You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
It's well worth a listen if you can spare the time; there's a lot to admire and learn from here. I particularly liked his concept of high and low resolution thinking and how most people don't like to be forced to think in high resolution. This gives rise to the natural tendency for most people confronted with something that contrtadicts their belief system is to reduce it to a facile level that can be dismissed as irrelevant or ideologically wrong.
Anyway, his insight, articulation and views on the world are to be admired if not always agreed with.
1hr 15mins? I’ll wait for the highlights thanks
I’ll wait for the highlights thanks
You are expecting highlights?
1hr 15mins? I’ll wait for the highlights thanks
LOL you want the low resolution version! Sorry it doesn't exist, but he lays out some really compelling perspectives on how societies are structurted within the first 15 minutes so if you just listened to that, you'd likely still learn a lot.
I predict a flounce....
I’ll wait for the highlights thanks
A good summary here:
Dammit, my mum* always said I was a high-resolution thinker as well 😢
*women, wtf do they know anyway
so if you just listened to that, you’d likely still learn a lot.
Or you'll just realise he's a mysogynistic fruit loop just trying to sell books by posturing right wing ideology dressed up as science....
Or you’ll just realise he’s a mysogynistic fruit loop just trying to sell books by posturing right wing ideology dressed up as science….
Wow, didn't take you long to resort to 'he's an XYZ therefore I don't have to listen to him' did it? Move on then buddy. Nothing for you here; I'm sorry you feel that way.
Wow, didn’t take you long to resort to ‘he’s an XYZ therefore I don’t have to listen to him’ did it? Move on then buddy. Nothing for you here; I’m sorry you feel that way.
Whereas I'm sorry that you're so easily duped.
Has he changed is views then geetee?
Happy not to give him the publicity or attention myself.
Whereas I’m sorry that you’re so easily duped.
Well I appreciate your sense of concern and compassion, misplaced though I think it is I am sure you mean well.
Has he changed is views then geetee?
About what?
How's the beef-only diet going?
Nothing for you here; I’m sorry you feel that way.
Why dont you explain some of the highlights and why he is worth spending that time on?
I am biased since the first time I heard him was on the train wreck interview with Sam Harris. The bits I have read since havent been overly impressive.
About what?
About being a bit Rapey? You know, women asking to be assaulted by wearing clothes in the work place? The whole Incel thing? The list of very unpleasant views is pretty long where JP is concerned.
Well I appreciate your sense of concern and compassion, misplaced though I think it is I am sure you mean well.
I'm not concerned about you, just a little saddened.
I’m not concerned about you, just a little saddened.
I think Incel is like a cult, once they suck you in it's very hard to escape without someone outside kidnapping you.
About being a bit Rapey? You know, women asking to be assaulted by wearing clothes in the work place? The whole Incel thing? The list of very unpleasant views is pretty long where JP is concerned.
This mostly and the little excuse that people ignored his first step before following his advice. He knows exactly what he is doing and how to promote himself.
I’m no huge fan of him really but if you think he is s misogynist you clearly haven’t read or listened to much of his stuff at all
but then you wouldn’t because you’ve let someone else tell you who he is
I do wish he’d be clear on his take on god though
does he rant on about Lobsters in this one as well? That's always worth a laugh.
I’m no huge fan of him really but if you think he is s misogynist you clearly haven’t read or listened to much of his stuff at all
Ive listened to his stuff. He's a misogynist.
but then you wouldn’t because you’ve let someone else tell you who he is
Unthinking acceptance is a hallmark of his followers. That's what happens when you pander to prejudice.
I ain’t no follower I think he’s full of shit on lots of stuff but I don’t see the misogyny
I have however seen loads of stuff he’s said taken in isolation to prove he’s mental and misogynistic. I actually listened to some of his podcasts and lectures out of some strange need to be irritated but once I’d heard it it’s all fairly interesting and inoffensive stuff to be fair
This gives rise to the natural tendency for most people confronted with something that contrtadicts their belief system is to reduce it to a facile level that can be dismissed as irrelevant or ideologically wrong.
I can see why he'd want to try to pre-empt criticism with that sort of sophistry. As long as the book sales are going well he'll keep recycling the same trite nonsense to keep that happening.
How’s the beef-only diet going?
He's got scurvy.
His daughter is now charging for diet advice !
