Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Mountainsandh · 01-03-2019 8:13pm

Brian? wrote: »

It's not his "detractors" that paint it in these terms. It's his supporters, or a large subset of them. Type "Jordan Peterson" + any of the terms owns, crushes, destroys or schools into YouTube and you'll see exactly what I mean.

Peterson won't claim to win or lose, which is to his credit. It's his acolytes that will claim victory. Which is exactly what I said above.

Some Zizek supporters will do the same obviously. But I have yet to see a video where Zizek "owns" someone on YouTube.

The concept of win or lose isn't entirely mine. It's in the minds of fanboys. Do you disagree?

I agree.

I know what idiots you're talking about, and it's true, but take my word as testimony that not all supporters think like that, since ... I am a supporter and I don't. Like many others.

The idiots are just louder.

Mountainsandh · 01-03-2019 8:17pm

Brian? wrote: »

Also, I never said Zizek will win the debate. There's nothing to win or lose. I said he'd win over neutrals, I think he's a largely unknown commodity compared to Peterson.

You do indulge in a bit of that "win/lose" slant.

I prefer to think of it as a fierce interesting discussion, and entertaining, like you said.

Certainly a discussion we're all likely to learn some things from, maybe change our respective thinking(s) on various things.

I find it hard to listen to Zizek, but hopefully a video will be produced and I'll definitely watch it.

Arne_Saknussem · 01-03-2019 8:18pm

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I agree.

I know what idiots you're talking about, and it's true, but take my word as testimony that not all supporters think like that, since ... I am a supporter and I don't. Like many others.

The idiots are just louder.

It's basic clickbaiting, to claim large swathes of people who agree with things he says act like this is moronic.

Brian? · 01-03-2019 8:26pm

Mountainsandh wrote: »

You do indulge in a bit of that "win/lose" slant.

No, I don't. How can I be clearer about it than saying I don't?

I prefer to think of it as a fierce interesting discussion, and entertaining, like you said.

Certainly a discussion we're all likely to learn some things from, maybe change our respective thinking(s) on various things.

I find it hard to listen to Zizek, but hopefully a video will be produced and I'll definitely watch it.

So don't listen to him. Read his articles or books. His output is prodigious.

Brian? · 01-03-2019 8:26pm

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I agree.

I know what idiots you're talking about, and it's true, but take my word as testimony that not all supporters think like that, since ... I am a supporter and I don't. Like many others.

The idiots are just louder.

Agreed. These are the idiots I am referring to as acolytes. I though this was pretty clear.

Mountainsandh · 01-03-2019 8:42pm

Brian? wrote: »

Agreed. These are the idiots I am referring to as acolytes. I though this was pretty clear.

Acolytes seems to imply some reciprocity, imo. I don't think JP approves of their antics.

Maybe to avoid confusion, avoid semantics of "win/lose" in your posts ?
It really just antagonizes anyone reading it, even if it's not your own stance.

I'm not giving out, simply pointing out that if you mention win/lose re supporters/detractors in your posts as above, it is likely to cause someone reading it to take sides or to infer what side you may be on.

Just like the click baits.

Brian? · 01-03-2019 8:54pm

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Acolytes seems to imply some reciprocity, imo. I don't think JP approves of their antics.

I shall henceforth use fanboys in place of acolytes. Cool?

Maybe to avoid confusion, avoid semantics of "win/lose" in your posts ?
It really just antagonizes anyone reading it, even if it's not your own stance.

I can't control what antagonises people unfortunately. People are antogonised by the simplest things.

I'm not giving out, simply pointing out that if you mention win/lose re supporters/detractors in your posts as above, it is likely to cause someone reading it to take sides or to infer what side you may be on.

Just like the click baits.

I didn't mention win/lose. I said Peterson fanboys will claim victory, as a critique of Peterson fanboys. It really was a rather straightforward statement, I don't understand why we're still discussing it.

In case there is any confusion, I am a fan of Zizek. I am not a fan of Peterson. I don't think there will be a winner/loser of this discussion, as you say it's not a versus situation. I look forward to it.

Mountainsandh · 01-03-2019 9:01pm

Brian? wrote: »

I shall henceforth use fanboys in place of acolytes. Cool?

I can't control what antagonises people unfortunately. People are antogonised by the simplest things.

