/lit/ - Literature

>>15734957
Oh fuck, youtube deleted his yt lectures?

I don't really care, I'm just surprised he's still alive given his beef, bourbon and benzo diet.

>>15734996
KEK that is him trolling, anon. I doubt he actually does that.

>>15734957
I regard the transgenders as subhuman cattle mindless purpose engineered biopolitical clientele for the neoliberal globohomo regime. Wouldnt it feel great to line them up in a line and bust in their pink haired skulls with bricks?

>>15734996
mate you’re not too bright if you think beef is unhealthy

He's past his peak. If they were going to ban them they already would have.

>>15735041
>Wouldnt it feel great to line them up in a line and bust in their pink haired skulls with bricks?
It would not. That would be a mercy killing.

Don't tell me /lit/ actually takes this clown seriously

>>15735093
I dont tale peterson seriously but i take cultural marxism seriously. If anything the response to peterson shows the left is deranged and nothing will stop the slide into totalitarianism other than direct confrontation.

>>15735093
i do and i think his writings are really honest

>>15735052
too much meat corrupts the flesh

>>15735103
What is "cultural marxism"?

>>15735093
Okay, why do you think he's a clown?

>>15735052
Dude he only ate beef with some salt and drank water for like half a year

>>15735147
Just watch any debate he's had with actual philosophers or intellectuals. He has no idea what he's talking about.

>>15735139
cant tell if you’re playing stupid or not, but it’s another term for PC/SJW culture

>>15735139
replace class concious with race/sex/orientation conciousness, use dialectic materialism, follow in the steps of marxist-feminist writings (literally, thats what they call themselves), like Hegel and Haiti. they may be economically capitalist, but their process of thought is influenced by the marxist tradition of historiography and sociology.

>>15735180
I know what it is and it's more than that. It's a conspiracy theory about the Frankfurt school. I think Peterson claims the fundamental narrative of marxists is "oppressor versus oppressed" and that this culture you talk about is a conspiracy by marxists as a reaction to the failed narrative of class struggle. This is complete horseshit as Zizek among others have demonstrated.

>>15735227
people only ever bring up zizek on this point, also, what do you say to >>15735183
i can draw a direct intelecual geneology from marxism.

>>15735227
Economic Marxists are irrelevant and openly hated by most of the left. When i think about the greatest threat to all we hold dear i think of Lgbtsjwtfnpc anti whites and other cultural marxists being promoted by the establishment.

>>15735183
>>15735246
>follow in the steps of marxist-feminist writings
>Like Hegel
What?
>concious
I have no idea what the point here is. Maybe if you could write a single coherent sentence I could comment on this. Read about base/superstructure.

>>15735267
>Economic marxists
What the fuck are you on about? If you honestly think liberal SJWs are considered "left" by actual socialists, whether marxist or otherwise, you're simply mistaken. All marxists are materialists, that's what marxism is. There is no "cultural marxism", it's a right wing conspiracy theory. This is evident for anyone with even a basic understanding of marx.

>>15735295
So BLM, modern feminists and ANTIFA are the product of right wing conspiracies?

>>15735274
“Hegel and Hati” js a highly influential article which has been cited tens of thousands of times. it uses marxist dialectic materialism to assert a connection between the thoughts of Hegel and his master slave dialectic with the hatian revolution, and how it was a beginning fundement to institutionalization racism in historiography and academia. if you actually tried to read development in academic thought you might have known of it.

the structure of the idea of class conscious (what i meant by concious, sorry for the mistype) was a direct inspiration for “identity consciouses” like those of feminism racialism and sexual identity.

>>15735295
Oopsie. It's a shame marxism died.

>>15734957
Why did Jordan call his depression cure the Carnivore Diet when it involved turning himself into a vegetable?

>>15735318
No but them being a product of "cultural marxism" is. And what exactly worries you about BLM, feminists, and ANTIFA?

>>15735323
I'll have to read that, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Can't really comment on this because I don't know about it.

>>15735381
well, thanks for being open minded on it at least. i dont think “cultural marxism” is the best term to describe it, but it is useful enough since it is somewhat interrelatedin terms of how it was developed as a thought process. i have other seminal “feminist” and other “identity” articles that were influential in achademia too if you like them. i actually think a good amount of them are very well write and good nuanced analysis, but that doesnt change the fact that they helped forward the development of idpol social engineering by the people who only saw the intellectual resedue of the works.

another is a feminist response to “The Making Of the Eglish Working Class”. the book itself was purely a marxist work by the author, and is seen as a fundemental development in leftist historica thought. the feminist response to it (made sometime in the 60’s) was equally as influential in the burgeoning feilds of feminism and sociology.

>this is Jordan's "research" with a mostly intact brain
>he doesn't have that anymore
Gotta say, I'm really excited for maps of meaning 2.

>>15735168
I've watched quite a few of his debates He's never really been shown up or embarassed.

You wanna cite something?

>>15735438
Can't hurt to read them. I'll gladly check out anything you got.

>>15734957
>didn't discuss maps of meaning
>proceeds to ask non /lit/ questions

I'm triggered.

>>15735458
Well in the Zizek debate he got clearly embarrassed. Other debates that I know of are unrelated to this but if you want to see him out of his depth check out his debate with David Benatar.

