/lit/ - Literature

Jung is retarded.

Nietzsche is beyond Peterson, he doesn't understand him.

Nietzsche already made that point as well.
VERY good thread.

>>11424536
and why is he so obsessed with that Lenin guy?

That image triggered me. Took me a few seconds to make the connection and realise it's Rogan's studio, before which I twitched a little. There's probably not another room in the world where so much shit has been said out loud.

Also Peterson doesn't understand Nietzsche. He cherry-picks stuff and rewords it to suit his Christian agenda. Nietzsche wrote entire fucking books lampooning Christianity and you have Memerson trying to deny it. Fuck him.

I have never read more than few paragraphs (Clean up your room goy!) from this man.

He surfaced on /pol/ somewhere around early 2014 iirc. More and more I started seeing his face in various threads and more I tried to hide those threads.

I still have no idea what the man is about and I will never, ever even find out what he is about. Only one look at his face and few quotes are enough confirmation to me: I want nothing to do with this fucking meme professor who some fucking retarded "Kekistan" posters adopted and well memed to internet fame.

Man who writes a book "12 Rules For Life" is a brainlet. Only a bigger brainlet would be a man who buys such "self-help manual"

Ever visited second hand stores? There are thousands of different generic books titled like these "10 rules for Happines", "5 steps for Happy Marriage" "6 secrets to Financial Gain" etc.

in 10 to 15 years, you will find this book gathering dust among the above-mentioned books and nobody will ever bother even read it.

>Be Memerson
>Lead to believe the postmodernists don't research anything and just make shit up
>Use as an excuse not to research them and just make shit up
>Gain a cult following of NEETs who believe you and hate the postmodernists for not researching anything and making shit up
>Meanwhile books full of evidence that this isn't true sit unread
>???
>Profit

>>11424547
Source

>>11424555
The title is tongue in cheek. The book is an exploration of presuppositions in western thought and ways to live an honest life. Stop projecting, you sound like an 80 year old.

>>11424570
>Rule 11. Do not bother children when they are skateboarding
he thinks he can trick us into thinking he's not a philosophically stunted boomer and the worst part is it worked

>>11424547
Wrong, he understands Nietzsche and his criticisms of Christianity perfectly well.

>>11424536
Does something have to be highbrow and not "brainlet-tier" to be a good philosophy to live by?
Not everyone needs to bolster their ego by appearing as a sophisticated intellectual to other people.

>>11424547
>Nietzsche wrote entire fucking books lampooning Christianity and you have Memerson trying to deny it.
Um.. no sweetie honey :) you don't even know what you're talking about sweetiepoops :)

Imagine needing to derive good morals and how to behave in life from some kermit-voiced e-uncle

>>11424577
He said that the postmodernists invented the idea that any given set of facts has an infinite amount of interpretations, which makes me wonder why he wouldn't ascribe that to N's perspectivism (if not Plato). My guess is he isn't well read enough? Seriously, Foucault loved Neitzsche for this shit
>In so far as the word "knowledge" has any meaning, the world is knowable; but it is interpretable otherwise, it has no meaning behind it, but countless meanings.—"Perspectivism." It is our needs that interpret the world; our drives and their For and Against. Every drive is a kind of lust to rule; each one has its perspective that it would like to compel all the other drives to accept as a norm.

The funniest shit is that some people call this man a "Traditionalist" while real traditionalist authors like Guénon, Schuon would describe this man probably the embodiment of what is commonly understood as "counter-tradition".

Peterson is a psychic residue, disconnected from true religion: he puts hope to some sort of cultural christianity and morals that will survive the ultimate dissolution.

In a way, he reminds me much of Varg Vikernes without Paganism and survivalism aspect.

>>11424536
>Nietzsche and Jung spent a lifetime trying to codify something every plebeian with a life, raised by a strong father and good mother, with love in his life and passion for some hobby, understood intuitively.

Is this the thread where we pretend normies aren't braindead idiots who watch marvel movies and have a 8th grade reading ability

>>11424536
I can't talk much on Nietzsche, but you're right that most of Jung's ideas are already understood intuitively. That speaks more about how profound they are than anything else. The reason so much Jungian psychology got absorbed into everyday culture and parlance is precisely the fact that it's so obvious; we just needed somebody intelligent enough to properly comprehend and document it.
Peterson, on the other hand, just teaches Jungian psychology. That's fine, but he begins to slip up once he tries to teach other academic subjects e.g. philosophy or when he tries to inject his own misguided ideas into Jung's e.g. his DNA meme.

