/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10343069]

Got this for my birthday. What am I in for?

[Anonymous No.10343072]

Garbage.

[Anonymous No.10343073]

>>10343069
more lonely birthdays in your future

[Anonymous No.10343083]

misunderstandings of godel's theorems and rehashed Jung

[Anonymous No.10343087]

>>10343072
Most /pol/acks told me it was a good choice. I love his lectures and find them extremely informative and interesting.

>>10343073
I have a qt azn gf who I met and approached in my computer science courses because of Peterson's advice (amongst others)

[Anonymous No.10343093]

>>10343087
>watches YouTube "intellectuals"
>has a gook girlfriend
>computer class

fucking hell

[Anonymous No.10343098]

I like some of Peterson's dad philosophy that basically yells you to stop being a piece of shit. However, I can't stand hid nihilism and Freud worship. His relationships with people like Ezra Levant are also extremely questionable.

[Anonymous No.10343107]

>>10343069
A 500 page explanation on why you should clean your room.

[Anonymous No.10343112]

>>10343107
so, a manual?

[Anonymous No.10343115]

>tfw comfy peterson shitposting thread

[Anonymous No.10343133]

>Step 1
>Write about how you're going to clean your room within the next five days
>Step 2
>Don't eat children
>Step 3
>Pay attention for dragons
>Step 4
>Drowning your father, but then rescue him
>Step 5
>Clean your room

[Anonymous No.10343144]

>>10343083
I don't have experience with those two concepts.

>>10343098
He's helped a lot of young men with his advice. He's a fucking hero to me and my small gaming friend group.

[Anonymous No.10343150]

>>10343087
>Most /pol/acks told me it was a good choice.

[Anonymous No.10343175]

One hell of a ghost story

[Anonymous No.10343180]

>>10343069
A dying meme.
>being so stupid you shit on your fanbase

[Anonymous No.10343184]

>>10343175
quit the spookposting

[Anonymous No.10343632]

I don't like Peterson, but if you got this for your birthday from someone you love, by all means go for it. Have fun :DDD

[Anonymous No.10343705]

>>10343069
Self-help quackery a.k.a. snake oil.

[Anonymous No.10343710]

>>10343087
>I have a qt azn gf who I met and approached in my computer science courses because of Peterson's advice
The jokes write themselves don't they?

[Anonymous No.10344117]

>>10343069
An opinion that you should entertain but not automatically subscribe to, just like every other commentary in existence

[Anonymous No.10344409]

>>10343144
>He's a fucking hero to me and my small gaming friend group.

Wtf I love Peterson shitposting now

[Anonymous No.10344441]

>>10343069
memes aside, memerson is not a great writer, it's a book that doesn't really flow and the overlaying theme is not presented properly, lots of references though so if you are interested in any of the themes developed in any chapter you can go from there and get lots of related literature

the book was probably over-edited by himself and read weird for that

>>10343083
i don't remember any reference to godel, but it may be there in passing, there's plenty of references on the book beyond Jung

>>10343705
olive oil > snake oil

>>10344117
pretty much this, memerson is a psychologist, not a philosopher nor a literature professor, if you judge him as a psychologist there's nothing wrong with him, people get mad because it turns out that a psychologist is not a philosopher, who would have thought

[Anonymous No.10344452]

>>10343069
an unread book on your shelf and a few more youtube videos so that you can pollparrot richard dawkins 2.0

[Anonymous No.10344469]

>>10344452
>getting your ideology from different types of anglos
yeah, no thanks

[Anonymous No.10344471]

>>10344469
nonresponsive

[Anonymous No.10344476]

>>10343069
By the end of it you'll be taking pride in your son and denouncing pride in the other direction as evil and wrong.

[Anonymous No.10344478]

>>10344441
>people get mad because it turns out that a psychologist is not a philosopher
People get mad because the psychologist likes to delve into philosophy and voice rather radical opinions based on severe ignorance and misunderstanding of the subject knowing full well he has thousands of fans who take everything he says as gospel.

[Anonymous No.10344485]

>>10344478
>People get mad because the psychologist likes to delve into philosophy and voice rather radical opinions based on severe ignorance and misunderstanding of the subject knowing full well he has thousands of fans who take everything he says as gospel.
that's retarded, he is just analyzing those ideologies as they manifest in the world from a psychological point of view, of course he won't get the details of the text right, but that is irrelevant at the level he is analyzing these phenomena and pointing him to the text doesn't really address any of his criticism

[Anonymous No.10344532]

>>10344485
>he doesn't understand the theory, but is capable to judge what is or isn't a practical manifestation of it
Come on, anon.

[Anonymous No.10344548]

>>10344485
How do you critique something you can't and don't want to understand?

Not to mention that Peterson ultimately is stuck in his psychology mindset, he can only see the pathological individual. But many of the things he talks about are precisely not at the level of the individual, via his critique all he ends up with is nonsensical reduction.

[Anonymous No.10344566]

>>10344441
>the book was probably over-edited by himself and read weird for that
I seem to remember peterson saying something to that effect in a video

[Anonymous No.10344586]

>>10344532
>>10344548
by that standard you shouldn't either write theory if you can't understand its psychological and economical implications, which is ridiculous and hasn't stopped any theorists ever before. you can analyze a phenomenon from different points of view, and criticizing its manifestation from one point of view doesn't require having a full understanding from another.

you don't need to understand the labor theory of value to realize that the murdering of people during stalinism was bad

[Anonymous No.10344589]

>>10343180
>being so stupid you shit on your fanbase
how? he's advising them to be less shit. that's not shitting on them

[Anonymous No.10344599]

>>10343180
>write a whole book (see OPs pic) in 1999 about not being a nazi
>people get mad when you explicitly say not to be a nazi in 2017
wew, not the sharpest tools in the box exactly

[Anonymous No.10344605]

>>10343072
fpbp

[Anonymous No.10344619]

>>10344586
But Peterson doesn't even TRY to understand anything outside the few authors he's read. If you critique a thing you have to at least bother to understand it within it's own logic. If one steps outside of his own discipline, one needs a certain level of humility and willingness to learn and Peterson just doesn't have that. He has literally admitted that he hasn't read ANY"""postmodern""" or marxist primary sources. That's the intellectual discipline of a high schooler. Hell, he has barely read any philosophy, which leads to an obvious botched understanding of Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.10344633]

>>10344586
by your standard you can grab some generic retard such as yourself and demand that they be taken seriously as an academic in some field they have no knowledge of.

[Anonymous No.10344637]

>>10344586
>by that standard you shouldn't either write theory if you can't understand its psychological and economical implications
How did you arrive here? It doesn't follow at all.
>criticizing its manifestation
First you have to establish that something is indeed a manifestation of the theory you're discussing which is impossible without comprehensive understanding of it. Otherwise you may end up concluding something stupid like blaming Marxist analysis for Stalinist purges or works of Curie and Becquerel for the innumerable deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[Anonymous No.10344647]

>>10344619
why would you have to read the postmodernists to analyze the current campus politics and the psychological malaise going on? by that standard you would have to read giovanni gentile to criticize fascism, which i think would be a great idea, not saying that going to the sources of an ideology that you are trying to fight is not good for your own intellectual development, and would make what Memerson is saying more informed, but you are obviously putting standards on Memerson that you won't require on anybody else

you are saying leftist and X studies departments should be only judged by their own standards while they judge everybody else using arbitrary standards, doesn't seem like a fair conversation

[Anonymous No.10344658]

How can people be interested in this fucking hack? I mean c'mon, he's just using the internet to create his own identity, which is plainly pathetic.
>inb4 but his old books are actually good
Without the scandal he intentionally created no one outside the academic world would care about those fucking scholastic dissertations devoid of any actual value.

