|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 15, 2020 21:32:56 GMT
It seems a little goofy to use the word "fan" here, but I sure do like him. For me, he is the supreme combination of intelligence and compassion. I need to listen to him on a daily basis. He also loves Carl Jung, who was eons ahead of Signing Freud.
|
|
autumn
Junior Member
@autumn
Posts: 4,544
Likes: 3,635
|
Post by autumn on Sept 15, 2020 21:41:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 15, 2020 21:41:34 GMT
Okay, I don't even know what that means. Does the waving tail mean you like him? |
|
autumn
Junior Member
@autumn
Posts: 4,544
Likes: 3,635
|
Post by autumn on Sept 15, 2020 21:42:39 GMT
Okay, I don't even know what that means. That's me waving. You know, raising my arm in the air as if to say, "yes, here, I'm a fan!" You know?
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 15, 2020 21:43:40 GMT
Okay, I don't even know what that means. That's me waving. You know, raising my arm in the air as if to say, "yes, here, I'm a fan!" You know? Ahhhh.... nice! |
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Sept 15, 2020 21:44:08 GMT
He seems to be an idol to those who like seeing people get DESTROYED! on YouTube.  |
|
senan90
Junior Member
@senan90
Posts: 1,452
Likes: 546
|
Post by senan90 on Sept 15, 2020 23:32:29 GMT
“Dr Peterson, what’s your favorite color?”
“Well that depends on what you mean by favorite. And it also depends on what you mean by color. This is a very difficult question. One must acknowledge the underlying verisimilitude that is irrevocably nested within a multi-layered metaphysical substrate that many people fundamentally conflate with their ideological presuppositions with no uncertain irregularity, and not dissimilar to Jung’s extrapolation of the archetypal and axiomatic juxtaposition of Raskolnikov’s Neo-Marxist existential nihilism…
With that said... I've written an 800 page book on the subject which unpacks the uninformative imitations with unmitigated precision, both biologically and metaphysically".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2020 23:55:30 GMT
I've heard him referred to as the "stupid person's smart guy", which is an apt descriptor
If you take him at face value, he seems well-informed, erudite, and convincing. If you actually know about the subjects he's speaking about, you start to see all the holes in his reasoning and how often he equivocates.
He's one tier above a motivational speaker who knows the secret to making you rich.
|
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Sept 16, 2020 0:59:17 GMT
Sometimes, sometimes not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 1:12:53 GMT
No. I started reading his book and he's talking about lobsters and how they have a hierarchy and alpha lobsters which just reminds me of everything I hate about this world so I stopped reading his 12 rules for living, what a pretentious title
|
|
autumn
Junior Member
@autumn
Posts: 4,544
Likes: 3,635
|
Post by autumn on Sept 16, 2020 20:15:05 GMT
No. I started reading his book and he's talking about lobsters and how they have a hierarchy and alpha lobsters which just reminds me of everything I hate about this world so I stopped reading his 12 rules for living, what a pretentious title Oh bullpatties. He explains everything based on merit and achievements, not "entitlement" which is the way we're headed right now in society. There's an entitlement rich society developing that wants everything for free, and Jordan talks about hierarchy for security and skill so we earn our places in life. What's so pretentious about that? Instead we are giving out degrees in gender studies and filling race-based or gender-based quota-filled jobs that have nothing to do with if they're qualified to do their job adeptly. You sincerely see nothing wrong with this picture? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Feologild Oakes on Sept 16, 2020 20:29:45 GMT
I am indifferent to him.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 16, 2020 21:06:46 GMT
I've heard him referred to as the "stupid person's smart guy", which is an apt descriptor If you take him at face value, he seems well-informed, erudite, and convincing. If you actually know about the subjects he's speaking about, you start to see all the holes in his reasoning and how often he equivocates. He's one tier above a motivational speaker who knows the secret to making you rich. I wouldn't say he equivocates. He's just very able to see several sides to a situation. I didn't find any flaws in his logic regarding the newly appointed pronouns. He said that if the individual/student came up to him and asked him if he would address the person by their gender preferred pronoun and was not rude or demanding about it, he would have no problem complying. It was when people got all arrogant and demanding about it that he didn't feel like obliging them. If you can point out any flaw here, I would appreciate hearing it. One thing i love about Jordan Peterson is he does not overcomplicate issues. I find him very unpretentious. I also love how he is not going to be swayed that masculinity and femininity are not important and relevant distinctions. And if he can motivate people (particularly males) to want to better themselves and have more self-confidence, then the proof is in the pudding. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 21:14:35 GMT
I've heard him referred to as the "stupid person's smart guy", which is an apt descriptor If you take him at face value, he seems well-informed, erudite, and convincing. If you actually know about the subjects he's speaking about, you start to see all the holes in his reasoning and how often he equivocates. He's one tier above a motivational speaker who knows the secret to making you rich. I wouldn't say he equivocates. He's just very able to see several sides to a situation. I didn't find any flaws in his logic regarding the newly appointed pronouns. He said that if the individual/student came up to him and asked him if he would address the person by their gender preferred pronoun and was not rude or demanding about it, he would have no problem complying. It was when people got all arrogant and demanding about it that he didn't feel like obliging them. If you can point out any flaw here, I would appreciate hearing it. One thing i love about Jordan Peterson is he does not overcomplicate issues. I find him very unpretentious. I also love how he is not going to be swayed that masculinity and femininity are not important and relevant distinctions. And if he can motivate people (particularly males) to want to better themselves and have more self-confidence, then the proof is in the pudding. Certainly, I can point out his flaw. He's of the opinion here that respect should be shown only to those who show respect. What ultimately does that lead to? Conflict. If you're disrespectful towards me for whatever reason-- maybe you've had a bad day, maybe you just don't like the cut of my jib-- under Peterson's philosophy, I should return that disrespect. "You've been rude to me so I'm going to be rude right back. You'll take the medicine you spoon out." What sort of interpersonal interaction does that form? One which is beneficial? Or one which breeds conflict? You'd surely agree it is better when we work together. That's what civilization is built on. So how does it help to fuel conflict rather than to work out of it, in your opinion?