That can’t be a long consultation can it
I do wish he’d be clear on his take on god though
Just on god? As above having listened to his trainwreck and occasionally looking to see if he has improved overall he is about as clear as mud.
but then you wouldn’t because you’ve let someone else tell you who he is
Sadly I came to the conclusion that he's an Incel apologist after wasting 15 mins of my life watching an interview with him on Youtube, a very unpleasant and dangerous individual. I'd never heard of him till geetee starting pronouncing him as the new messiah on STW.
I can see why he is so successfully though, you take a disaffected subset of society (men who can't relate to women) and instead of saying 'grow up, stop sending dick pix and groping / assaulting women in bars', you say 'it's not your fault, society and women have set you up with their complex rules, it's all their fault'. Great at selling books, but also great at perpetuating 15th century views toward women.
That’s is the thing he rambles on all over the place to the point you always end up wondering what he himself actually thinks on a subject,
Part of me thinks hes just hilarious
there are some ridiculous videos of his lectures on youtube, its just gibberish, there was areally good one that Adam Rutherford (an actual geneticist) tweeted, sadly the video has been deleted now,
even his interviews can be
heres his word salad generator
http://www.wisdomofpeterson.com/
"Your consciousness is nested
immovably in positive metaphorical
substrate"
The incel movement that worship him, not so amusing.</div>
Hes managed to monetise the inadequacies of men looking to understand why their relationships have failed, its quite cunning really, but its a cynical way to exploit the vulnerable. Hes another L Ron Hubbard.
He does a whole shpeel on blokes that can’t relate to women only having themselves to blame and that they need to take more responsibility for themselves and all that jazz but he does contradict himself all the time so I can see how people take offence. I just don’t think he’s dangerous or misogynistic or all that right wing really he just spouts a lot of stuff that puts him in lots of different camps and it’s all a bit messy
Not really a fan but can’t see the reason for the frothing he seems to create everywhere he goes
Anyway, his insight, articulation and views on the world are to be admired if not always agreed with.
WTAF?
Not really a fan but can’t see the reason for the frothing he seems to create everywhere he goes
To flip it round I can't see the reason for the complete adoration. I am not sure whether he tries not to be pinned down but I find him similar to those po-mo theorists he, seems, to claim he abhors. He does seem to hint towards supporting some rather extreme causes.
Those hints could be incorrect since generally beyond ranting about cultural marxism and lobsters he is as clear as mud. Overall though some groups seem to look up to him as a leader eg those incel weirdos and other groups with interesting outlooks on modern life and so those who think those groups are a tad odd may blame him for the adoration from those groups.
A dangerous misogynistic man. Unutterably foul attitudes towards women.
You thinking he has something to say says one heck of a lot about you.
He’s nothing more than another mouthy gobshite selling his particular brand of self help/diagnosis disguised as a salve for the modern male condition.......whatever the **** that actually encompasses.
I’d listen to Sam Harris (and often do with his podcasts) but Peterson’s whiny/pleading voice just gets on my tits
Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married.
“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”
Enforced monogamy is, to him, simply a rational solution. Otherwise women will all only go for the most high-status men, he explains, and that couldn’t make either gender happy in the end.
Just to pick one aspect of his vile philosophy. He believes women should be forced into sexual relationships with men to stop men becoming violent
He is a vile far right womenhater. No doubt at all
He believes women should be forced into sexual relationships with men to stop men becoming violent
He doesn't believe that at all. Going back to a previous point you are forming opinion based on what other sources portray him as by quoting sentences he has said out of context.
He may or may not be a genius salesman selling shite wrapped up in fancy words to anyone willing to buy it. If he is then there should be plenty of his ideas or viewpoints to criticise without making ones up.
He doesn’t believe that at all. Going back to a previous point you are forming opinion based on what other sources portray him as by quoting sentences he has said out of context.
Mmm kay, how about this then. He's a psychologist (apparently). And we all know psychology is not an actual science. Ergo whatever he says is bollocks. Ergo we don't actually have to read /listen to the shit he espouses we know he's a ****ing fraud. Now if he were a psychiatrist things would be different.
Can i create a false premise?
Now i have done so, i'd like to talk really really quickly in case you noticed.
Now i'll fashion all sorts of elaborate monsters from my premise, now that you've forgotten it's false.
And now you are living in fear.
Which is both useful and profitable to me.