[Anonymous No.10344659]

>>10344647
Because he blames "postmodernists" for the current situation on college campuses. How can you do that if you don't even know what the "postmodernists" were trying to say?

If he was just another dude whining about SJWs in american liberal colleges, I wouldn't even fucking care. The problem is the bullshit Alex Jones level theory he develops to explain what is going on.

[Anonymous No.10344671]

>>10344647
>why would you have to read the postmodernists to analyze the current campus politics and the psychological malaise going on?
You don't, but then have no grounds to posit that post-structuralists are somehow responsible for these developments.

[Anonymous No.10344672]

>>10344658
No one IN academia cared about him. His "book" is a fucking joke autismo manifesto and the only actual research he did was some obscure clinical psychiatry research.That's why he is so perpetually butthurt.

[Anonymous No.10344681]

>>10344672
That's what I meant bro. Absolutely irrelevant and annoying.

[Anonymous No.10344730]

>>10344672
>the only actual research he did was some obscure clinical psychiatry research
Why lie?

[Anonymous No.10344750]

>>10344730
Please tell me what kind of groundbreaking research he has done? Last time I checked all he did was co-author some decent psychiatry papers. Maps of meaning doesn't good, that's a meme book.

[Anonymous No.10344754]

>>10344750
*count

[Anonymous No.10344944]

>>10343144
>He's a fucking hero to me and my small gaming friend group.

[Anonymous No.10344959]

>>10344944
lmao that's a direct quote

[Anonymous No.10345212]

>>10344659
do you have an alternative to his theory

[Anonymous No.10345563]

>>10343069
>tfw better philosopher than peterson

[Anonymous No.10345578]

>>10344647
>by that standard you would have to read giovanni gentile to criticize fascism
Fascism was created before Gentile wrote his book tho.

[Anonymous No.10345626]

>>10344441
>he treats "philosopher" like it's an accredited label
a philosopher is a lover of wisdom

[Anonymous No.10345651]

>>10343072
>>10343175
>>10344658

Admit it, you only hate this guy because you are popular and you don't actually know the contents of Maps of Meaning. It's not a self help book at all. Now, I've mostly watched his lectures and only read parts of the book, but I think I have a pretty good grasp. I suspect that most of his critics (and his mindless fanboys also) are only judging him based on out of context 5 minute YouTube clips. When the wrote the book he was much less of a cringy crusader, but that doesn't make his work invalid. Also he is completely right about the state of the higher education system, but that's irrelevant when discussing the validity of Maps of Meaning.

[Anonymous No.10345659]

>>10343083
>dismissing a 600 page book based on a single tweet

I really hate this cultural of dismissing ideas you have not even partially entertained.

[Anonymous No.10345669]

>>10345212
I could point you to a pamphlet which explains it very well but it was written by a french marxist in the 60s so you'd probably just cry POSTMODERNISM and keep jerking Memerson off while completely ignoring Debord is actually so vanguardist in his critique of postmodernity that it wasn't even called postmodernity yet and he was already REEEEEing at it. Also, there are a lot of differences to consider, this has been written 50 years ago, but situationist critique of the commodification of "partisanship" (not the term I'm looking for, more like political conviction?) is spot on, specially when thinking about the american """""""""left"""""""""".
http://library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/display/4

[Anonymous No.10345670]

>>10343069
Go ahead and read Jung. There isn't anything that Peterson could add to that, maybe clearer explanations, but I doubt it.

[Anonymous No.10345674]

>>10345670
Peterson introduced me to Jung. I only ever heard about Freud in school, teachers never even once mentioned Jung.

[Anonymous No.10345676]

I need someone to believe in and follow. Jordan's reputation is getting a little muddied for me to have faith in him anymore. I have doubts. I wish we could just go back to when he was fresh and unquestionably right all the time not matter what. Who do you guys recommend?

[Anonymous No.10345682]

>>10345676
>right all the time
nick land

[Anonymous No.10345693]

>>10345676
everybody is kind of shitty currently in the culture war, it's the most boring shit ever, hopefully the universities gets purged soon now that the public hates them all and they have issues getting money, and we can start speaking about something else more entertaining

[Anonymous No.10345696]

>>10345674
That my friend is the correct paradigm for finding true knowledge: if the teachers don't mention it there is suspicion; if there is suspicion there is doubt; if there is doubt there is a lie. Ipso facto you have been lead by a negative example to the truth. Always follow the opposite. Universities are just buildings built on lies. The culture has been hijacked. Go towards the void and smile while it takes you in.

[Anonymous No.10345702]

>>10345626
If you wanna be this redutionist, a scientist is a knower of things. Does this make me a scientist?

[Anonymous No.10345714]

>>10345682
>>10345693
holy shit
>shittily satirize daddy pete fanboy mindset
>make a post that couldn't possibly contain more irony and criticism
>be taken seriously and even gain a sense of understanding from others

[Anonymous No.10345724]

>>10345714
Irony is for fags. New sincerity or bust.

[Anonymous No.10345727]

>>10345674
Largely because Jung looked at the the meagre attempt at producing a science which Freud had created and decided what it needed was a strong dose of magic and utter mysticism.

I remember talkin about Jung and archetypes in English class, but he is nobody in scientific psychology.

If you ever bother to read something like Freud’s interpretation of dream the first thing you’ll find is that a huge portion of the book is a literature review of all the experiments on sleep and dreams that had been conducted in the recent past and how his research as going to derive from that.

Jung on the other hand wrote a book about fckin alchemy.

[Anonymous No.10345736]

>>10345724
Tell that to your boys. They're taking it for the truth every chance they get. It's useful if you know how to use it, that is, if you know its irony and not reality.

[Anonymous No.10345747]

>>10345736
Still, irony has done more damage than good. It's easy to be ironic and dismissing, but hard to actually stand by your own feelings and believes out of fear of being ridiculed, so people just resort to ridicule themselves and mask their true believes with ironic statements.

[Anonymous No.10345773]

>>10345747
True. But how does your original reply to my post prove that JP fanboys are anything other than lost kids looking for someone to buy into?

Also irony does have a meaning and usage outside of this moment. Saying irony has done more damage than good shows how ignorant you are of literature. It has been used for exposing tyrannical regimes and historical injustice. Just because we live in this postmodern time where irony is the default attitude for so many doesn't mean we need to erase it from our lives.

I have nothing against sincerity. We are on the internet you know.

[Anonymous No.10345791]

>>10345674
That's a good thing, I suppose. I never heard about Jung until recently, and I don't regret reading him.

[Anonymous No.10345794]

>>10345773
>But how does your original reply to my post prove that JP fanboys are anything other than lost kids looking for someone to buy into?
It doesn't. I love Maps of Meaning and I think Peterson is a pretty cool dude, but that doesn't change that fact that his fanbase are a bunch of cultists. However, since Peterson's agenda is to undermine ideologies feeding on the week and resentful, id say it's a good thing if an angsty teen worships Peterson as opposed to becoming a commie or fascist. His fans are cringy and the man himself likes to disappear up his arse from time to time, but that doesn't mean that he isn't an overall positive influence, especially considering the current political divide in the united states.

>It has been used for exposing tyrannical regimes and historical injustice.
Do you really need irony and snark to deconstruct nazis and commies?

[Anonymous No.10345799]

>>10343069
who asks for this for their birthday...?