>>15735476
>Well in the Zizek debate he got clearly embarrassed

Where?

>>15735468
If these are the maps of meaning, no wonder people are getting lost! Jeez louise!

>>15735478
When Zizek asked him to name any postmodern cultural marxists.

>>15735494
Because nobody specifically identifies as one means nobody participates in it?

>>15735381
>BLM
BLM is subversive movement that is not interested in either truth or justice.
Whites are more likely per unarmed police encounter to be lethally shot.
In almost all cases of blacks being killed by police that's been talked about the last few years the victim has been armed, resisting or attacked the police officer. But this is apparently not important to the discourse.

I'm not saying problem don't exist but the discussion is not being held honestly nor is it open to criticism.

>Feminists
Equality under the law was achieved long ago and the modern problems are not really problems at all and this movement is also dishonest and subversive.

The pay gap does not really exist when analyzed honestly with multiple variables.

Biology and anthropology is forced to self censor to not show uncomfortable truths in the name of equality. It's known there are differences in temperament between the sexes but the consequences of these temperaments are supposed to be denied and ignored.

Feminism is no longer about equality but it's instead used to force equal outcome which is impossible and damaging to society.

>ANTIFA
ANTIFA would long ago be designated a terrorist organization in all of the West if their political leaning was not in line with what was was fashionable in academia and the MSM.

They get away with stupid rhetoric like saying they are not an organization and that they simply mean that they are against facism, which of course is laughable.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/6k67ns/made_my_own_maps_of_meaning_diagram/

Is this why people keep saying psychology is a soft science?

>>15735494
idk, ifwt like that wholedebate went absolutely nowhere. both parties were talking around each other and not really directing their points at each others.

and the “cultual marxist” point kf the debate, sounded like zizek firing up the audience more than anything, and Peterson told him it was a visable trend not something he had on hand. it was more of a rhetorical technique than a purely intellectual one.

>>15735476
He absolutely went in unprepared for that "debate"
That doesn't mean Maps of Meaning isn't worth discussing
Do better

>>15735505
Why couldn't he name anyone that participates in it? To make the claim he must be able to see them.

>>15735505
Because the concept is confused and incoherent. Peterson admits this much but he says nonetheless there's a movement like this. I guess he's saying the same thing as you are. But there are no such theory, the phenomenon you're referring to is not marxist, it's mostly liberal and maybe arguably anarchist though that aspect is very different from the shallow liberal political correctness.

>>15735544
Not him, but what always gets me is Jordan griping about postmodernism while being extremely postmodernist. MoM is classic pomo shit

>>15735544
i would definitely say its marxist since it employs dialectic materialism. you know marx wasnt just influential amongst commies in the ussr? he’s theories influenced practically every major thinker in sociology in the west as well.

>>15735544
>Because the concept is confused and incoherent.

It is inherently incoherent.
"Post-modernism" and "Marxism" are not directly compatible.

It cyclical abuses or exploits ideological mechanisms from one in order to rationalize the other.

"If we dismantle the traditional family, we'll create more equity in the world."
"It's not your fault society doesn't value your underwater basket weaving degree, it's class inequality robbing us poors."

>>15735588
>buzzword-laden strawmen of your opponents instead of arguments anyone has actually made
Peterson has taught you well.

>>15735645
What were the buzzwords?

Strawman? I literally provided a real word example of an organization promoting a post-modernist objective in the pursuit of combating race/class inequality.

>>15735645
This is the opposite. The pointed out the incoherent drivel the cultural marxists are spouting, he even gave a an explicit example.

>i'm indifferent to his participation in the culture wars
>proceeds to make a culture war thread

why don't you make a thread about the book you're reading you stupid pseud. is it because you're not reading the book and you're a retarded zoomer who can only watch youtube clips of daddy j?

>>15735443

This is incredibly boring and sterile. I hope his mental breakdown makes his insights more interesting.

>>15735669
>>15735677
>incoherent post-modernist drivel
Pic related

>>15735702
Are you a schizoposter?

>>15735139
Marxism of the Frankfurt school, especially as it applies to critiquing culture and critical race theory

>>15735728
Oh, you thought an actual diagram from Dr. Peterson's Maps of Meaning was something a schizo made?

>>15735760
Yes, but also on conjunction with your incoherent posts and refusing to actually answer anything.

>>15735776
Please, I just want to discuss the maps. I just need to find meaning in these maps.

>>15734957
>his views on transgenderism
he's pro of all it, his problem comes from classical liberalism autism surrounding being forced to used pronouns, basically a useless faggot.

>>15735760
the diagram makes sense if you're not a brainlet. its literally baby's first mythological symbolism. do you suffer from fetal alcohol syndrome?

>>15735791
Enlighten us plebs, please.

>>15735093
I do but not for being philosophically informed, nor a political spokesperson, nor a self-help guru. None of these things is he notably good at, despite the aforementioned epithets often being attributed to him in normalfag media. He's created a thought framework that I'm very fond of, and that I think is unfairly being treated as "uninspiring", "meaningless", or "far-fetched", because its content can't be neatly categorized or said to pertain to any particular tradition. The closest you'll get but which is still far from what would be right imo is to say Peterson's Maps of Meaning contributed to the tradition of analytic psychology of Carl Jung.

