/lit/ - Literature

>>19078235
I know

>>15528951
The easiest way to tell if somebody has read serious philosophy in their life is the peterson test:

>you fully agree with peterson

You are young and have never read anything substantial. You yearn for a rolemodel and he scratches that itch. Alternatively you are a midwit and dont have the will power to ever ascend this lowly place

>you partly agree with peterson

You are independent enough to see flaws in his thinking. You barely delved into politics and philosophy, but enough so to adopt opposing world views.

>you post the ted k meme

You realise peterson is nothing but an entertainer. A mere clown with no original thought. A coward who is essentially justifying neoliberalism and meritocracy despite himself suffering from this system (zoloft monkey). His highest achievment was "owning" 18 year olds on camera. You do not only disagree- you think his entire world view is shallow and embarrassing. You are well read enough to realise that this guy is fundamentally wrong on nietzsche, freud, marx and other thinkers. So much so that he probably has not even read them. The alternative is even worse, he has read them but has a highschool level understanding. You realise that his world view is just his own sad little coping mechanism and not even a sophisticated one

>>15421464
Where do I start?:

>has barely any control of his own life but preaches it

messy room, diet soda, anti depressants and now benzos

>say postmodernists just obfuscate aimlessley

cant give a clear answer regarding god and jesus ressurection. Uses vaguenes to keep a gurus mystique

>is a platonic sophist

instead of presenting critical questioning he preaches some to-be-slain dragon with vague instructions how to. Backing it all up with disney movies and weak scientific empiricism (lobsters). All with populist undertones to appeal to even the lowliest pleb (shouting, swearing etc.).

>preaches reading but has probably barely read anything

he talks about the same 10-15 books everytime. His reading list confirms my suspicion

>lives off his reputation of "owning" literal 18 year olds in a tranny debate

no comment needed

>has never said anything that a self help or PUA type could not have told you

he just coats their wisdom with pseudo science and his own brand of jungian superstition. Feel good astrology for men. Disclaimer: I am not against jung.

>>15385939
you're trying too hard to fit in
Peterson was just one of many fashionable idiots who had their heyday in our autistic sun, he's nowhere near as significant as having ruined this or any place, he is simply one part of a running trend in internet culture which now dominates the ever dwindling ever more centralized places of 'discussion'

/lit/ has been garbage for years before Peterson

>>12941473

>>12930561
t. nigger having existential crisis about ted

just read ted, it's short and doesn't waste your time like all the other shit here.

>>12719656

This goes here.

only comfy (boring) normalfags fear him.

>>12072076
t. peasants' peasant

>>11593725
why is it that eastern europeans in the UK all wear ugly and unrecognisable trainers whilst this picture shows that in their native enviroment they wear exotic yet familiar trainers and pedo loafers?

>>11058493
>On a serious note, has Peterson ever actually discussed the content of Derrida's or Foucault's arguments?
I belive he said in an interview that Foucault is the only post-modernist he's read because he tried the others but couldn't understand it.

Don't expect anything from Peterson. Hes popularity is merely the result of weak men with daddy issues wanting someone to tell the clean their room. Its just rudimentary self help packaged as something academic and politically charged. He is the resurrection of Tai Lopez.

Hey i think this belongs here.

Is Ted right?