Jesus fuck this board is filled with homos.

[Anonymous No.10345810]

>>10345799
>asking for presents
is this some kind of american degeneracy?

[Anonymous No.10345830]

>>10344647
A’s has been mentioned, if he was just whining about how mean teenage girls with nose rings are to him, then fine. But he built up this idea of “postmodern neomarxism” and specifically talks about Foucault, Derrida, Marx and so on. He can bitch about activists all he likes, I just wish he wasn’t trying to get a generation of people to totally dismiss so of the 20th century’s most important philosophers.

Like, I don’t reallly agree with Derrida or Foucault or any of the other so-called “postmodernists” on much, but I recognized their thought grew organically out of the enlightenment tradition, and that they posed real and serious problems.

The great irony of Peterson’s total dismissal and attack on them and the postmodernists in general is that they were motivated by one of Peterson’s principle concerns as well, totalitarianism. They grew up in the shadow of Nazism, and increasing disillusionment with the promises of the Soviet Union. Foucault writes in the preface to Delueze’s Anti-Oedipus that (to paraphrase) ‘the principle concern of the book was ethics, a manual for living the non-fascist life, and not just political fascism but the personal fascism inside us all, the desire to be led’. That sounds exactly like a sentence Peterson would write. And it makes sense, both Peterson and Foucault were huge fans of Nietzsche.

The difference between Peterson and the postmodernists is that when confronted by the totalizing violent of modernism, people like Foucault moved towards increasing skepticism towards all forms of institutions, finding power and domination everywhere including in language, and Peterson retreats to pre-modern modes of thought, appealing to religion and the mystic thought of people like Jung.

[Anonymous No.10345837]

>>10345794

Who the hell believes in ideology anymore? What is this, the twentieth century? I just have a problem with people who take advantage of people who are lost, or confused, or just starting their lives. I just hate it when I see people slavishly looking for an idol to worship and defend instead of having more intellectual curiosity of their own.

If all you take for tyrannical are nazis and commies, i'd say you have a very limited reach of history. I'm not gonna take this irony thing any further because I know you just got offended when I mentioned JP and have no real beef with irony itself other than what I mentioned in my last post.

[Anonymous No.10345846]

>>10345837
brainlet, the post-ideological world died, we post-post-ideological now

[Anonymous No.10345850]

>>10345830
Petersons point is that deconstructing grand narratives and ultimately meaning itself via endless relativism and social constructionism will eventually lead to people being disillusioned and resentful, causing them to run to the nearest structure and narrative that provides them with a purpose and to explain the world with. Which is true. People don't like to be confused or uncertain, they yearn for answers and the radical left and the radical right have those in spades.

>Who the hell believes in ideology anymore? What is this, the twentieth century?
Do you even see the absolute state of the US? SJWs and the far right are multiplying by the day. 7 years ago there was no far right with massive youth appeal. We are one great recession away from the late 1920s 2.0.

[Anonymous No.10345853]

>>10345830
that's fine and a legitimate criticism of Memerson. i just can't take seriously the people who will dismiss anything he says because he is shit at talking about 1 domain. Everybody bluffs all the time and are unfair when talking about certain things.

Foucault was also shit at history, doesn't mean everything else he wrote should dismissed.

[Anonymous No.10345854]

>>10345837
>believing in idealogy
*sniff* that is not how it works, my friend

[Anonymous No.10345866]

>>10345850
>Petersons point is that deconstructing grand narratives and ultimately meaning itself via endless relativism and social constructionism will eventually lead to people being disillusioned and resentful, causing them to run to the nearest structure and narrative that provides them with a purpose and to explain the world with.
or they will be rammed out of the way by the next big player that comes along with a consistent ideology, being deconstructive is fine as long as you have the biggest cock in the block, but that may not last forever

[Anonymous No.10345881]

>>10345866
>or they will be rammed out of the way by the next big player that comes along with a consistent ideology
That's the entire purpose of Maps of Meaning. It's the ultimate meta narrative. It's essentially post-post-modernist. Peterson's growing autistic cult fanbase seems like testimony to that. Peterson tries to fill the void in peoples hearts before anything more cancerous can.

[Anonymous No.10345885]

>>10343069
>What am I in for?
disappointed parents

[Anonymous No.10345893]

>>10343144
>He's a fucking hero to me and my small gaming friend group.

That's actually the perfect description of Peterson. He's a hero to losers and outcasts. Isn't there somebody more deserving of your admiration?

[Anonymous No.10345897]

>>10345881
that's the think, Memerson following feels cultish, but the problem is not him, it's that society should have a place for those kids and they wouldn't have to need some meme psychologist to come along and provide some basic structure for them

[Anonymous No.10345900]

>>10343144
Please fuck off to /pol/ or /r9k/, I don’t want you on /lit/.

[Anonymous No.10345902]

>>10345893
you mean Sam Harris?

[Anonymous No.10345911]

>>10345897
>it's that society should have a place for those kids and they wouldn't have to need some meme psychologist to come along and provide some basic structure for them
Yeah, but you can't really blame the man. I think that he actually wants to fix society and not become a cult leader, but the fame is somewhat getting to him. If Peterson makes hundreds of thousands of teenagers saying "fuck you mom and dad, I believe in meaning and that I should become the best possible version of myself", that's a step in the right direction.

[Anonymous No.10345912]

>those poor kids without a father figure
>dindu nuffin

[Anonymous No.10345916]

>>10345912
>Porko & The Twinks

[Anonymous No.10345917]

>>10345912
can't tell if those are 12 or 22

[Anonymous No.10345931]

>>10345912
>a literal character select screen

[Anonymous No.10345938]

>>10345897
>some basic structure
What like the YMCA?

[Anonymous No.10345943]

>>10345902
I mean someone who doesn't have a Youtube channel and who isn't looking to profit off of his followers

[Anonymous No.10345944]

>>10345912
What's their outfit? It would be fun fighting them.

[Anonymous No.10345950]

>>10345943
>stop making money
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.10345952]

>>10345938
i don't know, is that the rootless american version of structure?

[Anonymous No.10345955]

>>10345943
What's his best book? I have to buy something to signify what group I belong to, and so I can put it on my shelf.

[Anonymous No.10345960]

>>10345952
There's a European version? Who plays the Indian and the cowboy in your version?

[Anonymous No.10345964]

>>10345912
>These are the people saying leftists aren't "real men" online

[Anonymous No.10345966]

>>10345853
I fully agree that Foucault’s histories aren’t accurate, though I’d say anybody that takes him at his word as being a historian is missing the point. I think there is a significant point he makes even if everything of fact he says is wrong, in the same way that novels still can contain something despite being lies.

[Anonymous No.10345969]

>>10344485
If you want an analysis of ideology and the behaviors that result, read Eric Hoffer.

Peterson takes explicit aim at specific ideologies, and he absolutely makes claims about how the content of these systems are causally related to what he sees as frightening behaviors. He is talking about what he defines as postmodern, what he defines as Marxist, etc. He is not making general claims about ideology in the abstract. It is therefore fair to ask that he have some understanding or engagement with that literature.

>>10344586
>you don't need to understand the labor theory of value to realize that the murdering of people during stalinism was bad

You’re missing the point. If you were to attribute those murders to LVT, it would be fair to ask that you understand LVT.

[Anonymous No.10345972]

>>10343069
I want to be a philosopher. I plan on majoring in philosophy when I get to uni. Would Maps of Meaning be a good first book to shape my philosophical outlook?