For the same reason the criticisms levelled against Peterson are usually met with accusations of misunderstanding his work and as a result prove insufficient in revoking the whole thesis. Experts within specific fields who find one aspect of his work to be lacking critique said lack, but fail to address the whole -- Because no vantange point from which this could be done yet exists. Peterson himself said at some point that noone had attempted a proper systematic critique of MoM.

>>15735103
The concept of "Cultural Marxism" is literally Nazi propaganda, except back then they called it "cultural Bolshevism".

>>15735811
I think Peterson is a hack and a retard, but this is the best defense I've ever seen of him. I applaud your honesty and your dubs

>>15735813
How is that relevant?

In this very thread people have clarified what they mean given explicit examples.

I don't care about that Heisenberg chose to remain in Nazi Germany, his ideas and contributions are no less valid because of it.
If cultural marxism explains something then it does not matter if a precursor to the idea was used for propaganda purposes or not.

>>15735845
Much obliged. I usually try to take criticism levelled against his work seriously, so it makes coming up with a take that seems like it might stand up to scrutiny hard.

>>15735295
>All marxists are materialists, that's what marxism is. There is no "cultural marxism",
Either dishonest or just plain stupid. The whole point of calling it "cultural" Marxism instead of plain Marxism is to indicate that it's Marxist ideas applied to culture rather than to economics. Your attempt at pedantic deflection isn't even properly pedantic. It's like complaining about the term "national socialism" because socialism is just supposed to be economic and not nationalistic. Okay, but you understand immediately what Hitler meant by the phrase, right? Socialism with a nationalistic ideal attached. Same shit here. The people we're discussing have their roots in socialist/communist ideas about the world and tie back at the roots to communist organizations, it's perfectly sensible to call their plan "Cultural Marxism." Ideas grow and change, and the only point of making a post like this is to argue your way around the point.

>>15735813
Do you believe Nazi conceptions of cultural marxism, Judeo-Bolshevism appeared out of thin air?

>>15734967
Nope, still there.

>>15735813
>implying the Nazis were wrong

>>15736053
Marxism is an economic theory. You can't just "apply it to culture". What's the cultural equivalent of the labor theory of value, or the means of production, or the transformation problem? Doesn't make a lick of sense.

>>15735811
>noone had attempted a proper systematic critique of MoM
I don't blame them. One look at those schizo diagrams and any serious scholar would run in the opposite direction. Pure meth-addict-tier crackpottery. Surprised to hear he was only into downers.

>>15735693
I heard he can only communicate now through primitive hand gestures and beef-farts. Sad how he went from Maps of Meaning to Braps of Meaning.

>>15736125
yes I know MANY other economic theories that prominently feature class consciousness, revolution & counter-revolution and historiographical conceptions in their mathematical models

>>15736162
>t. hasn't read Marx

>>15736125
Regardless if it makes a lick of sense, it still is applied. Have you read feminist theory? a good chunk if it adresses sex like marx adresses class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_feminism#:~:text=Marxist%20feminism%20is%20a%20philosophical,individual%20ownership%20of%20private%20property.

>>15736179
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxist_feminism

>>15736179
>>15736186
I'm sure there are people who think they can apply quantum mechanics to psychiatry. That doesn't make Max Planck a crackpot.

>>15736205
They literally call themselves marxist feminists. Can you not get that through your thick skull.

Im not a polemicist. Marx was a great man, and Marxism had far reaching impacts in a lot of feilds, why is it such a stretch that his form of dialectic materialism effected sociology?

>>15735588

That extract you posted seems to be calling for not dismantling the "traditional family," but a return to it. The nuclear family can hardly be called traditional, it has only been been around a generation basically.

>>15736221
>Marxist_feminism
That's just about attaining feminist ends through Marxist means. It's not "Marxism applied to women", which would be nonsensical.

>>15736244
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1468-0424.00061
>poststructuralist approach to gender, class and power.

>>15736205
And it doesn't make the phrase "quantum psychiatry" illegal. Address the ideas, not the phrasing.

>>15736139
They're only schizo if you look at one without having a modicum of background knowledge. They're fairly systematically built up in the book, explained along with their mythological counterparts. For what it's worth, Peterson's terse and repetitive writing style does a great job at laying out the models, step by step.

>>15734957
Will who ban his books? Youtube isn't the government you dweeb.

>>15736252
That's not Marxism.

>>15736178
>not THAT part of Marxism

>>15736280
>not THAT approach to Marxism

>>15736280
Have you been to a sociology class? the idea that history, and the history of people can be brought to a science is a marxist one.

>>15736263
It all sounds rather whimsical and unfalsifiable.

>>15736291
What?

>>15736297
Because it is. The right way, I think, to view it is akin to a proposition for a grand explanatory model. Sorta like string theorists making ridiculous off-the-wall propositional papers about how the cosmos is structured. The core thesis is in part or fully untestable because it's so far removed from what we know of its subject matter right now, but with time we might come to see it be verified or disproven, as the library of knowledge of how the subject works expands.

Part of the reason for this far-fetchedness of MoM is that mythology is extremely hard to study reasonably, even comparatively, interpreting notwithstanding. If you were to take it to be the sole thing MoM rests on, restricts its scope of reasonable application considerably, which I think is why Peterson defers to his expertise in psychology as a means to lay out some measure of empirical verifiability. It's for sure not enough, but it makes a reasonably strong case, which is enough for me to have a respect for the theory, along with my obviously preexistent personal experiential bias.