I didn't mention win/lose. I said Peterson fanboys will claim victory, as a critique of Peterson fanboys. It really was a rather straightforward statement, I don't understand why we're still discussing it.

In case there is any confusion, I am a fan of Zizek. I am not a fan of Peterson. I don't think there will be a winner/loser of this discussion, as you say it's not a versus situation. I look forward to it.

Yeah, I didn't mean to get into that kind of discussion myself. Not important.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-03-2019 11:07am

Is Peterson seriously going to preech capitalism to young men who are being shafted by capitalism? It's getting into snake oil salesman territory.

Peterson is doing. great out of capitalism and a fair dues. But it's a bit rich to speak to an audience of young men from a generation who can't afford houses or families and don't have stable employment, that capitalism makes people happy.

Wanderer78 · 02-03-2019 11:10am

El_Duderino 09 wrote:

Peterson is doing. great out of capitalism and a fair dues. But it's a bit rich to speak to an audience of young men from a generation who can't afford houses or families and don't have stable employment, that capitalism makes people happy.

Capitalism has been great for humanity, but somewhere we took a wrong turn with it, and potentially created one of the most dangerous forms of it, maybe we need a new form of capitalism

ArchXStanton · 02-03-2019 11:14am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Capitalism has been great for humanity, but somewhere we took a wrong turn with it, and potentially created one of the most dangerous forms of it, maybe we need a new form of capitalism

It seems to have turned into some predatory/monopoly type capitalism

El_Duderino 09 · 02-03-2019 11:17am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Capitalism has been great for humanity, but somewhere we took a wrong turn with it, and potentially created one of the most dangerous forms of it, maybe we need a new form of capitalism

I think we're about to see that discussion thrashed out in the worst possible way in the next US presidential election campaign.

I also think people who do well out of capitalism take the socialist parts for granted. No joke that I know an American bloke who hates socialism and is joining the military reserves because if he stays with them for 6 years they'll pay off his uni debt. But can't stand socialism.

Wanderer78 · 02-03-2019 11:18am

ArchXStanton wrote:

It seems to have turned into some predatory/monopoly type capitalism

Yea it has unfortunately, and I suspect if we don't do something about it quickly, we re gonna end up in serious trouble

El_Duderino 09 · 02-03-2019 11:24am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

ArchXStanton wrote:

It seems to have turned into some predatory/monopoly type capitalism

Yea it has unfortunately, and I suspect if we don't do something about it quickly, we re gonna end up in serious trouble

Isn't that the natural progression of capitalism? Taxing wealth is a Dirty concept these days. Isn't it natural that wealth will accumulate?

I don't see how compassion fits into capitalism.

Brian? · 02-03-2019 11:31am

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I think we're about to see that discussion thrashed out in the worst possible way in the next US presidential election campaign.

I also think people who do well out of capitalism take the socialist parts for granted. No joke that I know an American bloke who hates socialism and is joining the military reserves because if he stays with them for 6 years they'll pay off his uni debt. But can't stand socialism.

Every time it’s pointed out how high the standard of living in democratic socialist states is, the right leaning here about that it’s only possible because they exist in a capitalist society. They fail to make the logical leap that socialism puts the brakes on the worst parts of capitalism and helps create more a more equitable society.

Wanderer78 · 02-03-2019 11:32am

El_Duderino 09 wrote:

I think we're about to see that discussion thrashed out in the worst possible way in the next US presidential election campaign.

Being a proud lefty, I'm not even convinced of socialism, most, if not all ideologies have their merits and failures of course, but for the moment, I do think capitalism is the better one, I could be wrong of course, I have a funny feeling we may eventually have to abandon the use of both terms, both have become highly toxic.

Unfortunately I think you re right, the US elections is probably gonna be rotten, but I'm starting to become hopeful, many Americans have had enough, many are well informed and motivated for change, I think we re all waiting for countries such as America to make a leap forward in change, hopefully that happens before humans do human things, when things become desperate.

Brian? · 02-03-2019 11:32am

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Yea it has unfortunately, and I suspect if we don't do something about it quickly, we re gonna end up in serious trouble

Are you surprised at all?

Mountainsandh · 02-03-2019 2:14pm

If I understand JP right, he's not going to argue for all one or the other, rather that there should be a healthy balance between strong capitalism and a consistent dash of socialist forces tampering it all the while.