[Anonymous No.10345978]

>>10344619
>He has literally admitted that he hasn't read ANY"""postmodern""" or marxist primary sources.
Source? I need ammo for my anti-JBP rants

[Anonymous No.10345979]

>>10345972
>Would a book that's not about philosophy written by someone who's not a philosopher be a good book in shaping my philosophical views?
Yes, by all means

[Anonymous No.10345981]

>>10345972
Start with the greeks

[Anonymous No.10345989]

>>10345972
It could be a little bit too biased. Peterson is dangerous. Start with the Greeks. Read Xenophone's Socrates, then Plato's dialogues.

[Anonymous No.10345995]

>>10344672
>the only actual research he did was some obscure clinical psychiatry research

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ&hl=en

[Anonymous No.10346021]

>>10345989
>Peterson is dangerous.
lmao

[Anonymous No.10346030]

>>10345995
anti peterson shills btfo

[Anonymous No.10346032]

>>10345972
>I want to be a philosopher

[Anonymous No.10346038]

>>10346032

[Anonymous No.10346039]

>>10346021
I'd say Peterson is more of a frowny face than an inquiring face. Have you even watched his vids?

[Anonymous No.10346043]

>>10346039
Yes. I realize he suffers from chronic depression.

[Anonymous No.10346051]

>>10345995
>google scholar

[Anonymous No.10346055]

>>10346043

[Anonymous No.10346056]

Peterson is a representant of watered-down boomer conservatism who gives basic boomer life advice

[Anonymous No.10346058]

>>10346051
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jordan_Peterson2

[Anonymous No.10346067]

>>10345893
I had a literal revelatory moment when I was on /pol/ the other day and saw a meme featuring a Pepe in an SS uniform lynching a feminist with the caption ‘all I wanted was to play video games. You made me do this’.

It’s like, oh, neo-Nazism and this whole wave of garbage is being brought on by lonely gamers, who, not having grown up in close contact with strong bonds to other people, especially of different backgrounds, never really learned empathy or respect for others. In the video game world you are free to constantly let out your foulness without any repercussion, never having to see the face of a person who curse at, or type racial slurs to.

Now off in college or even high school they are confronted with the reality of other people, and can’t handle the difference. They’ve never had people push back in video games against their endless release of anger, so being confronted with people who challenge them, or even minor slights as towards men or white people REQUIRE retaliation. Why are people putting up stickers of Muhammad on my campus? I have to suppose it’s people for whom the concept of being respectful towards others is foreign, and who violently resent being told what they should and shouldn’t do. They won’t tolerate being told that it’s inappropriate to create depictions of the prophet Muhammad, and the more people react the more they will sticker up the place. Who cares how it makes the incredibly small minority of Muslim students feel, deal with it! Makes me sad man.

[Anonymous No.10346068]

>>10346056
Wrong. He's a radical centrist with some traditionalist flavoring.

[Anonymous No.10346073]

>>10346067
>so being confronted with people who challenge them, or even minor slights as towards men or white people REQUIRE retaliation.
SJW detected. Out out out!

[Anonymous No.10346081]

>>10345972
it's a psychology book, I think having a psychological outlook on philosophy is fine, good even. But you're taking steps to becoming a psychological philosopher.

[Anonymous No.10346085]

>>10346058
>research gate

[Anonymous No.10346086]

>>10343144
There are no Heroes.

[Anonymous No.10346092]

>>10346085
>>10346051
See? This is the irony and dismissal I'm talking about. Absolute cancer. No argument, only snark.

[Anonymous No.10346093]

>>10346085
>I have no voice and yet I must scream

[Anonymous No.10346095]

>>10346056
Boomers are the devil, you absolute asshole, for reaping the benefits of government intervention in the economy, which we all know is a shit idea and never should have been allowed to contribute to the highest standard of living generation that ever was, you faggot ass

[Anonymous No.10346096]

>>10346068
>He's a radical centrist with some traditionalist flavoring.

That's what I meant by "watered down boomer conservatism"
>just work hard
>just find a good woman
>only losers think about race
>sexual liberation is fine
but hey, stop with the pronoun games!

>>10346067
>three paragraphs of pure strawman
Wow really showed those nah-tzees

[Anonymous No.10346099]

>>10346096
>only losers think about race
Fuck off, collectivist.

[Anonymous No.10346101]

>>10345972
Absolutely not. Peterson is, first of all a psychologist, he only plays a philosopher on TV. And also he’s writing in a defined tradition, with the assumption of some background in that tradition. Without some background on the idea of the people he is utilizing and commenting on, you aren’t going to have a good time. And I’d consider his lectures insufficient for providing the fullness of that background.


While it’s definitely a meme, read the greeks. Read some Plato, read Christopher Shield’s Aristotle, read Descartes Meditations. Give yourself time to develop a foundation in the canon. I’d hazard a guess that Peterson would tell you that to. If Peterson’s popularity is more than a meme based on him making a stink over transgender people and “cultural Marxism”, Maps of Meaning will still be around in a few years once you’ve developed your foundation. And if it isn’t around, then you managed to not waste your time on a meme.

[Anonymous No.10346103]

>>10344619
He has literally admitted that he hasn't read ANY"""postmodern""" or marxist primary sources
What the fucking hell, why would you do something like this, just go on the internet and tell lies?

[Anonymous No.10346104]

>>10346092
Like you have an argument of your own. Only links and pandering. Oh look, a professor has a profile on research gate with links to essays on google scholar. I'm so fucking impressed. How can we even handle all this being right?

[Anonymous No.10346108]

>>10346067
>In the video game world you are free to constantly let out your foulness without any repercussion, never having to see the face of a person who curse at, or type racial slurs to.
>In the video game world
you even know what kind of senegalese mudcrab catching forum are you posting on?

[Anonymous No.10346113]

>>10346104
Your point was that he was irrelevant with no citations. Turns out he has thousands. Also I'm not even the same person, you stupid queer. Lmao. The absolute state of your life.

[Anonymous No.10346117]

>>10346096
>>sexual liberation is fine
Literally the opposite of his message.

[Anonymous No.10346122]

>>10346067
Ever wonder how much empathy the islamic hordes will have when they have procreated to majorities in our countries ? I don't think they will give a shit about your hurt feelings when it comes to convert or die, snowflake.

[Anonymous No.10346130]

>>10343093
>gook
Fuck you, napalm breath

[Anonymous No.10346136]

While I do agree that Peterson do have a cult of retards following him. Why do you people have to stoop so low as to say he didn't do his homework. I'm not saying that he didn't fail his homework (even though I don't think he did), but he have read plenty of books on opposing views, and the book in the OP is stacked to the brink with scientific references.

He might be wrong, but he didn't cheat, and you lying that he did won't make me suddenly think he did.

<spoiler>think again bucko</spoiler>

[Anonymous No.10346139]

>>10345850
This is so odd to me because he also literally cried on YouTube over how much he loves individualism. Doesn’t he see a problem or contradiction over any sort of grand narrative and individualism? Or see the fundamental compatibility between individualism and the deconstruction of grand narratives? Foucault whole shit was about his curiosity towards how people who lived fundementally outside the mainstream constructed their identities in absence of the grand narratives that facilitates most people to understand themselves. This is why all his work is studying criminals, insane people, gay people, transgender people, and so on. How do these people create purpose for themselves in absence of conventional modes of signification?

[Anonymous No.10346140]

>>10346113
Look at you telling me what my point was.
>thinking citations lead to credibility
For all you know they could just be citing him to say "ayyyy ooooo look at this total faggot." That's why you should bring something of substance to the argument.

