Untitled topic • Hacker News Board

Re: undefined

#11

Post by api » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:24 AM UTC

gdix wrote: post #9

This post is rocketing down the list. It was number 1 just 10 minutes or so ago, then it went to 6, now it's 36. Is that normal or is this post being moderated or brigaded? edit: And now it's gone completely from the list with 74 points... edit 2: Ok now it's back... wtf mods make up your mind about what we're allowed to see edit 3: All the comments in this thread are getting brigaded down.

Alt-right vs. "SJW" left posts get flagged around here. Usually I agree and one of the reasons I hang around here is to stay away from that whole scorpion fight.

Personally I view both as two sides of the same coin. Both the alt-right and the social justice left are totalitarian, intolerant, and intellectually shallow. I find their argumentative styles, emotional reactivity, and style of engagement with the larger culture to be strikingly similar to the point that I see them as different manifestations of some underlying social or psychological disorder.

I actually used "vouch" on this one, which I rarely do, because it's interesting and a bit more substantial than the usual fare.

Re: undefined

#12

Post by brucephillips » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:25 AM UTC

The difference between critical theory (and postmodernism generally) and social justice is the belief in universal values. Believers in postmodernism don't accept universal values. They see every conflict as a power struggle, devoid of moral truth.

Broadly speaking, social justice advocates, or at least those described in the article, and caricatured by the Channel 4 interview, do have a universal value, namely equality of outcome.

The truly destructive force, again shown in that interview, is that logic is not universally valued. If equality of outcome can be obtained while posturing and arguing strawmen, then go for it.

Re: undefined

#13

Post by api » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:30 AM UTC

psyc wrote: post #5

I watched this interview the other day. It was infuriating. I mean, you expect today's journalists to be provocative, sure. But this interviewer relentlessly , and in the most hostile manner, misrepresented Peterson, put words in his mouth, and made sideways accusations. I don't know who she is, but if she's supposed to be any kind of serious journalist at all, she deserves to be called out for this. Most striking to…

I agree that the interview is awful, but consider what an interview with an advocate of social justice and equality would be like if it were given by one of many popular alt-right Youtubers.

There are some incredibly hot button emotional issues under the surface here. It's very hard for most people to talk about any of this without going nuts.

Re: undefined

#14

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

gdix wrote: post #9

This post is rocketing down the list. It was number 1 just 10 minutes or so ago, then it went to 6, now it's 36. Is that normal or is this post being moderated or brigaded? edit: And now it's gone completely from the list with 74 points... edit 2: Ok now it's back... wtf mods make up your mind about what we're allowed to see edit 3: All the comments in this thread are getting brigaded down.

[deleted]

Re: undefined

#15

Post by brucephillips » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

api wrote: post #11

gdix wrote: post #9

This post is rocketing down the list. It was number 1 just 10 minutes or so ago, then it went to 6, now it's 36. Is that normal or is this post being moderated or brigaded? edit: And now it's gone completely from the list with 74 points... edit 2: Ok now it's back... wtf mods make up your mind about what we're allowed to see edit 3: All the comments in this thread are getting brigaded down.

Alt-right vs. "SJW" left posts get flagged around here. Usually I agree and one of the reasons I hang around here is to stay away from that whole scorpion fight. Personally I view both as two sides of the same coin. Both the alt-right and the social justice left are totalitarian, intolerant, and intellectually shallow. I find their argumentative styles, emotional reactivity, and style of engagement with the larger cu…

Though Peterson is often characterized as alt-right, I think that's quite unfair. He's often grossly mistaken about things, but doesn't believe in bigotry, nationalism, etc..

Re: undefined

#16

Post by hyperdunc » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:31 AM UTC

api wrote: post #11

gdix wrote: post #9

This post is rocketing down the list. It was number 1 just 10 minutes or so ago, then it went to 6, now it's 36. Is that normal or is this post being moderated or brigaded? edit: And now it's gone completely from the list with 74 points... edit 2: Ok now it's back... wtf mods make up your mind about what we're allowed to see edit 3: All the comments in this thread are getting brigaded down.