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 16, 2020 21:25:12 GMT
I wouldn't say he equivocates. He's just very able to see several sides to a situation. I didn't find any flaws in his logic regarding the newly appointed pronouns. He said that if the individual/student came up to him and asked him if he would address the person by their gender preferred pronoun and was not rude or demanding about it, he would have no problem complying. It was when people got all arrogant and demanding about it that he didn't feel like obliging them. If you can point out any flaw here, I would appreciate hearing it. One thing i love about Jordan Peterson is he does not overcomplicate issues. I find him very unpretentious. I also love how he is not going to be swayed that masculinity and femininity are not important and relevant distinctions. And if he can motivate people (particularly males) to want to better themselves and have more self-confidence, then the proof is in the pudding. Certainly, I can point out his flaw. He's of the opinion here that respect should be shown only to those who show respect. What ultimately does that lead to? Conflict. If you're disrespectful towards me for whatever reason-- maybe you've had a bad day, maybe you just don't like the cut of my jib-- under Peterson's philosophy, I should return that disrespect. "You've been rude to me so I'm going to be rude right back. You'll take the medicine you spoon out." What sort of interpersonal interaction does that form? One which is beneficial? Or one which breeds conflict? You'd surely agree it is better when we work together. That's what civilization is built on. So how does it help to fuel conflict rather than to work out of it, in your opinion? well, see I guess that's it then because i would not view that attitude about respect to be flawed. Or else I'm not understand something here. I mean I understand the occasional hard day and I would think that Peterson would also. But why would you go out of your way to respect somebody who didn't respect you? I don't necessarily think that a person should return hate with hate, but I never picked up on anything JP said where he thought so, either. I find the man to be about as noble as it gets. And I also think that everybody needs their heroes. Just out of curiosity, who do you find inspiring? And thank you for responding with some detail! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 21:32:00 GMT
Certainly, I can point out his flaw. He's of the opinion here that respect should be shown only to those who show respect. What ultimately does that lead to? Conflict. If you're disrespectful towards me for whatever reason-- maybe you've had a bad day, maybe you just don't like the cut of my jib-- under Peterson's philosophy, I should return that disrespect. "You've been rude to me so I'm going to be rude right back. You'll take the medicine you spoon out." What sort of interpersonal interaction does that form? One which is beneficial? Or one which breeds conflict? You'd surely agree it is better when we work together. That's what civilization is built on. So how does it help to fuel conflict rather than to work out of it, in your opinion? well, see I guess that's it then because i would not view that attitude about respect to be flawed. Or else I'm not understand something here. I mean I understand the occasional hard day and I would think that Peterson would also. But why would you go out of your way to respect somebody who didn't respect you? I don't necessarily think that a person should return hate with hate, but I never picked up on anything JP said where he thought so, either. I find the man to be about as noble as I come. And I also think that everybody needs their heroes. Just out of curiosity, who do you find inspiring? You are arguing that hate should be returned with hate, though, and so is Peterson. What is the end goal of treating disrespect with disrespect? Or perhaps to put it more bluntly, what is the end result of an eye for an eye? Who do I find inspiring? My dear, elderly mother-- a tough lady as they come to raise me at the very least. This guy I know who had his arm blown off in Afghanistan but still has an authentic smile. A guy I know who is a train-hopping vagabond who keeps a piano in an alley here and can play any song you can think of naming. Many more, I'm sure, but no need going down the whole list. I don't pay much attention to those who tell me how to live. I pay attention to those who do live.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 16, 2020 21:34:37 GMT
I wouldn't say he equivocates. He's just very able to see several sides to a situation. I didn't find any flaws in his logic regarding the newly appointed pronouns. He said that if the individual/student came up to him and asked him if he would address the person by their gender preferred pronoun and was not rude or demanding about it, he would have no problem complying. It was when people got all arrogant and demanding about it that he didn't feel like obliging them. If you can point out any flaw here, I would appreciate hearing it. One thing i love about Jordan Peterson is he does not overcomplicate issues. I find him very unpretentious. I also love how he is not going to be swayed that masculinity and femininity are not important and relevant distinctions. And if he can motivate people (particularly males) to want to better themselves and have more self-confidence, then