/lit/ - Literature

Two quotes:

>When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

>A man that should call everything by its right name would hardly pass the streets without being knocked down as a Common Enemy

Dis nigga be a drug addict with a whore daughter while preaching self improvement

>>19702204
No one who has an IQ above 125 will be wasting their time with this quack sophist simplifier who evidently doesn't even read that much outside of Jung.

>>19702232
Yeah, that's the biggest flaw with peterson. he simplifies things.

He has some questionable takes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yk4V4mfUmRY

>you have earned a $25 Red Lobster gift card for defending Western Civilization on 4channel

>>19702204
Anyone tried her diet?

>>19702204

people don't like the truth, which is usually that everything bad they're experiencing is entirely their fault. That successful people have just as much misfortune as everyone else, but they simply have the fortitude to deal with it and carry on.

People don't want to know that their life is actually in their control. It's much better to just throw your arms up and say your powerless and you got a bad hand in life, and please hand me my welfare check time.

>>19702204
>his field
What do you mean specifically? Psychiatry?

>>19702204
lmao

>>19702271
Most successful people in the US are from the bourgeoisie, it's just bourgeois headspace reproducing itself generationally.

>>19702269
It was one of the things that set off Jordans recent mental issues

>>19702307
>successful people in the US are from the bourgeoisie

if by "successful" you mean "rich", then maybe. But right off the bat, you can tell you have a pretty bizarre idea of what success is. Most rich people are miserable mental cases. success has very little to do with money. It's more about, are you achieving what you wanted to? Are you content? Is your life tolerable? Does you get along with your family?

Go to AA and NA meetings sometimes, if you think money is the only indicator of success. One of the most common stories you'll find there is, "I had all the money in the world, but it didn't mean anything to me..."

>>19702313
Misrepresenting much? Neither one of them are really advocates of their diets. They basically just say they both have fucked up autoimmune disorders, and their all meat diet is the only thing they've found that reduces the symptoms. Not like they're going around telling everybody to do the same.

>>19702204
yeah it is mostly fine to be a total idiot phoney in his field, academic psychology, the most bullshit field imaginable. he's a moron and has the weakest intellect out of all the "public intellectuals" out there today. his politics offends me far less than his totally undeserved pretensions of erudition. and he's a drug addict and raised an insufferable thot.

>>19702360
I didn't misrepresent anything. He asked if anyone tried her diet and I said Jordan did and then ended up in a Serbian hospital

>>19702405
BY CHOICE

>>19702244
you forgot the quack sophist thing

and also the Jung

and that he never fucking says anything

>>19702204
He goes into a debate about Marx purporting to be a scholar, and is unaware of one of the most hyped canon works of bourgeois sociology and political economy known to man.

He's published two books, he maintained a Professorship on *one* book.

In Australia, in philosophy, you need about five book equivalents which aren't popular appeal, to make a level E position.

There's no reason for him to get the amount of his he gets as far as his intellectual production goes: HE HAS PRODUCED NOTHING.

>>19702522
He's just a political meme, a grift, possibly an unwitting psyop.

>>19702204
There are more posts like yours defending Peterson against his detractors than there are posts critical of Peterson.

>>19702522
uhh he's apparently frequently cited in his academic niche.

The thing is, every other philosopher type that's gotten to the level of celebrity Peterson has, has also been a pseudointellectual hack. The difference is that those other celebrity philosophers were left-wingers, as is the audience for that type of celebrity.

Now that the right has their own pseudointellectual, it's much easier for a mainly left-wing audience to sniff out the pseudointellectualism.

Nobody gives a shit when Zizek says something inane, because they like Zizek and agree with him that everything they don't like is capitalist propaganda. Peterson says something they don't understand or like and suddenly they can notice obscurantism when they see it.

