[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 587 KB, 1080x692, Peterson-2-Screen-Shot-2018-03-21-at-7.06.04-PM-copy-1080x692.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11154418 No.11154418[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

So does he ever actually deal with Nietzsche's critique of Christianity or does he just gloss over it?

>> No.11154425

>>11154418
he doesn't
He just says how Christianity has been more beneficial in the long run or something

>> No.11154444

why doesnt anyone confront him about this? also
>not literature related

>> No.11154463

>>11154444
quads confrim

>> No.11154470

>>11154444
He has q&a's at speeches and as monthly streams but no one's ever gave him a rigorous challenge. Very disappointing desu.

>> No.11154496

>>11154470
so why don't you rigorously challenge him

>> No.11154506

>>11154496
I don't want to drive 500 miles to one of his speeches or patreon him.

>> No.11154513

>>11154418
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ao8u0CEvqEY

>> No.11154550

>>11154513
There is no critique whatsoever in this video. In fact I think if the only knowledge you had of Nietzsche came from this video you could rationally believe that Nietzsche loved Christianity and that he thought the death of Christianity was a terrible thing

Still no mention of slave morality or any refutation of Nietzsche's argument that Christianity is a morality of sickness and weakness and resentment

>> No.11154563

>>11154418
this really really bothers me
i wish he would just come out and say that he is a christian and that he literally believes jesus resurrected from the dead and that homosexuality is a sin and that those who don't repent are going to hell because he clearly thinks these things but hes so hesitant to be honest about it

which is really disappointing from a guy who claims to value honesty so much

>> No.11154611

>>11154418

Feel like he kind of implies the Rene Girard thing where in a world of people endlessly competing for the dominance hierarchy, the christ figure allows for redemption

>> No.11154666

>>11154563
Peterson doesn't believe the divinity of Jesus or that he rose from the grave. He claims to be a Christian, but he's not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIB05YeMiW8

>> No.11154671

>>11154418
A bleeding Eucharist or a deaf woman restored to hearing is sufficient to deal with Nietzsche's critique of Christianity.

>> No.11154675

>>11154418
Why would he? He's not a philosopher, he's a self help scam artist for man children. He's the Dr. Oz of philosophy.

>> No.11154676

>>11154563
Imagine producing a post of quality as low as this.
You ought to be ashamed.

>> No.11154678

>>11154676
Nice refutation

>> No.11154694

>>11154418
He tells conflicting stories about how his daughter overcame childhood arthiritis, and always in ways that fit whatever talk he's doing.

In his book, he said her pain was fixed by a doctor.

In JRE, he said a meat/greens diet fixed her pain.

My respect for his guy is gone. It sucks too because I liked a lot of his ideas

>> No.11154696

>>11154563
I agree but why the tumblr phraseology...............
>really really

>> No.11154702

>>11154563
he isn't that retarded

>> No.11154704

>>11154563
also I actually disagree with you in one vital sense, I think he is NOT a christian and knows it. he doesn't believe that stuff literally.

>> No.11154706

>>11154550
How is it a morality of sickness and weakness? What does that even mean?

>> No.11154707

>>11154418
he glosses over everything except sucking his own penis

>> No.11154728

>>11154706
Read SOME Nietzsche please

>> No.11154761

>>11154706
Christian morality is based on jerking yourself off for being a poor weakling who doesn't even want the power those rich strong masters have.
>Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth
Wtf I love being a beta faggot now!

>> No.11154829

>>11154706
One does not simply arrive at the answer to this by asking it randomly on an anonymous imageboard. Nietzsche spent his entire life reading and thinking and he was a professional at it. Nonetheless, if you spend some time in the air of Nietzsche you might arrive at the same conclusions eventually.

>> No.11154833

>>11154470
Plenty of leftists and avowed Marxists have asked him to have conversations with him. He ignores them and then claims no Marxist wants to debate him.

>> No.11154839

>>11154563
>you either have to be athiest or a fundamental theist
I hate this bullshit brainlet nu-athiest critique. If you had actually looked into his work and processed it at all you would know why he doesn't.