Alt-right vs. "SJW" left posts get flagged around here. Usually I agree and one of the reasons I hang around here is to stay away from that whole scorpion fight. Personally I view both as two sides of the same coin. Both the alt-right and the social justice left are totalitarian, intolerant, and intellectually shallow. I find their argumentative styles, emotional reactivity, and style of engagement with the larger cu…

There are no arguments or talking points in the interview that are specific to the collectivist alt-right. Peterson is clearly an anti-authoritarian individualist.

Re: undefined

#17

Post by api » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:33 AM UTC

brucephillips wrote: post #15

api wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alt-right vs. "SJW" left posts get flagged around here. Usually I agree and one of the reasons I hang around here is to stay away from that whole scorpion fight. Personally I view both as two sides of the same coin. Both the alt-right and the social justice left are totalitarian, intolerant, and intellectually shallow. I find their argumentative styles, emotional reactivity, and style of engagement with the larger cu…

Though Peterson is often characterized as alt-right, I think that's quite unfair. He's often grossly mistaken about things, but doesn't believe in bigotry, nationalism, etc..

I'm not sure if he makes the leap, but it's not hard to go from his soft biological determinism to "well then this is the way things should be." For example if women "don't want tough careers" then it follows that claims of discrimination by women can be dismissed as without merit.

I do definitely see him as an apologist for aspects of the status quo. That being said that does not mean I'm a fan of all his detractors. There's a totalitarian strain of liberalism I don't much like either.

Also... his Twitter feed contains enough alt-right material for me to see him as at least sympathetic.

Re: undefined

#18

Post by brucephillips » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:36 AM UTC

api wrote: post #17

brucephillips wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Though Peterson is often characterized as alt-right, I think that's quite unfair. He's often grossly mistaken about things, but doesn't believe in bigotry, nationalism, etc..

I'm not sure if he makes the leap, but it's not hard to go from his soft biological determinism to "well then this is the way things should be." For example if women "don't want tough careers" then it follows that claims of discrimination by women can be dismissed as without merit. I do definitely see him as an apologist for aspects of the status quo. That being said that does not mean I'm a fan of all his detractors…

I haven't seen his twitter feed, granted.

To your first point, to make that leap would be to conflate "is" and "ought". Yes, many people do make that error, but you can't accuse him of doing it when others do.

Re: undefined

#19

Post by psyc » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:36 AM UTC

api wrote: post #13

psyc wrote: post #5

I watched this interview the other day. It was infuriating. I mean, you expect today's journalists to be provocative, sure. But this interviewer relentlessly , and in the most hostile manner, misrepresented Peterson, put words in his mouth, and made sideways accusations. I don't know who she is, but if she's supposed to be any kind of serious journalist at all, she deserves to be called out for this. Most striking to…

I agree that the interview is awful, but consider what an interview with an advocate of social justice and equality would be like if it were given by one of many popular alt-right Youtubers. There are some incredibly hot button emotional issues under the surface here. It's very hard for most people to talk about any of this without going nuts.

Rather, imagine if it were given by Tucker Carlson. I seriously doubt it would be quite like this. This is just totally unprofessional.

Re: undefined

#20

Post by api » Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 1:38 AM UTC

brucephillips wrote: post #18

api wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if he makes the leap, but it's not hard to go from his soft biological determinism to "well then this is the way things should be." For example if women "don't want tough careers" then it follows that claims of discrimination by women can be dismissed as without merit. I do definitely see him as an apologist for aspects of the status quo. That being said that does not mean I'm a fan of all his detractors…

I haven't seen his twitter feed, granted. To your first point, to make that leap would be to conflate "is" and "ought". Yes, many people do make that error, but you can't accuse him of doing it when others do.

The is/ought issue is one of the core philosophical issues under the surface here. It goes to the heart of what it means to be a liberal (broadly defined) or a conservative.

To be a conservative is to tend toward deriving "ought" from "is," or at least skepticism toward attempts to change the status quo.