Now if he was shooting up Heroin, or doing Meth, my opinion would change... but getting addicted to prescription drugs? He joins a rather large percentage of the US population.

    The acceptable, middle class drugs to be addicted to. Heroine or meth are poor people drugs only for scumbags and poor people. Professors and Canadian Jesus would only get hooked on a Classy, prescription drugs, because he's got righteous opinions.

    Never a thought that people get addicted to drugs for basically the same reasons - to escape pain. Nope, Peterson's drug addiction is worthy of sympathy, heroine and met addicts aren't. So bloody predictable.

    I wonder how he'll deal with it in the next book. Will he advocate for greater socially funded addiction services to help addicts of all kinds? Pfft, of course not. That's not what his audience wants to hear. But it will be Interesting to see how he deals with it without advocating for any kind of social services.


  • #4230
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users Posts: 19,906 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    CQD wrote: »
    How long was he on them?..he was surely taking the prescribed dose..he was going through some difficult times, and as soon as he realised he was developing a physical issue with them he tried to address it..At least you're not going on about his diet..be thankful for small mercies I suppose..

    A lot of irrelevant assumptions in that post. How do you know he was taking the prescribed dose? How do you know he got help as soon as he realised he was dependent? Why are those invented details even relevant?

    Why invent the details?


  • Advertisement
  • #4231
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭[Deleted User]


    Tony EH wrote: »
    An addiction to any drug is messy. An addict loses control over their actions in favour of the drug, which grows to have a major influence on the addicts life.

    He's in Russia right now going through experimental procedures to get him off of the benzos.

    If that's not messy, then I don't know what is.

    I'm addicted to tobacco, and I have been for almost two decades. I haven't lost control over my actions. I have friends who are addicted to various other drugs including cocaine and/or prescription drugs. As with many people out there, I became borderline addicted to Alcohol when I was in my 20's. I sought help. I was still capable of deciding what was right for me, and how I should go about getting that help.

    You're making a sweeping statement about both addicts and the drugs/addictions that they partake in. There's a thing called willpower. You can be addicted to something and still be able to lead a relatively normal life. Not everyone becomes a shell of a person.

    Your idea of what is messy is far different from mine. He went to Russia... so what? Why would it be better for him to get treatment in the US or Canada, considering he's using private care? You're making assumptions about his state of mind, and degree of addiction based on what...? Yup. Absolutely nothing. Peterson has a long history of talking about his depression.. and the fact that he does so, shows that he's willing to reveal other aspects of his vulnerabilities..


Advertisement