Unfortunately because we're only human, we can't maintain that healthy, happy equilibrium for long enough, so we tumble up or down to extremes, then spend years trying to recover... and so on.

El_Duderino 09 · 13-06-2019 8:35pm

Peterson is launching a new, subscription only site, which will avoid censorship at all costs. They pledge to only remove content when ordered to by court. So presumably well be hearing a lot about that when they're taken to court for some free publicity. He plans to call it thinkspot

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jun/13/jordan-peterson-launches-anti-censorship-site-thinkspot

If you've ever been on the existing free speech sites like GAB, there isn't really much discussion. It's more like racist diatribes about Muslims and liberals and women.

Peterson's back in the headlines anyway.

WrinklyNeck · 06-10-2019 10:07am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0rvuy5KpT8&t=

Zubeneschamali · 07-01-2020 2:25pm

Sadly (and I mean that, I am not poking fun) it appears that meat diet did not sort out Peterson's mental health after all, nor did he just need to stand up straight and clean his room.

He checked into rehab in September to try to kick a benzo addiction, and cancelled a November London 12 Rules show.

Notably from that article:He tried to quit cold-turkey over the summer

Tried and failed.

Will he re-evaluate his 12 Rules stuff?

xckjoo · 07-01-2020 2:39pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Sadly (and I mean that, I am not poking fun) it appears that meat diet did not sort out Peterson's mental health after all, nor did he just need to stand up straight and clean his room.

He checked into rehab in September to try to kick a benzo addiction, and cancelled a November London 12 Rules show.

Notably from that article:He tried to quit cold-turkey over the summer

Tried and failed.

Will he re-evaluate his 12 Rules stuff?

Better to get professional help with that kind of thing than wing it at home. IMO rehab is the responsible choice to make

Hande hoche! · 07-01-2020 2:45pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Sadly (and I mean that, I am not poking fun) it appears that meat diet did not sort out Peterson's mental health after all, nor did he just need to stand up straight and clean his room.

He checked into rehab in September to try to kick a benzo addiction, and cancelled a November London 12 Rules show.

Notably from that article:He tried to quit cold-turkey over the summer

Tried and failed.

Will he re-evaluate his 12 Rules stuff?

Time for a sequel, 13 rules...

Brian? · 07-01-2020 3:55pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Sadly (and I mean that, I am not poking fun) it appears that meat diet did not sort out Peterson's mental health after all, nor did he just need to stand up straight and clean his room.

He checked into rehab in September to try to kick a benzo addiction, and cancelled a November London 12 Rules show.

Notably from that article:He tried to quit cold-turkey over the summer

Tried and failed.

Will he re-evaluate his 12 Rules stuff?

Jesus, sounds horrible. Poor guy.

bnt · 07-01-2020 4:09pm

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Notably from that article:He tried to quit cold-turkey over the summer

Tried and failed.

Will he re-evaluate his 12 Rules stuff?

Not sure what you mean by that. He's never been an advocate of "tough it out" or "go it alone" for genuine mental health issues, and has stated that he has prescribed SSRIs etc. when he thought it was the best course for the patient. As a practising psychotherapist he's not any kind of rebel, the books etc. are for a more general audience than his patients, and even there he doesn't suggest people not get the help they need. He sought help himself with coping when his wife was seriously ill, and got was prescribed Valium (or similar) on medical advice, his daughter said.

El_Duderino 09 · 07-01-2020 4:18pm

bnt wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by that. He's never been an advocate of "tough it out" or "go it alone" for genuine mental health issues, and has stated that he has prescribed SSRIs etc. when he thought it was the best course for the patient. As a practising psychotherapist he's not any kind of rebel, the books etc. are for a more general audience than his patients, and even there he doesn't suggest people not get the help they need. He sought help himself with coping when his wife was seriously ill, and got was prescribed Valium (or similar) on medical advice, his daughter said.

Ah yeah, but he also advocated the all beef diet 'cure' which his daughter sells. He said it cured his depression, weight gain, anxiety etc. But he doesn't recommend the diet as he's jot an expert (phrased in the appropriate legal jargon to keep him in the clear).

His daughter sells the benefits of the beef only diet 'cure' for $70 per half hour which isn't an extortionate amount in and of itself. When you go sided she has absolutely no credentials sell diet advice except being Jordan Peterson's daughter and the diet is complete nonsense, then it becomes clear that it's pretty bad. JP has no problem promoting the 'cure' which is pretty bad human behaviour.