>> No.11154849

>>11154506
then tweet at him you dip, i'm sure he'd rather respond to you than the 6 million anime avatars asking why he won't blame jews for all of canada's problems

>> No.11154859

>>11154706
christianity = race to the bottom mentality (blessed are the meek, letting God cuck your girlfriend is a good thing, if your enemies kill you you win etc)

>> No.11154873

>>11154418
He also glosses over the fact that Nietzsche is the father of postmodernism and that the Frankfurt School critical theory that he decries as "Cultural Marxism" only exists because its thinkers abandoned Marx for Nietzsche (i.e. the abandonment of Marx's immanent critique for Nietzsche's total critique - they literally though modernism was a degenerate social form, just like Nietzsche).

Homeboy really needs to read some Richard Wolin. Or, you know, just some primary sources.

>> No.11154913

>>11154873
He's clueless. He thinks he styles himself a defender of Enlightenment values without realizing that his project is just a continuation of Counter-Enlightenment thinking, and more over, that thinkers that he rails against like Adorno, Foucault, Derrida, et al. were also part of this Counter-Enlightenment project as well.

>> No.11154924

>>11154666
It's a shame...

>> No.11154927

>>11154666
He's a Gnostic and he runs a Gnostic cult.

Your trips are apropos.

>> No.11154956

>>11154666
>And I don't mean this in a postmodern way
Proceeds to repeat a statement he vilifies postmodernists for claiming
And people still listen to this guy smdh

>> No.11154958

>>11154849
I don't use twitter, you normalfuck.

>> No.11154988

>>11154859
Are there actual philosophical discussions of this? Because this seems like a shit-tier argument.

>> No.11155001

>>11154988
Yes, Nietzsche you moron

>> No.11155013
File: 20 KB, 474x528, 880.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11155013

>>11154988
Yes

>> No.11155052
File: 23 KB, 480x450, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11155052

>>11154418
>reads the most biting and eloquent invective against Christianity
>doesn't look like anything to me

Peterson's interest in Nietzsche has always confused me.

>> No.11155094

>>11155001
Obviously, but what's the argument? People say it's great but only come out with shit-tier nonsense.

>> No.11155102

>>11155094
>needs to be spoonfed nietzsche

do the reading or go back

>> No.11155137

>>11155094
Start with "Thus Spoke Zarathusra". In his prologue he contrasts Jeebus with his Superman ideology. Why be with a shepherd among the sheep when you can break away from the flock? He also points out the hypocrisy of Christianity's teachings.

>> No.11155180

>>11154706
Maybe if you read Nietzsche you'd know why he thinks that retard

>> No.11155264

>>11155094
no one can answer you because neetche's entire critique boils down to "dude it's life denying XD"

>> No.11155267

>>11155264
Nice strawman

>> No.11155366

>>11154833
Like who? Zizek?

>> No.11155377

>>11154418
He postulated God being a sort of hermaphrodite...

He doesn't understand Christianity, so he doesn't understand Nietzsche's flaw in viewing Christianity as Lutheran and overly platonic.

>> No.11155379

>>11155366
He's dodged both Doug Lain and Derick Varn numerous times.

>> No.11155407

>>11155094
Beyond Good and Evil is like 150 pages, just read it you dumb fuck. Nietzsche is the greatest rhetorician of the last two hundred years. He'll convince you, at least for a while.

>> No.11155417

>>11155377
Nietzsche talked about the differences between protestant and catholic christianity, in many aphorisms.
Unless you are talking about some other variation of christianity, you are wrong.
But please annouce to us, those that you consider his flawed views.

>> No.11155609

>>11155417
If man was going to affirm life, he would need to be rid of Christian morality. Purport Christianity as a platonic duel between spirit and body when discussing morality, and dismantle Christian morality, you're left with the morals of man. But it's good versus evil; human beings tend towards Christian morals, though not entirely (they choose evil, thus not have a full tendency towards virtue). Christian morality affirms all the good of men and denies all his evils. Christian morality doesn't deny man.

