The way he talks about the meanings of the stories of the bible make me think he is a perfect fit for the Higherside. There is also his recent health battles that saw him fleeing to Russia to seek treatment. I have a little bias, he also grew up in the berta prairies.
Dr. Jordan B Peterson
- Thread starter carltheheir
- Start date
-
Hey Guest !
Welcome to the THC+ Forums. To participate you need to be, or at some point have been, a THC+ Member. If that's you, your THC+ Username is already here, but you need to establish a separate password for the forums, since access doesn't rely on your THC+ account being active. Just click the "Forgot Password" link and follow the prompts. Thanks and enjoy!
I love this suggestion. Though it might be difficult now that he blew right up and has greatly scaled back his media appearances.
Peterson is mediocre at best and fraudulent at worst. I should be surprised he is even a professor, but it explains a great deal regarding why we find ourselves where we do in 2020.
Last edited:
I see this sort of thing a lot and am always curious about where exactly it comes from. I’m not looking for an argument but genuinely interested as I’ve listened to all your shows with Greg and generally appreciated your insights. Any chance you could enlighten me on Peterson’s fraud and mediocrity?
There are many critiques of Peterson out there but the main points that are of interest are:
- Peterson is a religious fundamentalist in ideology, he couches this in intellectual terminology.
- Peterson's political, historical, and economic arguments are incorrect as the "facts" he uses are proven false with the most cursory verification. An enormous case in point is the discrepancy between the pronoun policy he supposedly railed against to gain prominence and the actual letter of that law being relegated to workplace discrimination.
- Peterson's books are all self-help books whose central message is "clean up your life" and actively ignores any form of systematic repression or need for social support.
- The above message is undermined by Peterson's need for drug rehab for previously prescribed drugs a year ago.
- Peterson is a money-grubbing shill, I doubt he would ever appear on THC without a payday.
Well, I definitely see the shadiness of the ‘fellowship’, though comparing it to Trump U is a bit of a stretch. Otherwise, these look to be the same tired ideological differences that don’t really do much to refute any actual arguments or ideas he so much as rail against a rising interest in what are largely center-right intellectuals being framed as alt-right figureheads. It would explain the charge of mediocrity for certain but doesn’t do much to prove blatant fraud or unfitness for a professorship. It’s hard to accuse a guy of being an evil money hungry monster when everyone making these clickbait, gotcha videos aimed at popular figures who inevitably draw in viewers by name recognition include links to a Patreon and another potential donation source, while on the platform of a gentleman who has repeatedly been falsely accused of the same. I totally understand not liking the politics involved but hardly think that precludes him as being a wishlist guest for somebody else. I appreciate the response but I think we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
The dude admits his definition of truth stems from religion and everything spirals as circular logic from there. If you simply choose to believe things because you want to feel free to listen to him. Just don't be surprised when your conception and reality don't align. It's a little unclear from the scripture if Jesus cleaned his room.
I apologize if I caused you any offense by questioning you or by not being convinced by the links you provided- I don’t think it’s necessary to rub against the waters of ad hominem by implying my view of reality is skewed. I’m open to listen to and hear from anybody, especially individuals whose ideologies I don’t fully agree with. I should hope that as someone who, if I remember correctly, was doing some actual solid work and research in the alternative community you wouldn’t throw accusations of fraud or mental inefficiency around lightly. Which is why I asked you specifically- I’ve listened to you speak and take you to be a reasonable and highly intelligent individual. I’ve delved into to quite a lot of Peterson’s work and interviews and most of the criticisms that are out there. At the end of the day they seem to be almost exclusively ideological - coming from the Left and the Right. The Right shares your critique of his faith, asserting that he is a false Christian and is manipulating the faith by lumping it in and tying it to other myths from throughout the world which he very often does. I myself am not nor have ever been a Christian, but I don’t see the sense of writing someone off who was or is of that or any background if their philosophies have some semblance of logic. I legitimately thought maybe you had come across something solid that I had not.
