What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson? • Hacker News Board

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#161

Post by nicolashahn » Sat, Jan 20, 2018, 9:56 PM UTC

Erik816 wrote: post #75

What is often lost since Peterson became "famous" after the whole gender pronoun controversy is the quality and depth of his thinking and lecturing that was already available on YouTube. This article starts with that, and explains his popularity as a teacher at Harvard and Toronto. I had been watching his lectures for about a year before the pronoun issue, and his ideas are fascinating and deep. They tie together man…

For those interested in his non-gender identity content:

His series on the Bible:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-wWBGo6a2w&index=1&list=PL2...

is generally regarded (by those I know, at least) as Jordan at his best. He goes through the first few stories in the Bible and tries to bring meaning to them, not from the fundamental Christian lens of "this is absolute truth," but more like:

"Here are some archetypal patterns about the world and how to act in it that our ancestors have discovered over thousands of years and distilled into stories. Maybe they hold truth that isn't the 'word of God' truth, but observations about the world that have utility to us even as a modern, rational, scientific civilization. I'll back this up by tying it to studies on psychology, neuroscience, evolution, and animal behavior, and show that variations of the same archetypal stories appear in non-Judeo-Christian societies all over the world."

You can be a hardline atheist and still get tons of value out of these lectures.

I also found his 2017 Maps of Meaning lectures particularly interesting, and personally more relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8Xc2_FtpHI

He does a similar thing with the story of Pinocchio instead of the Bible for the first few lectures, which might be more palatable for some. There's a lot of overlap with the Bible series as well.

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#162

Post by stcredzero » Sun, Jan 21, 2018, 12:39 AM UTC

beat wrote: post #156

stcredzero wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope Peterson can actually wake up some of his red-pill followers, and do more harm than good in the long run. Freudian slip? As George Orwell noted in Road to Wiggan Pier, leftists often don't so much as love the poor, but hate the rich. But for now, he really needs to apply that intellect to dealing with something he wasn't ever prepared to deal with - being a symbol of intellectual authority to a movement that s…

You're making an awful lot of generalizations with very little substance here.

You're denying people say "It's okay to hate your oppressors?" You're denying that people have been trying to kick people like Dave Rubin and Bret Weinstein out of the Left?

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#163

Post by lixtra » Sun, Jan 21, 2018, 8:26 PM UTC

andai wrote: post #160

lixtra wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In total it’s a tiny rather peaceful group. I don’t see a danger for society. I’m sure he does help some of his followers. But I doubt that most of his followers profit long term from him. At some point they should move on for their own good.

In response to your last sentence, I am interpreting that as a judgment that the quality of his lectures is inferior to those to which people should move on to, is that right? Do you have any recommendations?

I‘m tempted to say think for yourself... It may sound like a different category but i found listening to Tim Ferris and Guy Raz much more positive and felt energized to try stuff. JBP helps you to do your dishes but the two other push you to pursue your dreams. Your mileage my vary.

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#164

Post by erik_seaberg » Sun, Jan 21, 2018, 8:57 PM UTC

beat wrote: post #93

jnbiche wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some 4 or 5 new pronoun classes, totally over 30+ new gender pronouns recognized by some transgender rights activists. This UW LGBT Resource Center lists an additional 7 pronoun classes, totaling 35 new pronouns [1]. So imagine the typical college professor. They've got what? Three or four classes of up to 50 or 60 students? So you want them remember not only each student's name, but also which of these new…

It's very simple, really. You use what seems obvious, and if someone corrects you in one-on-one conversation, you finish the conversation doing the best you can to respect their wishes. And if you screw up, you apologize and self-correct. We're not talking about 200 students in this case. We're talking about one on one conversation with one person . That's when pronouns matter. Being unhappy about coercive regulation…

"You" is not gendered, only third-person pronouns are in English.

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#165

Post by 1123581321 » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 5:45 AM UTC

beat wrote: post #84

nouveaux wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jordan Peterson is on record saying he would use preferred pronouns. He is opposed to the law and regulation of these pronouns: https://youtu.be/aMcjxSThD54?t=21m39s 23m16s is where he states he would use preferred pronouns.