See take Tjs point there he’s absolutely convinced that the guy is a lunatic! If you can show me the footage of him saying that stuff I would happily believe you but I just don’t think it exists all that is just people throwing crap at him by taking stuff he’s quoted in lectures and using it against him
I’ve not listen to all that much of his stuff but I’ve listened to a few full lectures had a listen to his joe rogan podcast, expected to be outraged and offended but wasn’t.
Elaborate monsters are definitely in there 😀
Too busy tidying my room to watch this, soz.
He keeps popping up on here and I can't see the video so I've had a read around his website and am now deciding on one of two conclusions:
1. He's clever but very bad at getting his ideas across.
2. He's almost comically full of s##t.
Direct quotes from the man himself not taken out of context.
That is exactly what he said.
I have never heard of this man so I watched (some of) the video - I have no idea if he is a misogynist or not but it struck me as complete boll**ks I’m afraid. Maybe I’m just not clever enough 😄
Just to pick one aspect of his vile philosophy. He believes women should be forced into sexual relationships with men to stop men becoming violent
Yeah as has been pointed out already TJ he really doeasn't say that and you making that argument says a lot about you my boy ;o)
There's a fundamental truth that at a basic level, most men have a built in urge to find a mate and then have children. It's evolutionary and kind of important to our continuation as a species. If it wasn't the case we wouldn't be here so the truth is, to coin a phrase, entirely self evident.
If for some reason that mechanism breaks down for some group of men, that's going to cause problems, just like how society broke down around the turn of 20th century when women (and almost all men) felt agrieved that society was failing them and campaigned to change to law.
I'm not for one moment suggesting we should be passing laws that force women into relationships with men and neither is Peterson; that would clearly be wrong and socially and morally repugnant. You're making that suggestion, not him. But you do need to engafge with the idea that if we end up marginalising a large group of men who then feel like they are failures in society, that is not going to turn out well for us. It's a simple reality that is being observed as unpalatable as that might be
And I agree it is unpalatable. I'm no fan of the knuckle dragging Neanderthal type of masculinity that is under attack either, that's not me but that's no reason to dismiss those people as irrelevant.
Anway, in this video he hardly touches on the subject of gender, he only mentions the subject briefly though TJ you will appreciate what he says as he talks about how men are more prone to aggression and women more prone to neuroticism. I know the idea that men and women, though overlapping far more than they differ, do have identifiable and measurable trait differences across large populations.
Most of what he says here is in the broad category of epistomology, ontology and logos.
Psychiology is not a science
How ignorant of you to think so. It's a higly robust social science. The only difference between the scientific approach of (robust) psychology (and I admit there is a lot of garbage out there), and other science subhects is the degree of variability and error the data it produces. But the methodology for determining the conclusions is just as robust as say high energy physics.
So, what he is saying is there is a danger to the human race if a certain group of men are not given access to reproduction. Am I understanding his point correctly?
He goes on to say that women are choosing not to reproduce with these men and that these choices should somehow be “adjusted”. He seems to say that is the responsibility of women to change; to ensure this group of men are given chance to reproduce. Am I still getting this right, @geetee1972?
rachel
I’m not for one moment suggesting we should be passing laws that force women into relationships with men and neither is Peterson; that would clearly be wrong and socially and morally repugnant. You’re making that suggestion, not him.
If he isn't what does he mean when he says the cure for violence is "enforced monogamy".
“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”
WTF is "enforced monogamy" then?
WTF is “enforced monogamy” then?
It's just Peterson calculatedly being a controversialist. His acolytes laud him as a communicator but he uses deliberately inflammatory terms like "enforced monogamy" to a mass audience without any caveat or explanation only to later claim that of course he meant it in a technical anthropological sense and you're all too thick to get it.
It's always about the grift, anything to increase exposure to bump up the book and tour ticket sales
It’s evolutionary and kind of important to our continuation as a species.
Continuation of what exactly?
To breed more retards like this in the world? We think, and hope, the human race has evolved into an interesting intelligent being. But then when secularism and lack of empowerment is brought into view, the only comments re: solutions come from self promoting insular, non cooperative, backward looking gobshites like him.
I doubt I’ll get sued for this comments, because they are essentially true.
The more you post about this bloke the more you are digging your own self into the sand, with the tide coming in.
Get out more, stop promoting preaching morons.
Hey there socially inadequate virgin who’s sat watching this in your bedroom at your mums house in between furiously masterbating to unpleasantly violent pornography and tweeting rape threats to feminists. It’s not your fault that women don’t like you. It’s THEIR fault!