[Anonymous No.10346145]

>>10346140
So what would make Peterson credible in your eyes? If you shared his opinion?

[Anonymous No.10346147]

>>10346099
>fuck off, collectivist
I'm an individualist who realises that individualist societies are only possible with white/asian populations. Pic related.

>>10346117
Has JBP ever condemned the hookup culture? One night stands? Or did he just pick on the low-hanging-fruit of pronouns?

[Anonymous No.10346153]

>>10346147
>has JBP ever condemned the hookup culture? One night stands?
Nigger, did you ever listened to a lecture of his? To him procreation and the family are among the highest virtues. He condemns hedonism and sees it as a great threat to both society and individuals.

[Anonymous No.10346154]

>2017
>anti SJW youtube stars are considered philosophers
CANT WAKE UP

[Anonymous No.10346158]

>>10346145
If he wasn't a shill.

[Anonymous No.10346161]

>>10346147
he condemned it in one of his Q&A, from what I remember he basically said that there is no such thing as "casual sex", sex is not casual. Something along those lines.

[Anonymous No.10346163]

>>10346158
A shill for what, you commie fag?

[Anonymous No.10346167]

>>10346153
>>10346161
OK, point taken.

[Anonymous No.10346174]

>>10346153
How is family life compatible with stark individualism? Does he just sorta think kids are fun an expendable? Or does he not recognize that the failure to put ones kids ahead of oneself is a huge problem? And if he’s okay with a person’s self-sacrifice for their family, why not their community? Or their nation? Where is the line there?

[Anonymous No.10346179]

>>10346147
A hundred years ago you'd be saying the same shit about the wops.

[Anonymous No.10346183]

>>10346174
the family is the line as far as I know. He mentioned several times that communism works great in a family but horrible in society.

At one point the community becomes to large to be founded on empathy and other virtues like being reliable and consistent becomes more valuable. And the line is after family as far as I have understood him.

[Anonymous No.10346192]

>>10346179
Wow, you've really disproven me with this baseless assertion of what I would be saying 100 years ago.

If the statistics I've presented don't speak to you, how do you explain that no society based on liberty has been created outside of white/asian populated regions?
Is it... is it possible that not all people are created equal?

[Anonymous No.10346199]

>>10346174
>How is family life compatible with stark individualism?
The point of the family structure is to create the best possible environment for your child. The point of having that child and providing for it is to leave a legacy, which is what we are hardwired to do and every single person desires. Nobody want's their life to be for nothing. Having a child and caring for it is the easiest way of archiving that. Peterson believes that if you forgo the child and family you better have a damn good reason to make that sacrifice. For instance if you are a great composer or artist you don't need children for you legacy, but the chances of being that are very slim, you so better think twice before falling for the childless meme. If you don't have kids it will make you miserable because you can't defy your biology. His reasoning is entirely rooted in the well being of the individual, because he believes that not having children will be a determent to most people.

[Anonymous No.10346200]

>>10346163
Look how much you know about me without even knowing anything about me. Disagreeing with your boyfriend makes me a "commie fag." Look what Peterson did to your brain.

He's a shill for the capitalist realism that pushes against any critique of the system.Being a shill of any kind means you have an agenda and are not doing research in service of truth. It means you are bringing those bits of information which suit your purpose to the forefront in order to persuade.

[Anonymous No.10346204]

>>10346200
>I'm not a commie I swear
>complains about capitalism in the very next sentence

sasuga

[Anonymous No.10346213]

What I like about Jordan Peterson is he points out that many more people died under Stalin and Mao than Hitler, you know. You can't argue with that logic.

[Anonymous No.10346223]

>>10346213
But those were the gook people and only whites matter

[Anonymous No.10346226]

>>10346204
>being so mislead you defend the faults of the system you live in
>... but are willing to get angry at whatever JP decides is the cause of those faults
>any critique of the system is DUDE COMMIE LMAO
you're getting your moneys worth i'd say

[Anonymous No.10346238]

>>10346226
>you're getting your moneys worth i'd say
You're still a butthurt socialist. Also I never gave a single cent to Peterson. Not to mention that Peterson concedes the fact that there are problems like corruption within capitalism, just as there are in any other structure. He just thinks that the proposed alternatives are worse and that, if people want to change the world, they should start with themselves and not the system, because the last time we did that shit went tits up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr9bVe68OZM

[Anonymous No.10346245]

>>10346223
But that's the point of Communism. They wan't to cause a revolution which usurps their own political power to gain the votes of niggers and women who will then vote them back into office. This is not good for the white man. Let's face it, capitalism is run by communists who just keep the system in place in order to erode the cultural foundations of the society it supports. That's where the real payoff is, in brown babies and lesbians with purple hair.

[Anonymous No.10346250]

>>10346245
I know, I was just goofing

[Anonymous No.10346261]

>>10346238
>tits up
when?

see, he has a lot in common with Zizek then, if he's used to guide young people away from the political process by telling them to get less involved and go clean their room or whatever.

[Anonymous No.10346266]

>>10346261
>when?
USSR. Third Reich, Mao's China, Cambodia, etc and so on.

[Anonymous No.10346272]

>>10346250
>I know

[Anonymous No.10346273]

>>10346261
>if he's used to guide young people away from the political process by telling them to get less involved and go clean their room or whatever.
Yes. His message to young activists is basically "how are you going to fix the world when you can't even control your own life?". Once people are in control of their destiny and free of resentment and bitterness he isn't opposed to people trying to fix society as a whole. But only those people should ever attempt doing so.

[Anonymous No.10346284]

>>10346266
Im not a socialist. Please expand your outlook to include ideas that don't belong to an "ism." I'm talking about not lying down, spreading your cheeks, and putting on a smile to the ruling class, of defending the economic rights of working people even if the capitalist class dosen't like it, of maintaining a standard of living worth living in, of not giving them everything and saying "well at least we're not communist." Please look into economic populism and leave this cultural shit for the fools.

[Anonymous No.10346288]

>>10346273
>You shouldnt be trying to change the system unless you're so deeply rooted in it you won't speak up anymore out of fear of losing it all
>you shouldn't be engaging in activism if you feel something is wrong because then you're being resentful
Basically only people who should engage in any activism are those content with the status quo.

[Anonymous No.10346294]

>>10346288
>>you shouldn't be engaging in activism if you feel something is wrong because then you're being resentful
Holy mother of strawman. The point is that resentment leads to misery and destruction even if it is justified.

[Anonymous No.10346298]

>>10346294
So when there is great injustice happening in society, I shouldn't be resentful at it, but go clean my room instead?

[Anonymous No.10346302]

>>10346298
>great injustice
Like what?

[Anonymous No.10346303]

>>10346298
yes

[Anonymous No.10346305]

>>10346298
You realize that the room thing is a metaphor for getting your shit together, right?

[Anonymous No.10346309]

>>10346302
Can't you think up an example of great injustice yourself?

[Anonymous No.10346313]

>>10346305
I do, big brain, and I used it in this very sense myself.

[Anonymous No.10346314]

>>10346309
No, you claimed that there is such a great injustice in our current capitalist society that getting your shit together is not enough and that anyone who tries to improve their standing is just "playing into the system". Now I want you to describe what you think this great injustice is that has to be overthrown.

[Anonymous No.10346320]

>>10346314
>No, you claimed that there is such a great injustice in our current capitalist society that [...]
I literally didn't claim that.

[Anonymous No.10346325]

>>10346320
Then what's your criticism of Peterson again?