>>15735796
Wait, so you're here to seriously criticize Peterson and you haven't read his book? You sound like a fool.

>>15735845

It's a workable defense to you because he actually read the guy's damn book, and it seems you haven't. You probably don't know anything about Peterson's actual ideas or framework. But you know him as a "hack" and "retard", probably because a talking head on TV told you so.

What is wrong with you?

>>15735476
No. Read the transcript. Zizek is a fraud who hides behind his inexcusably poor English.

>>15736537
He seemed to have a thorough understanding of the diagram- and so do you!
You wouldn't happen to be pretending to "get it" to look smart, would you? Then what's so hard?

>>15735476
>clearly embarrassed
that's a nice argument. he read the manifesto and responded to it, while zizek defaulted communist position immediately. how embarrassing!

>>15736783
I don't care if you think I "look smart". I am stunned and disgusted to find that nearly every criticism of Peterson is by people who don't know anything about his actual theories.

What's the point of having a conversation with someone who doesn't even know what the conversation is about? This sucks.

>>15736783
It says right there in the label.

It's the role of a divine mother figure in giving birth to the monomythical hero.

impregnated by chaos, begetting anxiety or hope at anticipation of the childs journey to ritualistically "slay the dragon" as he loves to say and the maturation of the child into a hero

>>15736825
You obviously care how you look, you're using a trip. Anyway, this seals it, you have no idea what this diagram means.

>>15736849
This guy gets it. It's the role of a divine mother figure in giving birth to the monomythical hero.
Impregnated by chaos, begetting anxiety or hope at anticipation of the childs journey to ritualistically "slay the dragon" as he loves to say and the maturation of the child into a hero

>>15736562
I think that he's a hack and a retard in the same way I think anyone practicing Jungian "science" is a hack and a retard. The Jungian school, like any other pseudoreligious, pseudointellectual spinoff of science, is the domain of the greatest hacks and retards of the last century.

>>15736887
Wrong. I don't care what YOU think. My trip is mostly for corresponding with worthwhile people.

You, meanwhile, seem to be an ordinary sort of dummy that entered a conversation criticizing a work you have never read, while asking others to explain said work to you.

just watch this shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naWWzn2fxWc
>the purpose of phenomenology and ontology is to find a way to coexist with everyone
Peterson is drawn to philosophy because he is merely a weepy therapeutic psychologist, he has no value aside from getting autists to clean their rooms

>>15736912
Oh? Which of Jung's works would you specifically criticize?

>>15736941
Psychology and alchemy, for starters.
More generally, the idea that all humans share an umeasurable psychic hivemind, an idea desperately kept alive by a few generations of well-meaning wannabes like Peterson. It's a charming way to study religion, but it's a piss-poor attempt at psychology.

>>15737141
OK, this seems like a better conversation. If you're not a fan of Jung and the conception of archetypes, how would you explain the similarities of stories and themes that reoccur all over the world, and within totally disconnected peoples?

>>15735052
What the fuck are you talking about? The connection between red meat and cancers/poor cardiovascular health are well documented. It’s hardly as bad as smoking, but if you’re a middle aged guy like Peterson and you eat nothing but steak for every single meal, all I can say is good luck

>>15735041
>I regard the transgenders as subhuman cattle mindless purpose engineered biopolitical clientele for the neoliberal globohomo regime. Wouldnt it feel great to line them up in a line and bust in their pink haired skulls with bricks?

fuck off cia fuckshit

>>15734957
Read Nathan J. Robinsons critique of him and that nonsense book

>>15735516
>Feminism is no longer about equality but it's instead used to force equal outcome which is impossible and damaging to society.

This isn't necessarily correct. Pick up a book on male and female communication in the work force. The genders straight up use different communication styles and have different inherent social structures. And men, subconsciously judge the female way as inferior, and thus do not promote women or give them raises.

and before you or anyone else argues. Really, go read about it. Its fascinating stuff. Its like finding out there are secret witches or aliens or something. Before I really dug deep into it, I did not realize how different women's perception of reality was. And its hidden behind how we talk and organize people.

>>15737321
Are you saying women's "way" in the workplace isn't inferior? Because it sure seems so.

>>15737182
Throughout evolutionary history, humans in different environments have had common experiences.
Humans are social and curious, they often project human emotions onto inanimate objects and wildlife (animism). This is useful because storytelling and oral tradition can pass on information useful for survival- scavenger animals are often 'tricksters.' Humans all dealt with dangerous animals, birth, death, storms, etc, so these concepts inevitably play similar roles in oral tradition. This is where Jung's ideas work best, but these consistencies are still explained without a collective mind.

Jung's ideas fall apart at organized religion, where humans insert themselves into these mythologies as prophets or interpreters and give each religion its own themes and flavor. When comparing hinduism and christianity, Jungian interpretation requires one to squint pretty hard until you can find a few similar archetypes- a hero or a flood- which, again, are easily explained without a shared unconscious.

>>15737321
>And men, subconsciously judge the female way as inferior

Sounds really empirical and reproducible.