According to JP it all started in Paris, École Normale Supérieure, a Parisian university that was founded on enlightened thinking, and houses both Derrida and Foucault.
Jordan Peterson not only accuses Foucault and Derrida of being Marxists, he accuses them of being advocates for postmodernism, except that Foucault wasn't a marxist and Derrida criticized Marxism to a large degree, even writing books against it.
Foucault and Derrida followed the trend of structuralism based on linguistic theories, and both never claimed to be postmodernists, almost never mentioned postmodernism, and when Foucault was asked about postmodernism the interviewer had to explain what postmodernism actually is (Telos, 1983) because Foucault didn't know.
It took until 1979 before postmodernism became a popular term under Lyotard, described as a society of incredulity towards metanarratives.
Lyotard, the actual father of postmodernism, also stressed that nobody believes Marx anymore, nor his salvation.

Jordan Peterson calls Derrida and his followers hellbent on destroying western civilization, when Derrida's theories were based on repeated dialogue within western civilization, arguing against structuralism, which he himself had gained mastery in.
For someone worried about destroying western civilization, it seems awfully strange to spend your life mastering something you want to use to destroy, only to spend your time mastering the art of destroying it again to the point of becoming the most important critic of structuralism as well as its best writer.
This he was already doing in 1966 (Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of Human Sciences) when Jordan Peterson paints him as a fervent Marxist trying to bring about the destruction of western civilization.
Derrida believed that structuralism had always existed within weatern thinking, but had constantly been neutralized, but was then actually part of western thinking all along, thus defending western thinking.
Secondly Derrida then stresses he doesn't want to lose sight of the subject, which he wants to correctly place back in a different spot, not destroy.
To simply frame Derrida as a Marxist is to reject all of his works, which spoke against totalizing phenomena according to a single originary essence.

Postmodernism is not about destroying truth, it's the defense against secondariness, impurity, difference, and distortion constructing our thought.
It's not about rejecting the idea that there are men and women or pillows, simply that there is no pure transmission of thought due to the secondary medium corrupting it.

Yet Jordan Peterson launched a crusade against postmodernism, not making it a symptom of unease, but the cause of it.
He wanted to launch a program to help people identify and avoid postmodernist lectures, instead of listening to postmodernism from the source and forming an understanding of it that way.

>>11424645
>but you're right that most of Jung's ideas are already understood intuitively. That speaks more about how profound they are than anything else.

Guh hoh, like how people intuitively believed the world was flat

>>11424591
>which makes me wonder why he wouldn't ascribe that to N's perspectivism
It literally is Nietzsche's perspective.

>if not Plato
Are you retarded?

>>11424542
>Nietzsche already made that point as well.
Interesting. Where did he do that?

>>11424689
False equivalence, and that hasn't been popular opinion for a long time.

>>11424536
>with love in his life and passion for some hobby
why hedonists and other humanists crave passion and love so much?

>>11424695
>False equivalence
Not necessarily at all

>>11424591
He knows perfectly well that N. came up with it however, to be specific, post-modernists are reluctant to put any weights in front of various interpretations in certain cultural contexts. Nietzsche was still a classicist because he believed that experience to be subj. the best for the European cultural sphere.

>>11424698
Because they're literally the only things in life that makes existence vaguely worthwhile

>>11424706
No the only thing that makes existence worthwhile is the will to power.

>>11424720
Nah thats dumb

>>11424681
If anything, it's Jordan Peterson who is the zealot in this situation, and it's no surprise he attracts the far-right, undeliberately, but he sets the presets towards anti-dialectical demagoguery by telling people not to engage, but to reject and refuse, and sometimes even actively seek out and strangle political entities that do not exist. Postmodernism and Marxism has been taught in universities for decades without any problems, alongside other thinkers who have been rather controversial and nowhere near either of those. That's the function of a university, to engage with oppository beliefs and lessen personal prejudices and approach certain topics from multiple perspectives.

Jordan Peterson frequently says he draws his views on postmodernism from a book by Hicks who writes that postmodernism is a socialist ploy to destroy western civilization by promoting immigration and globalism, from the perspective of Ayn Rand, an infamous writer often attacked for her politicalization of her philosophy.
Are we really to believe this man on postmodernism rather than to read postmodernists writers?

>>11424721
No it actually makes lots of sense it's just that "will to power" is a lot more complicated of a concept than the average English speaker would assume from face-value.

>>11424723
Nah its dumb in any language. Basically just means doing shit for no reason

>>11424726
>Basically just means doing shit for no reason
No, you pleb.

>>11424701
He literally said the postmodernists came up with it in the 1960's.

>>11424681
>Foucault was asked about postmodernism the interviewer had to explain what postmodernism actually is (Telos, 1983) because Foucault didn't know.
>literally whole career predicated on everything is sex and violence
>isn't a postmodernist because he didn't know the word

Contemporary education, everybody.

>>11424729
That's just wrong then, it can be traced to Truth and Lies in a Non-moral Sense or other Nietzsche essays.

Nietzsche was the main influence on the post-structuralists IIRC so it makes sense.

>>11424692
perspectivism, not perspective. also, Plato literally spent his life trying to btfo sophists (who were basically proto-Neitzschians). Protagoras is the earliest exposition on perspectivism

>>11424706
>>11424720
>imagine being this dead inside

>>11424722
>That's the function of a university, to engage with oppository beliefs and lessen personal prejudices and approach certain topics from multiple perspectives.