If you keep giving me money I’ll use some big words to tell you why
But the methodology for determining the conclusions is just as robust as say high energy physics.
Of all the guff you spout this one made me laugh the most.
And your messiah still sounds like Kermit. 😉
Direct quotes from the man himself not taken out of context.
That is exactly what he said.
You can't see you are wrong or you can but truth doesn't matter to you. Either case is disappointing.
You can’t see you are wrong or you can but truth doesn’t matter to you. Either case is disappointing.
Teach us please enlightened one. Put the quote in context so we can all understand just how wise he is
The truth does matter to me and the truth is this man is a vile misogynist,
Its very simple to see the moment you read anything of his.
Teach us please enlightened one. Put the quote in context so we can all understand just how wise he is
I don't follow the guy or watch much of his stuff. Not my thing, but I did follow the resulting argument and coverage over this particular quote. Whether the choice of words used was an accidental bad choice or a deliberate attempt to drum up controversy is neither here nor there. If you look at what he was saying around the subject, it was definitely not what TJ asserts. If you are that interested the explanation is freely available, go look for it yourself. If he is a vile misogynist then there will be plenty of things to pick up on without exaggerating stuff to suit your own agenda once you start doing that you are as bad as the other side.
I say he is and produce direct quotes that prove it. You say he isn't but cnnot provide anything.
Its just so obvious from his speeches and writings. Its the whole crux of his argument dressed up in such a way as to appeal to disenfranchised men as some sort of scientific truth. As has happened here.
You say he isn’t but cnnot provide anything.
I say he isn't what?
Just a few choice quotes from him
Catcalling is not assault, consent is what a man wants, there is no rape culture, women just want attention, men are persecuted
Also, women harass themselves and shame one another into wearing burkas to even the playing field when it comes to beauty:
Probably because they're ( women) more biologically prone to negative emotions and are neurotic
God forbid we sit back and listen to what women are saying:
Though the reason women never speak against Islam is that they just hate capitalism and themselves:
Wouldn't matter anyway, because the feminists are crazy and irrational
And it's a real shame men have no protection from them. I mean -- can't even hit them!
But if a woman challenges you, she's probably just flirting with you
Probably because women prefer obeying men:
Wake up, men! They took yer jobs! And yer moneyz
Well, how can one be a strong individual when these "Gender Studies types" are indoctrinating your gullible, un-free-thinking children:
and it is "a fact" that Gender Studies (along with other disciplines) is just neomarxist postmodern indoctrination:
I really canot be bothered any more into diving into this cesspit of misogyeny, neo nazism and hatred
Just a few choice quotes from him
There you go again. Where did you copy and paste that from?
When did people stop reading The Game by Neil Strauss?
It explained to you why you weren't getting a shag and you didn't have to sit through any evolutionary psychology bollocks other than 'People want what they can't have'.
He's a **** and TJ is correct, as usual.
/end
Well you may well be right tj and if those quotes are correct in that they are his and in the right context then I’d be more than happily agree with you
however he constantly states that almost everything he’s ever done is on YouTube so it should be top of the list if it’s that outrageous and yet I’ve never heard him say anything as offensive as that and he doesn’t seem to be the sort of bloke that would
he also seems to have freinds and acquaintances that wouldn’t be seen dead with him if he did hold those views as I’ve said though I’m never all that sure what he actually thinks I just find the polarised reaction he creates to be bizarre
I’m never all that sure what he actually thinks I just find the polarised reaction he creates to be bizarre
Hardly bizarre, given that he's deliberately divisive.
"Hardly bizarre, given that he’s deliberately divisive."
Yup. And he's very good at it. I have no idea if he's actually a misogynist but I know he very carefully and deliberately plays that card both to generate outrage from critics and support from actual misogynists. He's essentially a clever Katie Hopkins. And I think that's probably worse than being an actual misogynist.
In the case of incels in particular they're a genuine terrorist threat, responsible for the Toronto attack among others, and without a doubt he intentionally fuels them.
Whether the choice of words used was an accidental bad choice or a deliberate attempt to drum up controversy is neither here nor there.
Actually it is a very important. For somebody who is apparently so clever and well thought out it's hard to understand how he uses some of those phrases by accident. It's calculated and then he has his excuses for later.
Watched the first 13 min. All I wanted was the girl behind him to throw up on his back..He would score highly in the management bollocks thread.