Obviously most of us here have a helluva lot of common interest and crossover, I don’t want a battle over Peterson, I’ve got no skin in that game. I just want civil conversation where maybe we don’t see exactly eye to eye without lowering ourselves to thinly veiled insults. There’s enough of that out there man. I love your work and look forward to hearing you again someday on THC
I don't find hand-waving away legitimate arguments with polite references to ideology very convincing. Calling me an ideologue doesn't refute my argument, just like getting the last word doesn't win an argument.
Peterson explicitly stated that he uses his religious understanding as the foundation of his definition of truth, which means he is starting from a conclusion and shoring up his argument from there. This is fundamentalist rather than logical thinking, using academic language doesn't change this fact. This is the root of the problem with Peterson. He states ideology as fact and the goes from there, most of what he cites as "facts" are misrepresentations masquerading as truth. Peterson is literally a self-disclosed ideologue. This is why I said what I said in the beginning, I've provided plenty of evidence to show this, I'm calling the horse dead on my end.
And yes, if you subscribe to fundamentalist philosophy your view of reality is going to be heavily skewed because you are actively cultivating confirmation bias. Until framed against the backdrop of a gaslit hellscape this was not a controversial stance to take.
Peterson explicitly stated that he uses his religious understanding as the foundation of his definition of truth, which means he is starting from a conclusion and shoring up his argument from there. This is fundamentalist rather than logical thinking, using academic language doesn't change this fact. This is the root of the problem with Peterson. He states ideology as fact and the goes from there, most of what he cites as "facts" are misrepresentations masquerading as truth. Peterson is literally a self-disclosed ideologue. This is why I said what I said in the beginning, I've provided plenty of evidence to show this, I'm calling the horse dead on my end.
And yes, if you subscribe to fundamentalist philosophy your view of reality is going to be heavily skewed because you are actively cultivating confirmation bias. Until framed against the backdrop of a gaslit hellscape this was not a controversial stance to take.
Yes I have two votes for this in my household. And I’ve thought this too! Since Greg likes him maybe he’s reached out in the past, but he should keep trying if that’s the case! I bet they’d both really enjoy that convo. And so would we!
> Peterson explicitly stated that he uses his religious understanding as the foundation of his definition of truth,
He also states that he came to that approach through his study of biology, psychology, myth etc. So it's not like he's a throwaway standard apologist.
Either way, it would be interesting to see Carlwood take a stab at him. I don't care if the guests are right or wrong. I just like interesting conversations. And Peterson on THC is almost certain to be interesting. I'd like to see him proded more on his familiarity with Jung and on his knowledge of soviet propaganda tactics. He has a deep understanding of the power of story. He's also talked about experiences/encounters he's had that would be classified as paranormal contact by the THC audience. He talked about these more openly when he first started getting some attention. But when the Cathy Newman thing happened he clamped down and got a bit more "Academically correct". Assuming he would go on THC, I figure that would be because buzz around him has reduced or he's old as fuck and doesn't give a shit anymore. I'd like to hear him go on completely uncensored rants and raves.
He also states that he came to that approach through his study of biology, psychology, myth etc. So it's not like he's a throwaway standard apologist.
Either way, it would be interesting to see Carlwood take a stab at him. I don't care if the guests are right or wrong. I just like interesting conversations. And Peterson on THC is almost certain to be interesting. I'd like to see him proded more on his familiarity with Jung and on his knowledge of soviet propaganda tactics. He has a deep understanding of the power of story. He's also talked about experiences/encounters he's had that would be classified as paranormal contact by the THC audience. He talked about these more openly when he first started getting some attention. But when the Cathy Newman thing happened he clamped down and got a bit more "Academically correct". Assuming he would go on THC, I figure that would be because buzz around him has reduced or he's old as fuck and doesn't give a shit anymore. I'd like to hear him go on completely uncensored rants and raves.