>>15737213
he had doctors monitoring his health for the entire period of his dietary experiment, and they didn't see any reason he should stop

>>15735811
>I do but not for being philosophically informed, nor a political spokesperson, nor a self-help guru. None of these things is he notably good at, despite the aforementioned epithets often being attributed to him in normalfag media. He's created a thought framework that I'm very fond of, and that I think is unfairly being treated as "uninspiring", "meaningless", or "far-fetched", because its content can't be neatly categorized or said to pertain to any particular tradition. The closest you'll get but which is still far from what would be right imo is to say Peterson's Maps of Meaning contributed to the tradition of analytic psychology of Carl Jung.
>For the same reason the criticisms levelled against Peterson are usually met with accusations of misunderstanding his work and as a result prove insufficient in revoking the whole thesis. Experts within specific fields who find one aspect of his work to be lacking critique said lack, but fail to address the whole -- Because no vantange point from which this could be done yet exists. Peterson himself said at some point that noone had attempted a proper systematic critique of MoM.

1. Peterson doesn't do anything particularly new. Joseph campbell wrote many of the same things, he just didn't pepper in various studies to back up some of his claims.
2. Lets be honest why people don't really like him. It has very little to do with the wroth of his books or career. These people are not reading his books. Its because he makes statements on gendered behavior based on old myths. Like he frames hero journey like it is for Boys, and then some other thing for women. The thing is, you can find some of these same types of stories where the genders are reversed. There is a Hungarian and Chinese folktale like beauty and the beast, but the genders are reversed. The hungarian one is about a prince and a princess pussy cat. And the Chinese one is where a dude marries a white snake. ANYWAY, this really pisses off liberals and women. He makes claims like men want purpose and women want to tame a bad boy, but women want purpose and men also like to tame bad girls.

He'd probably been received a lot better had he just said "people" instead of men do this and women do that.

>>15737358
I think you mostly agree with Jung, but are misinformed on what he believed about a "shared unconscious". As I understand it, it's not like a mystic thing floating up in space-- it's more like what you are saying, as this abstract set of rules that kind of exists because of the common experiences of evolution.

Basically, I don't think you really disagree with Jung.

>>15736053
>Either dishonest or just plain stupid. The whole point of calling it "cultural" Marxism instead of plain Marxism is to indicate that it's Marxist ideas applied to culture rather than to economics. Your attempt at pedantic deflection isn't even properly pedantic. It's like complaining about the term "national socialism" because socialism is just supposed to be economic and not nationalistic. Okay, but you understand immediately what Hitler meant by the phrase, right? Socialism with a nationalistic ideal attached. Same shit here. The people we're discussing have their roots in socialist/communist ideas about the world and tie back at the roots to communist organizations, it's perfectly sensible to call their plan "Cultural Marxism." Ideas grow and change, and the only point of making a post like this is to argue your way around the point.

You've been brainwashed by fbi and cia ops on 4chan. No one in feminism, blm, whatever, call themselves "cultural marxist" Its a made up term by conservatives in high places to manipulate you.

Can you even explain what cultural marxism is past saying its the cultural agenda of the left

>>15737398
1. Campbell is dope, but you could make a similar argument about him-- a lot of his writings seem to be about collecting others anthropological writings and building up a framework using Jungian standards. I would say Peterson is doing something a little similar-- using Jungian standards also, but collecting different points to reference and explain such as prison camps and more modern psychology (1960-1980s data-driven stuff).

Campbell is more accomplished, sure. But I don't think this is a reason to drop Peterson.

2. And yeah, here we go. Peterson has a few controversial opinions about gender, and then his whole framework gets thrown out without even being looked at. I guess that's just the sorry truth of it-- that's how most people operate.

>>15737141
>More generally, the idea that all humans share an unmeasurable psychic hivemind

did jung create the idea of the zeitgeist?

>>15737409
I've had something resembling this conversation before, and I regret to inform you that Jung did mean it literally.
Like I said, I think it is a pleasant way to study religion, but Jung was not using it as an abstract term for a more grounded phenomenon. It was heavily spiritual for him, and it is for Peterson, too. Though JP tries to downplay it, occasionally he lets it slip, like in the video where he admits he thinks Jesus could have resurrected by "balancing his mental life and death drives."

So I mean, you're right, I don't disagree with Jung if you want to use his stuff as a metaphor to discuss religion, but it's pretty depressing when it sinks in that Jung meant it literally, and these guys take it literally.

>>15737339
>Are you saying women's "way" in the workplace isn't inferior? Because it sure seems so.

You say this, but half the men on 4chan probably communicate like women.

Like here is an easy example. What do you personally do in a meeting? Stereotypical manly men use meetings to repeat what they know, and their level of knowledge shows their rank, which asserts dominance. and protects their place in the hierarchy. Stereotypical men love having meetings where nothing is achieved, but they get a chance to assert or peacock their knowledge.

Women on the other hand are more egalitarian. And would rather use meetings to discuss issues and make plans. They are less likely to care about being wrong because the meeting isn't for asserting status or rank to them.

Now put the two genders together in a meeting. The man is peacocking is knowledge and rank. The girl tries to make a plan, but is wrong. Instead of helping her, the male smugly thinks to himself that she is beneath him for being wrong and not also peacocking what she knows to assert her skill.