>> No.11155649

>>11154913
Wolin go to sleep.

Just because Adorno and Foucault cited some de maistre, does mean they are the same(although in critique there can be similarities). Personally, like Zizek I think most of the PoMos or Frankfurt schoolfags think that modernity should have been done differently or take a different course that the one that happened.

>> No.11155811

>>11154696
>tumblr phraseology
What
>..............
What

>> No.11155816

>>11154706
Man must dwell in solidarity and find himself, for the group is a comforting drug.

>> No.11155837

>>11154694
>implying you can't fix arthritis with a combination of treatment and diet
RA sufferer here, both of those methods helped keep my symptoms in check enormously. I don't like Peterson but it's retarded to hate him simply because he might be inconsistent with his stories

>> No.11155909

>>11154418
There's a video where he says something along the lines of Nietzsche's treatment of Christianity was akin to maggots eating dead flesh (meaning N took out the undesirable aspects of christianity). The problem is N didn't want to cure Christianity as much as he wanted to supplant it with something different, he probably felt that the whole thing is rooted in axioms of lesser value. As for why Peterson insists on citing N to argue for his 'christianity', I really have no idea. Perhaps he doesn't want to lose patreon bux from Nietzsche lovers.

>> No.11156176

>>11155909
Which video was this

>> No.11156188

>>11155609
>If man was going to affirm life, he would need to be rid of Christian morality.
Obey this rule, and you will affirm life and not follow rules like a slave. :^)

>> No.11156378
File: 6 KB, 415x416, 1467007628934.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11156378

>>11156188
Ebin

>> No.11156594

>>11154666
Sometimes JP comes off as a bit of a normie.
His lack of philosophical depth is showing.

>> No.11156690

>>11154839
>you either have to be athiest or a fundamental theist
Of course that's a ridiculous notion, but be real dude the man speaks almost exactly like my childhood youth pastor. When I initially encountered Peterson my very first read on him was that he seemed like he regretted his degree wasn't from a seminary or similar.

>> No.11156740

>>11155609
>human beings tend towards Christian morals
Then why is there a Christianity?

>> No.11156749

>>11155909
>As for why Peterson insists on citing N to argue for his 'christianity', I really have no idea.
because the ignoramuses whose neetbux he covets know about him and his "god is dead" schtick but haven't read jack shit
that's also why he has meltdowns when somebody asks him if he believes in god ("You're trying to put me in a box!!!"), because he's afraid some of his gains would melt away if he came out as religious

>> No.11156780

>>11156749
You can disagree with someone and still use many of their arguments as support of your own. Also what is correct for one time, is not necessarily correct for all times.

>> No.11156794

>>11156594
Sometimes? He's always been a normie. His entire schtick has been to justify normie life in a context that is making it more and more unjustifiable.

>> No.11156804

How much have you guys actually watched and read of Peterson? Or do you just watch the clips?

>> No.11156806

>>11155417
Even at the moments it looks like he's complimenting catholicism over lutheranism, he's praising catholicism precisely because of it's undoubtedly dyonisian and pagan elements which the church never managed to supress (but protestantism did, to many extents. Too bad they also got rid of god in the process).
JBP should have been discarded the moment he said Nietzsche was ACTUALLY a christian. I'm sure a bunch of dadless buckos will start jumping out of the bushes telling me how I didn't understand what he ackshually said and that I should watch this 10 part 8 hour 240p video of him mumbling in a shit mic at some backwater university in Les Canards Succ Mon Coq, Alberta or whatever but there are /lit/ threads in which other kermitonites try to argue for this. I won't look for them because honestly I can't be arsed to but the OP was something like "was he right in calling "god is dead" a lammentation" or something like that.
Quick answer: no he wasn't, Neetchee's project needed god to be dead.

>> No.11156822

>>11155366
Actually he and Zizek may be having a debate this year, around November.Jordan Peterson, hilariously, got into an argument with a twitter account that posts Zizek quotes, thinking it was his actual twitter, and word eventually got to the man himself who agreed to it when he returns to America for his book tour.