[Anonymous No.10346333]

>>10346325
If genocide/slavery/authoritarianism was happening outside my windows, I should go clean up my room instead of fighting for better future?

[Anonymous No.10346337]

>>10346333
doing a demonstration would probably kill you

[Anonymous No.10346338]

>>10346333
>If genocide/slavery/authoritarianism was happening outside my windows
It isn't though. And that genocide/slavery/authoritarianism is a direct result of people NOT getting their shit together. So your criticism is that Peterson's advice isn't valid within a state that our society is currently not in? So you do concede that as long as genocide/slavery/authoritarianism isn't happening outside your windows that his advice is valid?

[Anonymous No.10346347]

>>10346338
To elaborate: Genocide/slavery/authoritarianism is exactly what happens when people let resentment and bitterness get the better of them. See USSR and Third Reich.

[Anonymous No.10346350]

>>10346338
So you're saying that the good and reasonable guys should stay passive "getting their shit together" while the oppresive bad guys organise and win?

[Anonymous No.10346355]

>>10346333
>If genocide/slavery/authoritarianism was happening outside my windows,

it is happening outside your windows, it is always happening somewhere and you should still go clean your room

[Anonymous No.10346368]

>>10346350
You have no motivation aside from winning this argument, do you? Getting your shit together is not the same thing as being passive, quite the opposite. Defending yourself against people who want to kill you after society has broken down isn't exactly resentment fueled behavior. The people trying to murder you however are very much fueled by resentment and bitterness.

[Anonymous No.10346370]

>>10346350
not being passive is part of getting your shit together. Most activists aren't acting independently they're just being part of a loud group, and that's pretty passive.

[Anonymous No.10346377]

>>10346368
cont. If everyone got their shit together instead of blaming their problems on other people, those conditions where genocide occurs would never arise in the first place.

[Anonymous No.10346398]

>>10346350
>>10346368
>>10346377
>>10346370
Why the radio silence? Out of arguments?

[Anonymous No.10346412]

>>10346213
Except that it totally ignores how people die. Is a systemic industrial genocide different than a famine from bad planning? Do we consider all the people who die from not having access to healthcare in India excess deaths in the same way?

[Anonymous No.10346413]

>>10346368
So you shouldn't act out unless there are already death squads out to kill you? Isn't it a little too late?

>You have no motivation aside from winning this argument, do you?
I'm slowly working towards showing you that JBP's theory is just happy-go-lucky platitudes.
The injustice doesn't have to be as radical as slavery - perhaps you want the gun laws changed, or the immigration laws, or the healthcare system.
In a civic society there are always opposing views and interests about virtually everything. Groups are in a constant state of conflict, trying to wrestle control of the state appartus from other groups. Fortunately this conflict is solved in a peaceful manner through elections, debates, demonstrations etc. It doesn't mean however that people aren't resentful when some aspect of the system is contrary to their morals. This resentment is what fuels activism, which in turn fuels change.
Literally all that's necessary for "evil" to win is the passivity of "good" people. Opresive systems didn't come down by people magically deciding to "sort themselves out" - they were overthrown, often in violent revolutions. Our tree of liberty grew on our ancestor's blood.

[Anonymous No.10346454]

>>10345912
i'd fuck the one with the beanie

[Anonymous No.10346464]

Garbage

[Anonymous No.10346475]

>>10346413
>mean however that people aren't resentful when some aspect of the system is contrary to their morals. This resentment is what fuels activism, which in turn fuels change.
That's not what resentment means. I'm talking about shit like "white male privilege" or "Jewish nepotism".

[Anonymous No.10346483]

>>10343069
Noggers spooging nigger spooge on IQ score results

[Anonymous No.10346485]

>>10346413
>Opresive systems didn't come down by people magically deciding to "sort themselves out" - they were overthrown, often in violent revolutions.
But our current system is not oppressive and doesn't deserve to be overthrown.

[Anonymous No.10346492]

This is big daddy JP telling all you white middle class undergrads to sort yourselves out. The world is in white hands, it'll be fine. Just worry about yourselves.

[Anonymous No.10346504]

>>10346475
It doesn't? I see people getting resentful over stuff like taxation, immigration, foreign policy, corruption, lobbying, abortion, gun rights, cyber-privacy, welfare, and plenty of others all the time.

>>10346485
But it's not a perfect system. There are many hot topics (see above) that people think deserve to be changed, one way or the other. This change can't come without activism, largely fueled by resentment over an immoral/ineffective system.

[Anonymous No.10346506]

>>10346413
>Opresive systems didn't come down by people magically deciding to "sort themselves out" - they were overthrown, often in violent revolutions.
But the revolution just replaces one oppressive system with another oppressive system at least 80% of the time. So why is violent revolution considered a good solution when history has shown time and time again that it has a high chance of making things worse?

[Anonymous No.10346524]

>>10346504
>But it's not a perfect system.
But not exactly genocide or totalitarianism now is it?

>There are many hot topics (see above) that people think deserve to be changed, one way or the other. This change can't come without activism, largely fueled by resentment over an immoral/ineffective system.
You can't blame your problems on the system if you haven't tried your best. Don't change to structure to fix problems in your life you could be fixing yourself. Society is complicated and you have no idea what kind of problems your so called "solutions" will cause down the line. The less you are in control of your life, the shittier your proposals for fixing society. That isn't to say that you shouldn't participate in politics and vote for politicians that support changes that you like. It means not upend the entire structure just because you think you life would be better in a different structure. You have the right to engage in democracy. Everything else is madness.

[Anonymous No.10346574]

>>10346524
>You can't blame your problems on the system if you haven't tried your best. Don't change to structure to fix problems in your life you could be fixing yourself.
This is a disgustingly egoist point of view. If an injustice doesn't cause ME any severe problems directly, I should just ignore it?

>Society is complicated and you have no idea what kind of problems your so called "solutions" will cause down the line.
With such assumption we may as well do away with democracy altogether, and not change anything at all, because no one knows the future, and any change may have unintended consequences.
But then again, lack of change will also have some. It's such a silly argument.

[Anonymous No.10346623]

>>10346574
>If an injustice doesn't cause ME any severe problems directly, I should just ignore it?
How can you help other people if you can't even help yourself? That doesn't mean that you have to be apathetic about the suffering of the people around you, but what are you going to do about it if you don't have your own shit together? After you are fully in control of your life you can extend that to other people, your friends and family, your community, your nation, the world. But it has to start with you.

>With such assumption we may as well do away with democracy altogether, and not change anything at all, because no one knows the future, and any change may have unintended consequences.
But then again, lack of change will also have some. It's such a silly argument.
You can help to make any change you like, WITHIN the democratic framework. That's why a constitution exists. Don't upend the framework. Don't disrupt the fabric of society.

[Anonymous No.10346629]

>>10346623
What are the minimum requirements for activism then? 60k a year and a girlfriend? Can I engage in debate and express my concerns if I'm addicted to cigarettes?

[Anonymous No.10346643]

>>10346629
That depends on what you mean by activism. Sending a letter to congress or standing outside with a sign and yelling at people? Having a significant other would be a minimum requirement if your concern is gender relations. That's why MGTOW is for faggots.

>Can I engage in debate and express my concerns if I'm addicted to cigarettes?
Not if it's about health care. If you are unhealthy because of your own personal choice you don't get to change the system to make up for your mistakes.