Now repeat that over a 100 meetings over a year, and you see who gets promoted or a raise. Not the girl that admitted she was wrong in meetings over and over again, but the stereotypical male that has hid every flaw at the cost of actually getting work done.

>>15737451
No, his brain downloaded it from humanity's psychic cloud server
when he was born. That's how he knew about it.

>>15737490
So you say he meant it literally. And I say he doesn't. Not sure where to go from here-- I don't have anything I can quote directly right now.

Peterson actually references this in Maps of Meaning, and says that Jung didn't mean it as a magical thing. I could quote that, but that's not Jung directly, so it's not the best evidence.

Do you have a passage you could point to that would suggest Jung taking things so literally-mystically?

>>15737416
I am not the anon you're arguing with

>You've been brainwashed by fbi and cia ops on 4chan. No one in feminism, blm, whatever, call themselves "cultural marxist" Its a made up term by conservatives in high places to manipulate you.
can't you say the exact same thing about systemic racism? Literally everybody disavows it, those accused of abetting it generally reply with denial/confusion, and the accusers have extreme difficulty citing specific falsifiable examples (e.g. bizarre truisms like "voter ID laws are racist because colored people have trouble getting IDs"). Is that also FBI/CIA ops, or a term made up by leftists in high places?

>Can you even explain what cultural marxism is past saying its the cultural agenda of the left
I have not read Marx, but I've been adjacent to enough Marx discussion to hear that the end state of the human economy is essentially a utopia free of class where all economic activity is through voluntary free association?

I see cultural marxism as an intellectual devotion to that same utopian tenet, but applied to things beside class. The bounds of race/gender/sexuality/health relations must pushed, relentlessly, until their intensive characteristics are erased, and any interaction between individuals where those things mattered is now as if they didn't exist at all.

This is, in practice, clearly impossible and this is where "cultural marxists" feel satisfied with destroying the present system of bigoted hierarchies, without having a replacement system planned that can provide us comparable advantages. They can't even show us new institutions without the hierarchies, they just want to repaint them.

>>15737445
>2. And yeah, here we go. Peterson has a few controversial opinions about gender, and then his whole framework gets thrown out without even being looked at. I guess that's just the sorry truth of it-- that's how most people operate.

his fans aren't helping. They've packed youtube with these videos.

I don't even know why he does it. Men love the idea of taming the monster girl / temptress. Anime is packed with it. The first love story in Transformers was that type of story.

Humans, both genders, like the idea of fixing someone with their genitals.

>>15737564
>can't you say the exact same thing about systemic racism? Literally everybody disavows it, those accused of abetting it generally reply with denial/confusion, and the accusers have extreme difficulty citing specific falsifiable examples (e.g. bizarre truisms like "voter ID laws are racist because colored people have trouble getting IDs"). Is that also FBI/CIA ops, or a term made up by leftists in high places?

You probably think you're being clever, but they are probably also fbi/cia ops. They have murdered black panther leaders because they had started to work with white churches.

racial tension keeps people in office. Conservatives tell their voters that the whites are on their team and they'll keep down the nonwhites.

The liberals tell the young whites and browns that they will fix all of that, vote for them.

And nothing changes. People vote. Money is made.

>>15737564
>I see cultural marxism as an intellectual devotion to that same utopian tenet, but applied to things beside class. The bounds of race/gender/sexuality/health relations must pushed, relentlessly, until their intensive characteristics are erased, and any interaction between individuals where those things mattered is now as if they didn't exist at all.

this sounds more like 90s colorblindness to race than anything sjw/tumblr/blm want now.

>>15737552
I'm not going to cite a passage because I'm lazy as fuck (and also because he says this many many times) but he thought the collective unconscious could be directly studied through dream interpretation. You wouldn't try to analyze something like that if you didn't think it was very literally real.

I'm not accusing him of being christian or anything, though. But here's the funny clip of JP, at around 4:00, speculating about whether jesus could have resurrected using mind-magic: https://youtu.be/RIB05YeMiW8

Apart from his overly long and too personal dream explorations of himself it's not that bad.
Ahead of its time, or 80 years too late.

>>15735358
He didn't plan for his wife to get cancer plus over-overworked.

>>15737689
I don't get what the issue is. Didn't he read twelve rules for life?

>>15737603
>You probably think you're being clever, but they are probably also fbi/cia ops.
If you'll believe me, I was trying to see if you'd hold a single standard and was not trying to "gotcha" you
>They have murdered black panther leaders because they had started to work with white churches.
I'm aware of this, but the seed of sympathy towards [what I called cultural marxism] in academica, which invented phrases like "systemic racism", has grown like a vine that is choking America to death. Is the alphabet soup profoundly incompetent to have done this? My bet is that they aren't involved in this. What would they have had to gain?

>>15737615
That's why I have the second paragraph:
>This is, in practice, clearly impossible and this is where "cultural marxists" feel satisfied with destroying the present system of bigoted hierarchies, without having a replacement system planned that can provide us comparable advantages. They can't even show us new institutions without the hierarchies, they just want to repaint them.
the cultural marxists used 90s liberalism as a springboard/smokescreen for what's going on right now

>>15737652
Dream interpretation is a fundamental practice with the old psychoanalysts-- Freud and Jung, at least. Personally, I agree with their arguments for dream interpretation. And I don't think you have to view the arguments as mystical if they respect a describable meaning for dream formations. In Jung's case, dreams (in certain cases) find creation from the old structures in our brains-- the old patterns developed through evolution and survival.