the proof is in the pudding. Certainly, I can point out his flaw. He's of the opinion here that respect should be shown only to those who show respect. What ultimately does that lead to? Conflict. If you're disrespectful towards me for whatever reason-- maybe you've had a bad day, maybe you just don't like the cut of my jib-- under Peterson's philosophy, I should return that disrespect. "You've been rude to me so I'm going to be rude right back. You'll take the medicine you spoon out." What sort of interpersonal interaction does that form? One which is beneficial? Or one which breeds conflict? You'd surely agree it is better when we work together. That's what civilization is built on. So how does it help to fuel conflict rather than to work out of it, in your opinion? No, I don't think a fight-fight interaction is going to be beneficial and turning the other cheek is certainly admirable (and noble, I would say), but Peterson's point seems to be that males need self-confidence and be able to stand up straight up straight and forge their own way. I am attracted to this. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2020 21:35:37 GMT
Certainly, I can point out his flaw. He's of the opinion here that respect should be shown only to those who show respect. What ultimately does that lead to? Conflict. If you're disrespectful towards me for whatever reason-- maybe you've had a bad day, maybe you just don't like the cut of my jib-- under Peterson's philosophy, I should return that disrespect. "You've been rude to me so I'm going to be rude right back. You'll take the medicine you spoon out." What sort of interpersonal interaction does that form? One which is beneficial? Or one which breeds conflict? You'd surely agree it is better when we work together. That's what civilization is built on. So how does it help to fuel conflict rather than to work out of it, in your opinion? No, I don't think a fight-fight interaction is going to be beneficial and turning the other cheek is certainly admirable (and noble, I would say), but Peterson's point seems to be that males need self-confidence and be able to stand up straight up straight and forge their own way. I am attracted to this. Self-confidence is the ability to shrug off disrespect; not to escalate it. Unless it's funny.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 16, 2020 21:41:29 GMT
well, see I guess that's it then because i would not view that attitude about respect to be flawed. Or else I'm not understand something here. I mean I understand the occasional hard day and I would think that Peterson would also. But why would you go out of your way to respect somebody who didn't respect you? I don't necessarily think that a person should return hate with hate, but I never picked up on anything JP said where he thought so, either. I find the man to be about as noble as I come. And I also think that everybody needs their heroes. Just out of curiosity, who do you find inspiring? You are arguing that hate should be returned with hate, though, and so is Peterson. What is the end goal of treating disrespect with disrespect? Or perhaps to put it more bluntly, what is the end result of an eye for an eye? Who do I find inspiring? My dear, elderly mother-- a tough lady as they come to raise me at the very least. This guy I know who had his arm blown off in Afghanistan but still has an authentic smile. A guy I know who is a train-hopping vagabond who keeps a piano in an alley here and can play any song you can think of naming. Many more, I'm sure, but no need going down the whole list. I don't pay much attention to those who tell me how to live. I pay attention to those who do live. Those all sound like very inspiring people. Something else that should be given consideration, I think, is that there are those of us who need to be shown the way. You said all those great things about your mother. You're lucky for that and I know that you know it. But some of us got dealt parents who were less than stable. And these people are going to be the kind of people who need role models and that's what JP is for a lot of people. And I'm not a hateful person by nature - at all - but I can admit to having to overcome a victim mentality that was nurtured in our household. And the fact that Jordan Peterson makes me want to be the opposite of a victim is nothing short of a miracle. I didn't see that one coming. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Sept 16, 2020 21:46:49 GMT
No, I don't think a fight-fight interaction is going to be beneficial and turning the other cheek is certainly admirable (and noble, I would say), but Peterson's point seems to be that males need self-confidence and be able to stand up straight up straight and forge their own way. I am attracted to this. Self-confidence is the ability to shrug off disrespect; not to escalate it. Unless it's funny. I don't disagree with what you just said (especially the part about if something's funny), but it's not really what I was talking about. There are all sorts of viable ways of living one's life, but when I talk about self-confidence I am saying that in order to successfully achieve a goal in life, you must have the faith in yourself that you can do it and that's what I get from Jordan Peterson. On top of everything else, the man is sincere to the degree of poignancy. I feel it coming off him. I can't help but feel that this is somebody who deeply cares about other people. |
|