[Anonymous No.10346664]

>>10346643
It's cool to finally see such a comprehensive list. I would like to know what are minimum requirements to express the following opinions:
>we should get out of the Middle East and reduce military spending overall
>2nd amendment should be upheld, citizens have a right to be armed for self-defense
>taxation should be kept as low as possible at the expense of military spending and welfare
>enviromental regulations against pollution are very important
>fractional reserve banking is fradulent and we should return to the gold/silver standard

I'd rather make sure I'm not voicing any concerns which I don't qualify for

[Anonymous No.10346676]

>>10346664
>we should return to the gold/silver standard
who still says this because they are shitting you sonny?

[Anonymous No.10346681]

>>10346676
I'm not asking if you agree, I'm asking what is the minimum level of life achievment to voice those specific opinions.

[Anonymous No.10346701]

>>10346664
>I'd rather make sure I'm not voicing any concerns which I don't qualify for
So much snark. But I'll bite:

>>we should get out of the Middle East and reduce military spending overall
Does not affect the overall structure of society at large to a great extend. No requirement.

>2nd amendment should be upheld, citizens have a right to be armed for self-defense
Literally advocating for the status quo to be maintained. No requirement.

>taxation should be kept as low as possible at the expense of military spending and welfare
Nothing your can personally do to affect the budget. No requirement.

>environmental regulations against pollution are very important
Don't litter and don't drive a pickup truck. Basically, be environmentally conscious before demanding the same of others via legislation.

>fractional reserve banking is fradulent and we should return to the gold/silver standard
Don't be poor and have a basic understanding of economics. Such a large change could potentially do more harm than good. If you're financially stable there is no reason for such a drastic gearshift. FIAT money is dodgy, but killing it could be catastrophic. I don't know, exactly, I'm not en economist and neither are you. Is there reason to believe that fractional reserve banking is making peoples lives worse?

I see that you and I have a disagreement on what constitutes activism and radical change. Everything except your last point is pretty milktaost and mainstream and has no potential to ruin the world. I'm talking about shit like complaining about the "gender wage gap" or arguing that either men or women are oppressed. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with wanting to change the status quo, but don't act like a victim and don't claim to be oppressed when you're living in a liberal democracy. This isn't the same thing that you're talking about. None of your political positions indicate that you see yourself as a victim and there is nothing wrong with pursuing your political goals. Just focus on yourself before you focus on society, that's all.

[Anonymous No.10346724]

>>10343705

So, like most ancient philosophy?

[Anonymous No.10346733]

>>10346701
>>10346724
>milktaost
>shitting on ancient phil.

BEHOLD! Two idiots pitted against one another on the topic of Memerson.

[Anonymous No.10346738]

>>10346733
I don't mean milktoast in a bad way. What I meant was "harmless".

[Anonymous No.10346757]

>>10346738
Your use of "milktoast" is wrong on multiple levels.

Going back to lurking now but wanted to clarify what I meant here.

[Anonymous No.10346762]

>>10346757
I know, bad choice of word on my part. It does carry the connotation of harmless and not-dangerous, but it's pretty condescending which wasn't my intent at all. Sorry. Not a native speaker.

[Anonymous No.10346764]

>>10343069
Many people shit on Peterson but I double majored in philosophy and neuroscience and can confirm that he's pretty competent

[Anonymous No.10346768]

>>10346764
Post your degree. :3

[Anonymous No.10346770]

>>10346701
Wouldn't it be much simpler though to just analyze voices based on their merit alone, instead of on the personal life of the speaker?

>you need to be in a relationship to talk about gender relations
Many people are in unhappy/abusive/cheating relationships, whereas others have just recently broken up, or have decided to save themselves for marriage and are still looking for the right person. Who are you to make such sweeping generalisations?

>you need to be not poor to talk about economics
How is one's wealth an indicator of understanding of economics? The opinion of a hobbyist interested in the subject is worth less than that of an ignorant who inherited a fortune? Who are you to judge that?

>an addict shouldn't be allowed to talk about healthcare
Arguably few people know more about addiction, recovery, relapse, and the related topics than addicts themselves. Is it fair to just disregard their opinions upfront?

It's funny that you're saying this stuff, because JBP is an opponent of ad personam arguments and mass-labeling people.

[Anonymous No.10346773]

>>10346067
wrong

[Anonymous No.10346784]

>>10346764
oh sweetie. stop defending this crypto-nazi

[Anonymous No.10346789]

>>10346770
>Wouldn't it be much simpler though to just analyze voices based on their merit alone, instead of on the personal life of the speaker?

You can't really detach proposals from the people who are pushing it. But generally, yes I would agree. It's less about which proposals to consider, but how you and I should act in the world. Not being in control of your life decreases your merit.

>Who are you to make such sweeping generalisations?
Because you asked me to. I just gave you what you asked for. Don't complain about the premise that you yourself created.

This has gone on for long enough and I should really go to bed. Not a bad discussion. Certainly for 4chan standards. Have a nice night.

[Anonymous No.10346791]

>>10346764
>I majored in...
people used to say this as a joke on here. now newfags say it all the time and expect to be taken seriously, or like anyone gives a shit

[Anonymous No.10346794]

>>10346791
I majored in philosophy and I agree with this anon

[Anonymous No.10346795]

>>10346770
>Many people are in unhappy/abusive/cheating relationships, whereas others have just recently broken up, or have decided to save themselves for marriage and are still looking for the right person.
My point is that people who are bitter virgins have nothing to say about gender reolationships.

[Anonymous No.10346796]

>>10343069
Flip it over and read the back. Read it aloud if you need to.

[Anonymous No.10346799]

>>10346789
You may or may not read it, but just to summarise:
Yeah, I agree that everyone should strive to be the best version of themselves, regardless of political activism.
I also agree that unsuccesful people gravitate more readily to radical, or even violent ideologies.
I don't want us however to fall into the trap of thinking that all radical opinions, or all opinions voiced by unsuccesful people, are to be automatically disregarded as signs of frustration. Propositions should be judged based on their factuality and logic, and saying "oh, you're just frustrated, clean your room" is a sleazy ad-personam tactic.

Good night.

[Anonymous No.10346807]

>>10346799
>"oh, you're just frustrated, clean your room" is a sleazy ad-personam tactic.
It's true however when talking about SJWs, radical communists, antifa, MRAs, neo-nazis and so on. The more you go the the fringes the more frustration you will find.

[Anonymous No.10346812]

Just curious bros, are there any preachy youtube philosophers that actually do advocate for civil forms of political activism?

[Anonymous No.10346816]

>>10346807
>The more you go the the fringes the more frustration you will find.
Arguably yes, but statistical trends can't be extrapolated to every single individual.
If you want to debunk SJW and neo-nazi talking points, do that by presenting counter-points of your own, not through ad-personams and shaming tactics.

[Anonymous No.10346822]

>>10346816
It's less about debunking their claims but rather about preventing such ideas from forming in the first place.

[Anonymous No.10346836]

>>10346812
From what I can tell left-wingers put emphasis on theorizing, and right-wingers put emphasis on arguing. Both want you to buy their books though. However, neither puts any effort into organizing, mobilizing, drafting proposals, contacting legislators, etc., from what I've seen.

[Anonymous No.10346931]

>>10344658
nothing he's been saying for the past years are different to what he's saying now. Just watch his lectures from years and years ago, he's an advocate of a pretty consistent values. In one of his Q&A, he acknowledge that popularity have swayed people into becoming their own devil.

[Anonymous No.10347077]

if your friend is willing to shell out 80 dollars for a book they are either like you a fair bit or want to convert you

[Anonymous No.10347091]

>>10343069
the absolute negation of discernible talent sucking all coherent inspired thought into a singularity of trite misrepresentations and rehash.