>>19702540
Its sadder than that. Children of the bourgeoisie who go into the academy get atypical results, vastly atypical results. Children of the bourgeoisie who are usefully trite right wing thinkers who manage to fulfill minimal ideological requirements that catch the fancy of someone or other achieve vastly atypical results.

Peterson just has a funding agent, or the equivalent of a funding agent, due to his obviously right wing agenda and his minimal capacity to form a thesis.

His utter incapacity as a HASS professor is demonstrated by his inability to interface with Marx in any cogent sense. When Zizek looks at you as a poor sick kitten, and instead of replaying Foucault, gives you a pat and some milk…wew lad.

>>19702541
Except his criticism of political correctness largely creates the object he critiques, fails in its critique, and is vacuous. Political correctness is primarily a bourgeois liberal tool used to attack the left, both the Old Tankie Morality Of Women Are Just Men Without Penises, Wages For HouseWork Please Now at Union Rates; and also the gender queer transcommo shit. "Political Correctness" was primarily a movement of middle class lesbians attacking working class lesbians in the 1990s, with some blowby against right wing commentators who were handily described as sexist in the 1980s. An attack on political correctness as a proxy for anti-communism is ludicrous: Dworkins is your fucking ally against the left.

I had netsex with those lesbians in the 1990s btw. They were eager but way too into BDSM as bottoms for their claims about liberation and identity to be real.

>>19702608
>Nobody gives a shit when Zizek says something inane, because they like Zizek and agree with him that everything they don't like is capitalist propaganda.
Most of what Zizek says that you don't understand is either:
1) Basic film theory, which is what he's paid for
2) Basic Lacan, which is what he's paid for
3) Basic Hegel, not paid for it, but he's good at it to a publishable level
4) Yugoslavian jokes, which are intended as a call to radical action, which his audience ignores and dismisses
5) A couple of cheap bland undergraduate level Marx jokes about what a useless cunt he is, see 4)

The thing is that Zizek is good for it, has published his books, then taken coke and published too many books like Sartre did, but even those are "adequate."

In public Zizek mostly moves between 3) 4) and 5) for fun.

Zizek went through the French system, where you actually do have to publish worthy works, apart from sucking some cock.

>>19702581
>citation frequency
You social scientists are great at making me laugh. The funniest bit was when you got control of the research funding model and tried to introduce impact factors.

>>19702611
>Political correctness is primarily a bourgeois liberal tool used to attack the left
Political correctness is a leftist invention. Leftist and liberal are synonymous.

>>19702677
You're completely filtered or arguing in mauvaise foi

>>19702611
Perfectly encapsulated.

>>19702689
Leftist, liberal, marxist, communist, democrat etc. are all different names for the same people.

>>19702307
wealthy ≠ successful

>>19702677
>mauvaise foi
>>19702689
There is a *third* option. He is a reactionary too ignorant to understand that 1789 and the steam engine meant the furthest right one can be is to be a right wing liberal (ie: "conservative,") or a violent right wing liberal with an ontologically inherent racial/colonist identity (ie: "fascist,").

Sadly he is unlikely to be a genuine reactionary, so we can't get our Pokemon photo-safari points up today.

>>19702702
If I could do it over I wouldn't have had netsex with those lesbians though. I just would have gone gay top IRL barrier and PReP on twinks and trans. It would have reduced the amount of feminist theory I read.

>>19702204
Yeah, I’d say 75% of his criticism comes from un-ironic “anti-racists” who vote Democrat (or the equivalent in their euroshit country) and are still butt-hurt about Trump. The other 25% hate him for his milquetoast conservatism, and “I act as if God exists”, and generally “boomer”-esque philosophy. His self-help is alright I guess for those that need it, though not anything particularly new (but who said self-help should be new).
I don’t watch him anymore, his fans are literal redditors, but I do appreciate him for pointing me to Jung, other psychologists, and literature that I otherwise wouldn’t have been interested in on my own. I really wish he didn’t take a democratic approach to his content, by which I mean to “help as many people as possible” by appealing to the typical man. I wish he just went completely off the deep end in Jung, the occult, Gnosticism, philosophy and psychology, so that he would be some Alan Watts or Terrence McKenna like character. Though that obviously isn’t the best mass marketing strategy, it would be more interesting to us pseuds that want to spark a blunt and listen to some crazy shit. Instead he opted for mass-delusion… he fooled himself and his followers into thinking he had answers for them. But when he BTFO’d Sam Harris multiple times… that was hilarious.