>> No.11156833

>>11156749
>if he came out as religious
Worshiping Satan doesn't count as 'religious', pretty much everyone except Tridentine Catholics and Orthodox Christians does that nowadays.

>> No.11156858

>>11156822
I bet you like snopes

>> No.11156898

>>11155816
Underrated post

>> No.11156905

>>11156833
The ritual is not the religion.

>> No.11156937

>>11155837
>I don't like Peterson but it's retarded to hate him simply because he might be inconsistent with his stories
>People who can't get their story straight are totally not chalatans at all
wew lad

>> No.11156941

>>11155052
Peterson said that while Nietzsche was incredibly insightful, JBP himself believes Christianity has become the guiding ethos of the West for a reason, and that its accrued to itself a vast body of precepts and images and symbols which teach us deep psychological truths and how to live our lives. It’s like a process of evolution except of ideas, those most beneficial to human flourishing continue to reproduce and to flourish, paring off what’s unnecessary/harmful and taking on what’s better. Not a perfect analogy (since there have clearly been missteps in Christianity, and continue to be) but somewhat similar to the gist.

>> No.11156952

>>11156858
No. Snopes is CIA funded disinfo.

>> No.11156970

JPS said that when Neechee proclaimed “God is dead”, he said it wasn’t in jubilation. It was in mourning.

But when I read Thus Spake, it seemed like the concept of God had to be overcome so that humanity could progress and reach the next plateau.

Did I just get that super wrong?

>> No.11156975

Neechee phone home

>> No.11156993

>>11154418
He's a typical Anglo thinker, i.e. a casual and bad reader of Nietzsche. Of course he is going to gloss over much of what he said.

Twilight of the Idols:

>When the English actually believe that they know "intuitively" what is good and evil, when they therefore suppose that they no longer require Christianity as the guarantee of morality, we merely witness the effects of the dominion of the Christian value judgment and an expression of the strength and depth of this dominion: such that the origin of English morality has been forgotten, such that the very conditional character of its right to existence is no longer felt. For the English, morality is not yet a problem.

>For the English there are only two ways of coming to terms with the genius and the "great man": either democratically in the manner of Buckle or religiously in the manner of Carlyle.

>I have been reading the life of Thomas Carlyle, this unconscious and involuntary farce, this heroic-moralistic interpretation of dyspeptic states. Carlyle: a man of strong words and attitudes, a rhetor from need, constantly lured by the craving for a strong faith and the feeling of his incapacity for it (in this respect, a typical romantic!). The craving for a strong faith is no proof of a strong faith, but quite the contrary. If one has such a faith, then one can afford the beautiful luxury of skepticism: one is sure enough, firm enough, has ties enough for that. Carlyle drugs something in himself with the fortissimo of his veneration of men of strong faith and with his rage against the less simple-minded: he requires noise. A constant passionate dishonesty against himself—that is his proprium; in this respect he is and remains interesting. Of course, in England he is admired precisely for his honesty. Well, that is English; and in view of the fact that the English are the people of consummate cant, it is even as it should be, and not only comprehensible. At bottom, Carlyle is an English atheist who makes it a point of honor not to be one.

Sound familiar?

>> No.11156996

>>11156970
Don't get too cocky but at least this one time, you're right over the tenured professor. Peterson is just dishonest.

See
>>11156993
>>11156806

>> No.11156997

who cares?
he's a meme

>> No.11156998

>>11156941
so is islam similarly beneficial to human flourishing then?

>> No.11157007

>>11156998
oh boy this one is gonna be good, I don't give 4 hours for the kermit cult to become specialists on why Averroes was shit

>> No.11157040

>>11156970
Yes. Nietzche mourned the death of God and sought a way out. He did not think God could be resuscitated, and thought all attempts to do so would end in destruction. So, recognizing that actual belief in God had died, he thought it necessary for Man to very consciously abandon the idea altogether. The work seems strange until you recognize that Nietzche was proclaiming the death of God and preaching the ubermensch as someone who did not believe in God but wished the possibility had never been presented to him. Any who abandon God by way of reason can only find their way back to God by abandoning reason. Nietzche would not abandon reason, to the point that he went mad. No one is more rational than the insane man.