And thanks for the video. Interesting re:Peterson.

>>15737652
>I'm not going to cite a passage because I'm lazy as fuck (and also because he says this many many times) but he thought the collective unconscious could be directly studied through dream interpretation. You wouldn't try to analyze something like that if you didn't think it was very literally real.

That still doesn't mean he thought it was connected like through magic.

The basic idea of jung and those that came after isn't that difficult. Basically humans have been telling stories since we could talk. And if the story didn't find appeal, it was forgotten. So stories that really tapped into things common in most of the minds of the group lived on. HOPEFULLY, that is telling us something about the human mind. BUT it can also tell us about the culture that created the story. Like if the hero are male then the society telling the story is probably a patriarchy, not that patriarchies are universal.

This becomes more and more true as religions go hand in hand with centralized authority. When you do that, you have removed the filter of the group that filters out ideas that are not universal, and you end up with perversions like Christianity.

In that regard, comic books and video games probably match Jung's ideas more than the New Testament, because we can all choose to buy and discard stories we dont like.

Also, as an aside, we are in a unique situation now, because with the internet, any kind of story can find a group of people that act as a pretty poor filter. So if you write a fanfic, where a guy becomes a cat and grows 3 dicks, you can find tons of other people that think the same way, and now the story is no longer universal. This might also be why we are in the political mess we are in now. We no longer filter politics through a community of people, but through like minded people clumping together online. People no longer have to work together to shape something that works.

>>15737717
>I'm aware of this, but the seed of sympathy towards [what I called cultural marxism] in academica, which invented phrases like "systemic racism", has grown like a vine that is choking America to death. Is the alphabet soup profoundly incompetent to have done this? My bet is that they aren't involved in this. What would they have had to gain?

systemic racism is real though, you dumb nigger.

The "lost cause" narrative was a real thing, pushed by white democrats in the north and south, to keep republican business out of the south. Go read about the Dunning school. Democrats from NJ made that shit popular from ivy league schools in NYC. Or read about Robert Moses who purposely built a road system that disadvantaged minorities. Or readup on redlining. Or how nonwhites used to not be able to get house loans. Or southern vagrancy laws. Or how we train police to write poor niggers tickets.

Shits real my man. It might not be your fault, but its real.

Not that I give a huge shit. If white people had any sense, they would go along with BLM long enough to end police unions and qualified immunity. As long as those things exist, you don't really have gun rights.

>>15737729
>This becomes more and more true as religions go hand in hand with centralized authority. When you do that, you have removed the filter of the group that filters out ideas that are not universal, and you end up with perversions like Christianity.

meant to say less and less true

>>15737719
The difference, as I see it, is that Freud saw dream interpretation as a way to learn more about the individual. That Jung saw it as a way to study humanity's collective unconscious suggests that he saw dreams as a "portal" to study something concrete and larger than the individual.
Anyway agree to disagree etc etc you use a trip so i win

>>15737789
I basically agree with all of that (except your "win" lel). And so, the universal (the larger human collective experience) can be discovered through the individual because everyone has the same underlying brain structure, thus the same root evolutionary patterns/archetypes. It's still not "magical", but I believe if you can explore the universal patterns through your own experience, you can have "spiritual" experiences (at least because they have special emotional energy).

And yeah, I will bid you good night. Nice talk.

>>15737503
Those stereotypes are not true at all. Also, meetings in general are a retarded waste of time.

>>15737564
>I have not read Marx
You should have stopped right there. Marx was not a utopian socialist. He simply described how capitalism works.

>>15737503
Oh fuck off you disingenuous piece of shit. You aren't even worth a considerable reply.

Even supposing that contrived world view is true, a show of planning is just as pointless as "confirming what they know".

Should I purchase this?

It's not available on my uni database.

>>15735149
Tbf if you eat the liver and kidneys there's nothing wrong with that diet. I added eggs and pork though.

>>15737321
Fuck this nigger.
Go listen to Patrice Oneal if you want to understand female communication and thought.

>>15738078
No get it on Amazon for less.

>>15738078
IMAGINE paying 225 for a book by peterson

Yo trannies, covert fbi/cia fag here. Truth is JBP one of our top ops, but he btfoed the left too hard so we hadda make up this 'brain damage' story & give him some gardening time. Dude is a crack shot btw and plays a mean game of Scythe so don't be thinking you know him at all.

Knowledge peacock out.

>>15737398
>Peterson doesn't do anything new
He does, though. Haven't read Campbell beyond some cursory wikipedia skimming but I'm sure they don't walk the same route, right? I don't think I've ever heard Peterson mention Campbell specifically either.

>why people don't like him
The bugman instinctual recoiling of any association between gender and a set of behaviors can't in any way reasonably be considered an argument. In fact he always makes it a point when talking about personality to show that there're more similarity on average than difference, but that difference manifests at the extreme. Essentially in comparison to what the libshits imagine it's the meekest and most insubstantial claim possible, the fact that it's actually a scientific correlation notwithstanding. Does not warrant the outrage directed toward statements of the sort as is why I tend to ignore any accusations along those lines, unless about Peterson's actual ideas.