Of all the guff you spout this one made me laugh the most
Oh so you’re an expert then? You’ve read up extensively on the subject? Clearly you haven’t but I have and I assure you the model generated are based on rigorous statistical analysis. They dealing with much larger degrees of variance and error but the basic approach is the same.
Catcalling is not assault
I dont know if Peterson said that but catcalling is clearly not assault. It might well be harassment but it’s the kind of low level harassment that a lot of people endure everyday. It’s called life. I don’t think it’s ok but it’s not remotely a problem unique to women.
. Am I still getting this right, @geetee1972?
No you’re not, you’re way off which hopefully is good news for you.
This is worth a read if you’re not already familiar with the story.
https://quillette.com/2018/10/05/writers-behind-grievance-studies-hoax-address-criticisms/
He’s a massive ****.
Consequently, massive ****s are attracted to masturabting their flaccid penises to his videos on YouTube and then to defending him on Internet forums. They’re best ignored. Like him.
#MensRightsNow
#SexualGratificationForIncelsNow
#BloodyWimminz
This is worth a read if you’re not already familiar with the story.
https://quillette.com/2018/10/05/writers-behind-grievance-studies-hoax-address-criticisms/
Academia, what a self-licking lollipop. This all reminds me why I ditched my Management Degree, just a lot of papers desperate to invent a new buzz word and get a book deal on the back of it. Just ignore them all and they'll go away.
Sad to see you're still banging this drum OP.
I guess it kind-of suits your fragile self-esteem to imagine that with your superior intellect and bold-mindedness you can perceive the truth while almost everyone else here is blinkered by political correctness or whatever.
Please do consider the possibility that JP is actually just a twisted old misogynist and you are a gullible sap.
🙂
Unfortunately Peterson will not just go away He has discovered his audience who lap up his vile philosophy and use it to excuse their own inadequacies.
A very dangerous man who needs to be opposed and exposed every time he speaks
Some people are just desperate to have someone tell them what they want to hear.
More so if they use big words and, like, have their own YouTube Chanel and a book and stuff
And particularly if they’re telling them their attitude towards women, which is clearly so totally self-evidently *ed up, is actually just peachy *ing creamy
"Jordan Peterson is the stupid man’s smart person"
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/is-jordan-peterson-the-stupid-mans-smart-person/
There’s a [b]fundamental truth [/b]that at a basic level, most men have a built in urge to find a mate and then have children. It’s evolutionary and kind of important to our continuation as a species. If it wasn’t the case we wouldn’t be here so [b]the truth is, to coin a phrase, entirely self evident.[/b]
OR .......
There’s a [b]fundamental truth [/b]that at a basic level, most women have a built in urge to find a mate and then have children. It’s evolutionary and kind of important to our continuation as a species. If it wasn’t the case we wouldn’t be here so [b]the truth is, to coin a phrase, entirely self evident.[/b]
so which one makes it “self evident” that it’s a “fundamental truth”
First one? ... second one?
Neither maybe ?
Basically, what you have written is total horseshit (dressed up as common sense).
I added two letters to the entire quote, and it totally reversed the meaning of iwhat you wrote, but it still makes sense and apparently proves itself somehow.
even though what it “proves” is totally different to what the first one “proves” 🙄
How ignorant of you to think so.
Yeah it is isn't it. Just as ignorant as Peterson's bullshit.
however he constantly states that almost everything he’s ever done is on YouTube so it should be top of the list if it’s that outrageous and yet I’ve never heard him say anything as offensive as that and he doesn’t seem to be the sort of bloke that would
he also seems to have freinds and acquaintances that wouldn’t be seen dead with him if he did hold those views as I’ve said though I’m never all that sure what he actually thinks I just find the polarised reaction he creates to be bizarre
Listen to some of the discussions Sam Harris has had with Jorden Peterson and you will soon realise that Jorden's predisposition to relying on a false premise before forming a string of rhetorical sentences to back up his premise is just a shtick that has seemingly duped a vast swath of his poor embittered male following.
He's a piss-pot charlatan and nothing more, he's definatly not the messiah!
Geetee.... Just to confirm? Does no mean...
a) no
b) yes
<div class="bbp-reply-author">tjagain
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">Just a few choice quotes from him
</div>
actually, and I’m no JP apologist, those aren’t actually his quotes at all. You’ve C&P’d a Reddit post where someone else has used those comments to describe various JP tweets. He didn’t actually say those words.
Oops. It wasn't reddit I got it from. My mistake then if thats so. As above I ain't dipping into his cesspool any more