I'm not surprised, because Jordan Peterson is thoughtful. And yet, a hundred thousand assholes gleefully share the video clip of him getting in the face of someone confronting him about pronouns, him talking about how it's oppressive, and they take it as the intellectual seal of approval for their refusal to use preferred pronouns, based on their contempt for those who ask for it. The road to hell is paved with good…

I notice you have used the insult “asshole” twice when no one else is, and you are using the mention of the word as proof someone is wrong.

Would you consider writing what someone has specifically done wrong, rather than the insult? It’d be more clear, and we wouldn’t need to guess whether your overall assessment of people is reliable.

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#166

Post by mercer » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 8:32 AM UTC

upofadown wrote: post #112

jnbiche wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So he more or less had to create a controversy out of nothing. The great majority of people consider the question a matter of courtesy and hold no strong feelings. Well, this is now enshrined in Canadian law, so it doesn't matter much what the great majority of people feel. It only matters how courts will interpret the law.

Not at all, although Dr Peterson has spent a lot of time arguing that it is. In particular, he thinks that a recent addition of gender to anti-discrimination law means something about the sort of gender pronouns you can use. He has not been dissuaded in his opinion by a great number of people with much better qualifications in that sort of law.

That's interesting. Do you have any links at hand explaining this? I mean, I can and will do some Googling, but perhaps you can save me some trouble?

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#167

Post by ndr » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 4:43 PM UTC

js8 wrote: post #152

ravenstine wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing... I'm not conservative by any stretch of the imagination, though I am often mistaken for one; I enjoy listening to people like Jordan Peterson and even Ben Shapiro because they are excellent debaters and can make solid arguments. I can't think of anyone on the other side of the political spectrum who can even come close in that regard, although I would love for someone to give me some examples.

What about Noam Chomsky, Christopher Hitchens, Yanis Varoufakis? They are all excellent debaters on the left. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAYlXb6kBA0 It's interesting to note that Chomsky was at a point also targeted by the postmodern "left", when he defended free speech.

For the record, Hitchens died in 2011.

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#168

Post by lliamander » Mon, Jan 22, 2018, 5:40 PM UTC

beat wrote: post #157

lliamander wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ok, that's fine. But he should use preferred pronouns anyway, in order to not be an asshole. Let me ask you, do you think requests for preferred pronouns are rooted in a correct understanding of human nature? Or are you merely accommodating something you believe to be mistaken so as to not hurt someone who likely be (on net) hurt by a more honest approach?

Let me give you a libertarian answer... it's up to individuals to decide what their own identity is. When an individual identifies as one thing, and society refuses to accept that identity and imposes labels they find offensive, then they are being oppressed . And that's a much more substantial form of oppression than "Please don't say that" is. I'm utterly shocked (not really) how many people proudly wave a flag of…

I'm not sure that's a particularly libertarian answer. But whether your views belong to a particular political label or not is not my main concern.

My question was whether you think such identity claims are true.

Now maybe you don't think it matters, and that we should use preferred pronouns regardless. But at that point you are saying that people should lie for the sake of politeness. The request isn't just "Please don't say that"; it's "Please say this other thing even if you don't believe it's true".

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#169

Post by hateduser2 » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 10:52 AM UTC

superquest wrote: post #15

moksha256 wrote: post #10

His interview with Camille Paglia is a gem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM

She is such a firebrand. After watching that interview I've tried to make my body language more expressive like hers.

Why would you want to copy her body language? Is your natural body language mute and unemotional? That sounds like a bigger problem.

Re: What’s So Dangerous About Jordan Peterson?

#170

Post by HardDaysKnight » Tue, Jan 23, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

rocmcd wrote: post #145

js8 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> his most recent debate with Cathy Newman from three days ago God, that was a terrible interview. The interviewer refused to understand a single thing that JP was saying. I am no fan of Peterson (in particular, I am left liberal), but he makes quite a lot of good points.

It really was. It was two people on entirely different planes of conversation talking right past each other. One thing I think Peterson could do better (though I imagine he wouldn't do this purely on principle, if he was even capable) is adapting his speech and rhetoric to meet his target audience. He was answering her questions in a calm and well-meaning manner, but just the tone and vocabulary of his explanations w…

I've watched the interview a couple of times. I did not see that his tone or vocabulary were over her head. However, I would like to know what you're referring to. Could you give one or two examples please?