Jordan Peterson

[pat grimshaw]

...I'm not into self-promotion in a binary environment.

Are you a proud Enbie?

 

[zoltanspawn]

Peterson absolutely doesn't, does not, believe women shouldn't wear makeup in the work place. He's not saying that.

He's just saying it's sexually provocative for women to wear makeup in the work place.

And that is what they're doing. They're being sexually provocative.

Should there be a rule against it?

Well? Well? Well?

 

[Telstra]

And further clarification of why Jordan is accused of transphobia and misogyny.

The tag about it being "even worse" (for the opposition) than the Newman interview is idiotic. The points were discussed in a wholly civil manner and both guests made their points adroitly without diversion or personal attacks. The host did tend to frame questions a certain way, but Peterson was up to the task of rephrasing them as he saw them, not as imposed. It was a fair fight.

maybe "gender equality" is the wrong words to use. They should use "gender fairness" perhaps ??
Male and female will never be the same therefore never be equal.

 

[ballcaphair]

Are you a proud Enbie?

No, I'm bi, but politically-wise, I think the State should not regulate who we are is straight, bi, identifiers, and well, all of us.

 

[NotHardUp1]

Jordan met his match

I would think Peterson can be bested in debate by many people, but he's not a messiah, nor is he infallible in his opinions. What he is, and why he has a following, is integrity and honesty. He may wax agitated at times, but the entirety of his teaching is even, and he is not a haranguer He makes lucid points and supports them.

The fact that he has met some inept opposition before probably sets up some myth in popular culture that he is invincible in debate. He is not. But, it is true that the opposition's chief strategy is to exaggerate his positions, redefine them into extremist rhetoric and then dismiss them. They apply words like "fascist" to hype the sale. Keep doing that if you want more Trump's to follow.

For the record, Telly, on what points do you think Dodd won?

 

[NotHardUp1]

And for the record, for those who find it anathema, Peterson uses "post-modern Neo-Marxists" about 3/4 into the interview.

Dodd's main observation is that Peterson misses the point by countering the Social Justice Warriors, in particular, in ignoring the injustices themselves. Peterson counters that what Dodd dismisses as a parochial problem (literally not derogatorily) is actually the shape of things to come, thus his critique of the left. Otherwise, the interview or debate follows the same pattern as most of them, with Peterson reiterating his assertions, shifting to cite examples, usually to be followed with the counterpoint arguing that they can't get into all of that.

The pattern is that the complexity of the social sciences is riddled with rabbit warrens and any educated person can run off into a maze of them, Peterson, Dodd, or any other erudite thinker. It ultimately makes for poor debate as nothing is ever conclusive.

 

[zoltanspawn]

God save the Lobster Queen.

 

[zoltanspawn]

Doctor Liberty is--get this--suing some people because they called him a charlatan! The ardent defender of Free Speech apparently feels that, in spite of being a "public intellectual" with an international reputation of public record, it's just not cool to be compared to Hitler. What a snowflake.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

Doctor Liberty is--get this--suing some people because they called him a charlatan! The ardent defender of Free Speech apparently feels that, in spite of being a "public intellectual" with an international reputation of public record, it's just not cool to be compared to Hitler. What a snowflake.

For many, "free speech" just means "whatever I agree with." The same people telling us that Nazis deserve the right to march through the streets chanting for extermination went apeshit when Colin K knelt during the anthem.

 

[Dominus]

Don't know why his videos keep popping up on my youtube feed.