You and I both know that's not how these courses are taught. They're presented as having merit because of the historical influence of long-march homos on academia, but they have been thoroughly routed out in each and every instance. Every humanities course I ever had shoehorned women and kikes into the discussion, and insisted we view culture with a critical lens on that basis. We don't teach Men's Rights in college because (as Peterson rightly identifies, and ironically echoing historical socialists like George Orwell) it's merely ideological - a self-serving fragmentary truth, unlike religious systems, which address social regulations not in terms of the particular but the universal.

Whether or not Derrida had this problem, I have no idea, but this is exactly what Foucault was - a dead-inside materialist who advocated for sexual perversion as an antidote to his own failures as a person. This sort of reductionism is common among academics (even those who are comparatively normal analytical scholars) because their obsession with books leaves them deadened to actual experience. Thus everything is merely an expression of power, nothing means anything if we don't ascribe meaning to it (and thus if we fail to do so, we despair, so it's best to load up on drugs and sex just in case you ever end up doing any actual thinking). It dates to Marx at least, probably earlier.

Jordan Peterson hasn't really given much of an indication that he understands many of these writers, but he also rightly identifies how pointless most of them are, because they start from positions that are ultimately self-refuting (e.g. Subjective truth, subjective morality / amorality, etc). Even if the positions turned out to be true, they wouldn't mean anything, and he rejects them primarily on that basis. He himself is nearly postmodern in this regard (do what is efficacious, truth neither matters nor exists), but the positions were easily refuted outside of the autistic academic hugbox before they were even popularized.

>>11424738
>perspectivism, not perspective
Perspectivism was Nietzsche's perspective, that's what I said.

>Plato literally spent his life trying to btfo sophists (who were basically proto-Neitzschians).
Yes, so why would Peterson ascribe perspectivism to Plato?

>>11424763
Upboted

>>11424536
>Nietzsche and Jung spent a lifetime trying to codify something every plebeian with a life, raised by a strong father and good mother, with love in his life and passion for some hobby, understood intuitively. Their works are educated brainlet-tier, and you could blanket everything they wrote with one giant 'duh'
what?

>>11424765
obviously because the sophists didn't leave any fucking writings so we get their ideas through works like Plato's Protagoras

>>11424772
they did write but the greek pseuds photocopied more platos

>>11424728
If ya say so Nietzsche, might want to come up with an actual argument to convince people

>>11424786
true, we do have some fragments

>>11424772
>Why don't people ascribe becoming The Last Man to Nietzsche because he articulated the concept?
>Why don't people ascribe capitalism to Karl Marx because he examined it critically?

>>11424793
Some of his writing is quite good, but the problem is that a lot of it is polemically saying things people usually won't address, so it's largely up to what you happen to agree with.

>>11424733
He wasnt a postmodern-neomarxist undermining western civilization because he wasn't either of those, and defended western civilization you pseud, actually read what I said.

>>11424536

>So tell me again, what's your fascination with this boomercuck when all he does is parrot their shit?

I've never read, listen or paid attention to Peterson in my life but there's literally nothing wrong with passing on knowledge. Get the fuck out of here with your everything is Intellectual Property mindset you filthy capitalist pigdog.

>He humbly claims these aren’t his theories, but he has been inspired by several authors, And seeing as their archetypical stories, it isn’t much to invent besides better articulations for them.

>I.E hes humble af

>Sees people dwindling into nihilism and compensating with either hedonism or extremism

>Wants to make a difference, proceeds to do so with his lectures and 12rfl book.

>Admits he wrote 12 rules to life to reach as many laymen as possible and improve their lives.

Seeing all the irrational hatred towards JbP in this thread, by people admitting to never have read or listened to him reveals ironically that its /lit/ that needs him the most. Instead of mindlessly blabbering how much JBP is a charlatan for selling ‘’obvious’’ ideas, (wich has a market, so how obvious were they really?) how about you go clean your room :^)

>>11424694
meant to quote >>11424540

>>11424970
How about picking intellectuals with actual merit instead of this man's pseud garbage?
Jordan Peterson needs Jung and Nietzsche to make his deliberately vague drivel seem coherent. :^)

>>11424540
>Nietzsche is beyond Peterson, he doesn't understand him.


lol nietzche isn't beyond anyone his work is very simple and stupid.

>>11424722
>That's the function of a university, to engage with oppository beliefs and lessen personal prejudices and approach certain topics from multiple perspectives.
Maybe a few centuries ago sure, but the in our time, universities are more or less corporations that sell the promise of social mobility and meaningful employment. This gives them a great deal of power, so rather than engaging with difficult concepts, most students just end up being preached at and forced to affirm the message.

>>11424681
>Postmodernism is not about destroying truth,

??? lol

>muh pronouns will lead to the deaths of millions
this guy is so dramatic