>>19702776
It's not bad faith. I accept your concession.

I'll respect Peterson when he stops charging $80+ per copy of Maps of Meaning, holy shit.

>>19702793
dude, nobody cares

>>19702204
>he's mostly fine
what an enthusiastic defense

>>19702269
Do an elimination diet if you suspect that your diet isn’t helping you. Meat and vegetables are typically the safest and most hypoallergenic foods. Whereas gluten and other grains are potentially problematic (or at the very least will make you feel a bit sluggish). Though in my experience, people typically blame or overemphasize the value of diet. After all the diets I tried, the only improvement I saw was from limiting grains until dinner.

>>19702313
Look! A vegan retard.

>>19702611
LOL. Petersons “right wing agenda”. Holy fuck you closet liberals are too funny. Getting this set off by a literal boomer, but I guess he is the intellectual match for most of “y’all”

>>19702204
I think the issue is because he represents liberalism and everyone is rejecting that. There's not really an answer liberalism can give us except "just don't worry/care about that". That's not satisfactory to anybody on the right or left. Even more he says to get involved in politics and to be in eternal struggle against the right/left through some mechanism of saying "dc about this". I don't see how it's accurate or helpful.

>>19702871
Kek. Single-handedly denying the "glorious" commie revolution of the West at this point. If only they could get him fired. Blast!!! Their plans are foiled.

>>19702871
>>19702922
Summarise the dusty balls joke in the context of the Hungarian Canadian Community, CIA research funding of the North American social sciences in the 1960s, Milovan Djilas' conversations with Stalin, and the discovery that the head of Aufhebengate.

Use the joke's vehicle as the red thread in your exposition.

You should be able to do this, its easy.

>>19702949
No, you sound like the expert, so you go right ahead here pal. Let's hear it.

>>19702949
I take that back, actually. From the sounds of it you're way up your own ass and I could do without hearing one of your jokes, thanks.

>>19703013
The cum drips out, untended, as the Mongol departs with dusty balls. She wakes up, pregnant but wilfully social democratic in Canada, as the doctoral sociology student who got a surprising disbersement for their PhD topic on Hungarian Migrant Remembrances goes to interview. All that's on the tape is semen, blood and the pregnancy of another woman to be born on the steppe. He's out of prison, and writing for the Mongol, about the Mongol's moustache, and when he asked Him if He let the balls get dusty the gutteral Georgian laugh came through, "But you see, I am the Mongol, why would I let my balls get dusty, here, once again, I will rape your wife Ðilas, now hold my balls."

The thing is you read Ðilas in the hope you'll discover something about not being raped. That maybe somewhere in the Soviet Experiment, sometime, somewhere, we were not pushed down into the dust and raped. You read the sociology of the young ball holders of Canada. You read Ðilas. You read Engels. And eventually you realise that you're not a ball-holder; that ball-holders turn out like the purportedly Left-Communist publishing group Aufheben, not as a cry in the dark, but as funded by the very police agencies designed to control you, designed to teach instead of the 1980s lines of demarcation of state agency, the newer, friendlier, London kettles of water starvation over long hours. You discover that anyone who publishes either cups or dusts the balls.

The point isn't to expect your useless proto-nomenklatura husband to cut the balls off.

The point is to sharpen your scissors before the rape. Because given a horse, your husband will become the mongol. The point is to cut Zizek's balls off and feed them to him in public.

Your mother.
Your sister.