Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: undefined

#41

Post by quantumofmalice »

Jach wrote: post #40
quantumofmalice wrote: post #36

I have become effectively alt-right (it is complicated, but for HN purposes it suffices), from a libertarian conservative, in the last two years, specifically because of behavior like that of this interviewer. I no longer think it is possible to engage in dialog with people who think dialog is not possible. The punch-a-nazi meme, its acceptance across my social circles (including HN), the our-violence-is-speech-their…

Would this not be analogous to becoming an atheist just because you don't like some of the practitioners of your faith? Or maybe another related faith? What do you see as the way forward if dialog can't happen?

> What do you see as the way forward if dialog can't happen?

Peaceful separation is my hope. But it is a faint hope.

Re: undefined

#42

Post by quantumofmalice »

jules wrote: post #27
throwaway1748 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This interview really demonstrates the style of argumentation you see around these topics, just dialed up to 11. Practitioners of this form of argument intentionally mis-represent the other side to form a strawman argument. This works exceptionally well on Twitter, where someone quote-tweets their adversary, intentionally warping their words with the intention to shame. Some people have called this tactic "dunking on…

I don't think that tactic works poorly in that format at all, it's just that this person is incredibly good at defending against it. Very few people could withstand such an interview.

Exactly. This tactic breaks all but maybe a thousand people in the world. I wouldn't have lasted two minutes, I would have just blown up at her and embarrassed myself.

We are very lucky to have Jordan Peterson, one of those very few people, to speak for free speech.

Re: undefined

#43

Post by Yetanfou »

harshreality wrote: post #28

Threads like this getting buried on HN are a symptom of the ideological intolerance and echo-chamber problems that lead to people like the interviewer never having encountered Peterson's ideas before.

The solution to that problem can be found in accessing HN through the RSS feed. This way you get to see everything that is posted (to the feed) without the bias effect of the high-and-low game of the front page ranking.

This actually goes for all news, not just HN. Accessing it through a feed reader makes it possible to see other interesting behaviour, e.g. news outlets quickly correcting article headings or actually deleting articles. It shows you the headings in the order of publication and leaves any ranking up to you.

Of course this only works as long as news outlets publish an RSS (or Atom) stream and as long as that stream is not censored.

Re: undefined

#44

Post by dennisgorelik »

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…

Cathy Newman (the journalist) is putting all her efforts to make that interview interesting and to present Jordan Peterson views. That is why she is trying to make it controversial and tries to present most likely misinterpretations of Peterson's position.

These misinterpretations allow Peterson clearly state what his position is and what it is not.

I think Cathy Newman did a good job with that interview. She could do it even better if she was a little bit less aggressive with interrupting Peterson. She still had to interrupt him though in order to maintain good interview pace (but interrupt a little bit less).

Note that most likely Cathy Newman finds Peterson's views on that topic - interesting. That is why she invited him to do that interview and promote his book.

Re: undefined

#45

Post by dennisgorelik »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #29
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…

Yep. The interviewer's style is something akin to this: Peterson: "Since they are human beings, women are mortal." Interviewer: "So you're saying that all women should be murdered." That is only a slight exaggeration of what she was doing. He would say something, then she would respond with "So you're saying...(some hot-button statement totally unrelated to what he actually said)". I give him a lot of credit for rema…

Cathy Newman allowed Peterson to answer to all of her intentional misinterpretations.

Peterson clearly enjoyed that intellectually challenging interview.

Re: undefined

#46

Post by vixen99 »

dennisgorelik wrote: post #44
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…

Cathy Newman (the journalist) is putting all her efforts to make that interview interesting and to present Jordan Peterson views. That is why she is trying to make it controversial and tries to present most likely misinterpretations of Peterson's position. These misinterpretations allow Peterson clearly state what his position is and what it is not. I think Cathy Newman did a good job with that interview. She could d…

Your view - fair enough but seems to me she gave every indication that for her, Peterson's views were infuriating and initially, an easy target for demolition. The interview was a lousy job thanks to the fixed agenda she brought with her. Newman just couldn't get her head round the 9% pay gap conundrum and ignored JP's explanation which is obvious to anyone who thinks about it.

Re: undefined

#47

Post by SnowProblem »

raguuu wrote: post #3

I can tell you that the tactics used by so called justice seekers are exactly the same we had in my dear soviet union. I don't know where it is heading but because America decides the course if the western civilization, I feel uncomfortable. Peterson is doing great work. I hope he can handle the pressure.

Can you expand on this at all? Your comment fascinated me, and I’m now very curious about what the climate was like in the Soviet Union. Any book or movie recommendations?

Re: undefined

#48

Post by vixen99 »

ecdavis wrote: post #35

Somewhere I saw Jordan Peterson saying that he spends a lot of time examining his arguments from all angles and trying to find fault with them. Many arguments we see in modern discourse are little more than a train of thought that sounds good but hasn't seen much scrutiny[0]. I've certainly been guilty of making such arguments, myself (some probably on this website). If I can make the comparison to software, it's lik…

Disappointed by what? The serotonin idea is not some kooky idea thought up by Peterson; it has massive amounts of evidential backing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2612120/ https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110915102917.h... https://www.cliniciansbrief.com/article/canine-aggression-li... http://caspar.bgsu.edu/~courses/Reading/Papers/1997EdwKra.pd...

Re: undefined

#49

Post by ecdavis »

vixen99 wrote: post #48
ecdavis wrote: post #35

Somewhere I saw Jordan Peterson saying that he spends a lot of time examining his arguments from all angles and trying to find fault with them. Many arguments we see in modern discourse are little more than a train of thought that sounds good but hasn't seen much scrutiny[0]. I've certainly been guilty of making such arguments, myself (some probably on this website). If I can make the comparison to software, it's lik…

Disappointed by what? The serotonin idea is not some kooky idea thought up by Peterson; it has massive amounts of evidential backing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2612120/ https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110915102917.h... https://www.cliniciansbrief.com/article/canine-aggression-li... http://caspar.bgsu.edu/~courses/Reading/Papers/1997EdwKra.pd...

Watching this interview was largely a waste of time. I think it was best encapsulated by Peterson's comment on heirarchical social structures among lobsters being followed by the question, "So you're saying we should organize our society like the lobsters?" A collection of thoughtful statements followed by misunderstandings or outright misrepresentations of what he had just said.

I was disappointed because I would like to see him defend his positions against someone with well-prepared criticisms. Admittedly I don't go seeking out Peterson content so perhaps there are plenty of those sorts of discussions floating around (if you know of any I would appreciate a link). It's not that I necessarily think he's wrong, I just appreciate the occasional probing, aggressive interview -- provided it's well-executed (which this one was not).

Post reply on HN