[Anonymous No.10347482]

>>10346199
wow truly a deep and esoteric philosopher

[Anonymous No.10347497]

>>10345830
This is a valid and well-thought out response, unlike most of the kneejerk reactions against Peterson and his work.

Unfortunately for Peterson - and dear old Roger Scruton as well - their attacks on the post-modernists are mostly polemical rather than being philosophical in nature. There's nothing wrong with polemics as a weapon, but it has to be substantiated, especially by those intelligentsia on the right, whereas memesters like Anglin and co. can afford to get way with crude generalisations and the like.

[Anonymous No.10347503]

>>10346101
>Maps of Meaning will still be around in a few years
It's already been out for almost 20 years m8.

[Anonymous No.10347516]

>>10346413
>I'm slowly working towards showing you that JBP's theory is just happy-go-lucky platitudes.
Yes, very much so. But you have failed to see its relevance, anon. Why would spouting platitudes all of a sudden become the next best thing since sliced bread, ask yourself that.
Protip: It's because the destabilising influence of the postmodern thinkers, the cultural relativism and the outright distortion of people's minds, which has become ever more prevalent since the last century has turned such previously-held common sense into pearls of wisdom.

That's why.

[Anonymous No.10347809]

>>10344441
fuk u demiurge

>le sad demiurge

[Anonymous No.10347815]

>>10345837
>Who the hell believes in ideology anymore?
The entire point of ideology in the 21stC is that we no longer think we believe in ideology while we continue to believe in it.

[Anonymous No.10347820]

>>10345943
>only admire failures

[Anonymous No.10347881]

>>10346757
milktoast looks tasty though

[Anonymous No.10347905]

>>10347815
we are post-post-ideological now though, people are starting to openly believe again now that the "muh experts" and the "muh economy though" memes have died out. 10 years ago people acted like things like immigration or corporate growth were just forces of nature, and the state could do nothing to respond to it beyond small corrections to avoid problems.

nobody believes those things are just "natural" now, people take an ideologically active stance, not just in the "anti-" side, but in the "pro-" side as well. for example people that believe in immigration want to stop all kind of border control, while people that don't believe in it want very active measures against it.

Even the ones in the middle that want some immigration don't think that importing low skilled workers is just natural and a thing that happens, we could as well import 100,000 left-wing journalists from third world countries every year, and thousands of third world country doctors to really address the healthcare cost issue. we should see then if the coastal elites would be so happy about immigration at that point

[Anonymous No.10347929]

>>10343069
Why did he remove the ability to see how much he earns on Patreon?

[Anonymous No.10347939]

>>10343069
something dumb

[Anonymous No.10348336]

>>10344548

I don't think it's impossible if you do it right. It seems to me that Peterson tries to identify the fundamentals of an ideology, through his expertise in psychology. His knowledge about Soviet history for example is truly very limited. But at the same time his critiques do hit at the core of the matter.

It doesn't matter how beautiful the frieze or the pediment looks. If you are able undermine the foundations of a temple, you can ignore the details of the superstructure.

In the end, if Jordan Peterson forces people to think about why they believe the things they believe he's providing a service to all of us. Cringey followers or not.

[Anonymous No.10348404]

>>10347905
>we are post-post-ideological now though, people are starting to openly believe again now that the "muh experts" and the "muh economy though" memes have died out.

10 years ago where I live (Poland) the topics of politics and ideology were taboo. Now they're everywhere, and for example nationalism, which used to be the fringe-of-the-fringe, became a mainstay among the youth.
The radicalisation (on both sides) that happened in the US in '16/'17 is clear to the entire world.
The time of ideology begins again.

[Anonymous No.10348413]

>>10343083
t. someone who read one negative review on amazon

[Anonymous No.10348414]

>>10348404
it's why the russian angle is so important to the US establishment, if trump's victory is russia's fault, then we just have to fight an external problem, if it's anything else then we have to confront that the consensus has broken and the neoliberal narrative of globalization and progress makes no sense anymore, which is something that was in the air since the 2008 financial crisis but only with trump it took a very concrete clear form

[Anonymous No.10348555]

>>10348414
The same angle is periodically used in Poland, although to a lesser extent. Nationalists are being accused of shilling for the Russians - I shit you not

[Anonymous No.10348571]

>>10348555
It's been brewing for years, I remember the confused chuckles elicited by Russians when respectable British papers started spamming "Putin killed my son" headlines after the Dutch plane went down but this was and still is seen as entirely proportionate and legitimate

[Anonymous No.10348579]

Yes yes well done Jordan, well done..

HOWEVER

[Anonymous No.10348641]

>>10343710
>>10343087
fuck too good to be true

you are a very funyn man

[Anonymous No.10348702]

>>10344619
the obvious irony of this post is mind blowing

[Anonymous No.10348705]

>>10348414
Zizek has said that he thinks key difference between right wing politics and left wing politics is that the left believes the problems in society are the result of structural flaws inside our own society which need to be overcome, while the right believes that the problems in society are the result of the corruption of the society from an influence from without, some foreign force which needs to be excised to return to a formerly held pure state.

With that in mind it becomes clear that right now both Dems and the GOP are practicing right wing modes of politics, where for republicans the outsider is mexicans, blacks, muslims, and other immigrants, not the politicians but the activists externalize even liberals. And Democrats are very focused on Russia, endless stuff on Russia.


Did Russia interfere with the election? Probably, but I'm not sure it can be argued that they caused a dramatic shift really.. The election shouldn't have been even close. Maybe Russia but a thumb on the scale but the fact that it was even possible that a person with such obvious contempt for the law as Donald Trump was even considered shows a far deeper problem with the civic culture in America that goes well beyond any Russian Spy Op.

[Anonymous No.10348776]

>>10348705
>Zizek has said that he thinks key difference between right wing politics and left wing politics is that the left believes the problems in society are the result of structural flaws inside our own society [...] while the right believes that the problems in society are the result of the corruption of the society from an influence from without, some foreign force [...]
If so then Zizek is fucking stupid. Both think that the reason for problems is the influence of the opposite side.

>The election shouldn't have been even close. Maybe Russia but a thumb on the scale but the fact that it was even possible that a person with such obvious contempt for the law as Donald Trump was even considered shows a far deeper problem with the civic culture in America that goes well beyond any Russian Spy Op.
It shows that people (white people in particular) have had enough of liberal-progressive identity politics and the ever more bold attempts at turning the culture upside-down.
You have created a legitimate neo-nazi underground in the US, and now you're just doubling down on your own stupidity. Name-calling and "expressions of concern" won't work anymore, buddy-boyo

[Anonymous No.10348779]

>encourages a new generation to look introspectively rather than propping up opposing view points and successfully
>deduces and successfully argues for the wrongs in modern social radicals
>provides a gateway to save the dying romantic intellectuality in the west
>249 posts of hooligans spewing impulsive musings because they couldn't watch a few hours of lectures
Clean your room.

[Anonymous No.10348783]

>>10348705
>the right believes that the problems in society are the result of the corruption of the society from an influence from without,
Dare I say Zizek has but a flawed conception of the problematic involved? Guenon, Evola et al magisterially diagnosed the unholy combination of both sets of factors, with the former preceding the latter, in a process that Evola termed Involution.
For what it's worth, so did F. P. Yockey in his Imperium if I'm not mistaken, although he laid more emphasis on his concept of Culture Distortion - thus the converse phenomenon, to some extent.

[Anonymous No.10348834]

>>10348783