I've never seen anyone mount a reasonable argument of the kind that hasn't just boiled down to moralfaggotry that focuses on inconsequential details. They usually go something like
>The great mother is chaotic and devouring? Bigot!

>the genders are reversed
Sounds interesting, do you have resources on this? Haven't heard of this before, beyond the basic Jung and Neumann I'm not very familiar with mythology for itself.

>>15735093
>adhominem
>strawman
>zero argument at all
aw look, it's scared

>>15735782
kek

>>15734957
He is the true champion of pseuds and therefore /lit/ probably see's a lot of itself in him and thus hates him. He's a good public speaker and able to blag his way around the normal asinine questions you see him answering in the media, and by reminding everyone that he's a psychologist/academic. I think it's good to have a guy like him that is charismatic enough to be in the public eye, especially since he seems to revel in shit flinging contests with crazy people. I read 12 Rules and it was amusing but I would be loath to take it as anything scientific or to be taken too seriously. I don't think there's anything that offensive enough in there to get it banned, no matter how much he makes people seethe

>>15737321

Any recommendations to start with?

>>15737881
>Those stereotypes are not true at all. Also, meetings in general are a retarded waste of time.

found out you think like a woman, huh?

>>15737931
>Even supposing that contrived world view is true, a show of planning is just as pointless as "confirming what they know".

lol, imagine thinking "doing" is worth less than bragging about all you know

>>15739020
Isn't one of his 12 rules to pet a cat if you see one? That's some life changing shit right there.

>>15738231
>Go listen to Patrice Oneal if you want to understand female communication and thought.

yes anon, base your life around a comedian nigger and not books and research

>>15738840

just google "Hungarian Pussy Cat Princess" and "Chinese Legend of the White Snake" if you want to read more about men dating and purifying monster/beast girls like Beauty and the Beast.

There is also the Japanese Urashima Tarō, who saves a giant sea turtle that ends up being the goddess princess Otohime, whom he weds.

Purifying the beast princess/wife with the power of your love/dick is a pretty common theme.

It really wasn't until modern religions did it become a a nono. Then the beat/monster girl/man became a temptress or a demon that should either convert to the religion or be destroyed. Kind of like how the evil queen in snowwhite never becomes good. Had that story been older, the king would have probably loved and fucked the good into her, and the story would have been more like Sleeping Beauty where the big bad is just some symbolic evil fairy. The queen and monster would have been separate.

You see a similar thing with king author. Author eventually ends up with his evil sister, But in older versions of the story, his love makes her good and the evil morrigan is a separate character. They say christianity was the key reason the evil women of the story were all combined. You only see remnants of the half sister that he purified with his love at the end of the story, as she loves him and mourns his loss and sends his body to avalon.

>>15739214
you've made the mistake of thinking his analysis of narrative archetypes are absolutist without exception

>>15735516
>[ANTIFA] get away with stupid rhetoric like saying they are not an organization and that they simply mean that they are against facism, which of course is laughable.

~12 years ago, anonymous used to use the same rhetoric about not being an organization, and simply existing for the lulz. I miss those days.

>>15737321
Did you read this on /x/?

>>15734957
>Will they ban his books too
YouTube likely would ban his books.

How fucking retarded are you as a human being that you think Peterson's books are in any way at risk of being banned fucking anywhere?

Please name a single book that it is illegal to print and sell in America. There are literally none.

Banned from bookstores? Private companies can choose what they want to sell. Bezos would sell his grandmother's left nut for a nickle, so I don't think he's going to grow a conscious and start policing book content.

Banned from libraries? Librarians are radical defenders of books. Seriously, when the revolution starts, make sure librarians are on your side. They'll fuck you up.

>>15739901
damn I kind of forgot those days existed. what happened to us? some anons even used to do good things for lulz

>>15739999
there are some illegal books in the US, one about income tax and the Fed iirc. And Bezos has banned quite a few books from Amazon, mostly about Jews.

>>15735093
As a person: rather indifferent.

That said, his lectures regarding Jung are thought provoking; particularly the unconscious shadow always dwelling beneath the conscious surface ready at moments notice to utterly consume one's every action if not properly analysed, assimilated, accepted.

I don't particularly care for many people on a personal level but regardless they might have something interesting to say and thus are worth at least entertaining.

>>15737503
>Women on the other hand are more egalitarian. And would rather use meetings to discuss issues and make plans.

Supposing this and the rest of your post is correct, everyone I work with (99% males) all act like stereotypical women with the egalitarianism angle dropped. Anecdotal, sure but when you get paid for what you do rather than how much time you spent on it the strutting peacock routine doesn't have much of a place.

>>15737213
>The connection between red meat and cancers/poor cardiovascular health are well documented
No they aren’t you veggietard, stop repeating this tired lie

>>15735041
It wouldn't feel great but it would be feel necessary like a chore
and you would be glad to be done with it

>>15737503
What happens if a person (male) wants to make things happen, works hard to be knowledgable, and doesn't use that knowledge to just peacock?

Or is that just the kind of person who shouldn't get involved in a bullshit office job?

>>15735381
There goals worry anyone who cares about Western civilization. You obviously don't care. Which begs the question, why not move out of this white, capitalist, patriarchical hellhole and go live in a non-white paradise. It's cheap and easy to do.