Even though it seems like a ripe opportunity for schadenfreude, I genuinely hope he's getting the treatment he needs. I also hope that he retracts the all beef diet nonsense when he's back on his feet.

Turquoise Hexagon Sun · 07-01-2020 5:45pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah yeah, but he also advocated the all beef diet 'cure' which his daughter sells. He said it cured his depression, weight gain, anxiety etc. But he doesn't recommend the diet as he's jot an expert (phrased in the appropriate legal jargon to keep him in the clear).

His daughter sells the benefits of the beef only diet 'cure' for $70 per half hour which isn't an extortionate amount in and of itself. When you go sided she has absolutely no credentials sell diet advice except being Jordan Peterson's daughter and the diet is complete nonsense, then it becomes clear that it's pretty bad. JP has no problem promoting the 'cure' which is pretty bad human behaviour.

Even though it seems like a ripe opportunity for schadenfreude, I genuinely hope he's getting the treatment he needs. I also hope that he retracts the all beef diet nonsense when he's back on his feet.

From what I took from him advocating that diet, he was really only saying it worked for him and his daughter. Everyone's genetic make-up is different and we have different microbiomes, and he pointed that out. I don't think he was trying to "sell it." He just pointed out that after his daughter trying everything they knew, that's what worked for them. But I suppose his daughter is trying to sell it. Perhaps when you have something that works for you and you want to share it? And get paid too, why not?

I think people looking to copy someone else's diet where evidence is showing our gut microbiome's are unqiuely different, are naiive, if not desperate. Yes, we know nutrition and the benefits of certain foods over others but that doesn't mean fringe carnivore diets that work with one or two people of similar genetics (ie. the Petersons) will work with other people and their unique microbiomes.

El_Duderino 09 · 07-01-2020 7:24pm

Turquoise Hexagon Sun wrote: »

From what I took from him advocating that diet, he was really only saying it worked for him and his daughter. Everyone's genetic make-up is different and we have different microbiomes, and he pointed that out. I don't think he was trying to "sell it." He just pointed out that after his daughter trying everything they knew, that's what worked for them. But I suppose his daughter is trying to sell it. Perhaps when you have something that works for you and you want to share it? And get paid too, why not?

I think people looking to copy someone else's diet where evidence is showing our gut microbiome's are unqiuely different, are naiive, if not desperate. Yes, we know nutrition and the benefits of certain foods over others but that doesn't mean fringe carnivore diets that work with one or two people of similar genetics (ie. the Petersons) will work with other people and their unique microbiomes.

Right and there's absolutely no reason to think he actually did the diet except the fact that he says he did it. I think it's far more likely he's just promoting his daughter's business selling the beef only diet than he actually did it and it's a 'cure' for depression.

Mental health and depression is actually pretty serious in my opinion. Cashing in because his status is such that he can sell anything, is pretty bad. Don't you agree?

MrKingsley · 07-01-2020 7:44pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Right and there's absolutely no reason to think he actually did the diet except the fact that he says he did it. I think it's far more likely he's just promoting his daughter's business selling the beef only diet than he actually did it and it's a 'cure' for depression.

Mental health and depression is actually pretty serious in my opinion. Cashing in because his status is such that he can sell anything, is pretty bad. Don't you agree?

He is a clinical psychologist who has suffered with depression for his entire adult life. I really do not think he would be “cashing in” on the back of the illness

ILoveYourVibes · 07-01-2020 8:10pm

Brian? wrote: »

Every time it’s pointed out how high the standard of living in democratic socialist states is, the right leaning here about that it’s only possible because they exist in a capitalist society. .

That's true though.

They fail to make the logical leap that socialism puts the brakes on the worst parts of capitalism and helps create more a more equitable society

Capitalism doesn't need the brakes put on it corruption does. Socialism's true cause should be appropriate and effective taxation to provide collective public services at the highest level and quality. The idea capitalism needs the brakes on is silly. It wasn't capitalism that caused the crash ..it was corruption.

To suggest capitalism needs brakes is to suggest the people who caused the crash were innocent. They weren't. It also suggests that to be socialist you need to be poor. I am sorry but i aspire to be as rich as possible as fast as possible no brakes required. That doesn't make me any less of a socialist than anyone else. It just depends on how you see socialism.

Jordan Peterson interview on C4

Comments