>> No.11157078

>>11154671
produce one that has stood up to any type of rigorous scientific testing, not the dozens that catholic ""scientists"" confirm whatever hypothesis some bumfuck peasants believe and then hide away their totally proven evidence against any other outside study.

>> No.11157210
File: 30 KB, 290x200, thinkan.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11157210

>>11154418

>expecting this absolute charlatan to tackle anything intellectually substantial

>> No.11157257

>>11155811
>What
What
>What
What

>> No.11157279

deep down jordan peterson is just another utilitarian and we should stop making this board about him

>> No.11157294

He just conviniently ignores it. He does the same thing with the Jewish question

>> No.11157295

>>11157279
deep down, everyone is just a utilitarian, you pseud

>> No.11157312

>>11157294
How do you take yourself seriously and use the phrase Jewish Question? What I mean by this is, how can you deny the holocaust, and then use a key phrase of said fabrication, in order to euphemistically speak of implementing an actual holocaust? That's not meta-irony, it's just meta-retarded.

>> No.11157323

>>11154694
you ever heard of the phrase 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'?

>> No.11157327

>>11154563
The world isn't as simple as you think it is.

>> No.11157330

>>11157323
there is no baby

>> No.11157342

>>11156998
You could rework the same theistic argument and apply it to the Arab World, yes. Peterson would probably mumble something about it being an inferior framework of reason in his usual revisionist drivel.

>> No.11157345

>>11157312
>how can you deny the holocaust
Where did the guy deny the holocaust?

>in order to euphemistically speak of implementing an actual holocaust
Where did he say he wanted to implement a holocaust.

>That's not meta-irony, it's just meta-retarded.
Are you new?

>> No.11157348

>>11154418
He seems to think that Nietzschean Doctrine is still a form of Nihilism. Then he takes Dostoevsky's position about Nihilism and Moral Vacuum.

>> No.11157354

>>11156998
It was before the Asharites took over.

>> No.11157372

>>11154927
Peterson is more Christian than Gnostic with his exoteric mass-appeal bullshit

>> No.11157383
File: 73 KB, 450x659, alpha5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11157383

>>11156970
He considered the death of Skydaddy a dangerous thing in itself, but also necessary in the coming-of-age process.

>> No.11157431

>>11156970
>God had to be overcome so that humanity could progress and reach the next plateau
Yes anon, read the Antichrist aphorism 2 & 5 clear this point.

>> No.11157462

>>11157330
that's quite a statement to make. I don't think you've considered this enough.

>> No.11157476

>>11157462
I disagree.

>> No.11157499

>>11154444
I'm going to see him in late July. Give me a well formulated question to ask and I'll try to

>> No.11157538

>>11157499
You tell me your questions now bucko.
And i'll sort them out.

>> No.11157560

>>11157342
I wonder who the arab peterson is

>> No.11157619

>>11156740
Natural telos of man is to know the first cause, that is through virtue; the supernatural telos of man is to end in the first cause, be in union with God. So man requires the gift of grace for this. For he cannot reach his supernatural telos on his own, especially not after the fall; he needs revelation from God to know God more than he did intuitively. And he especially needs the Incarnation to be saved.

Yes there's is of course the supernatural aspect, which I find to be so much more real, but man's natural ability to know God as the first cause and His many effects and attributes is convicting, and genuinely points to the Christian God.

>>11156188
There's the problem. There are Christian morals that are affirmed in the morality of the spirit and of human's natural instinct (they still have a tendency towards good in some aspects). Humans naturall feel humiliation, enact altruism, share with others, love their kin, etc. These "slavish" morals are inherent in the discipline of being a human. It is quite foolish too to say these are all for the ego—which Nietzsche does say. He may say it, to avoid the problem, but that's like puting duct tape on a hole in a boat.

>> No.11157630

>>11157619
altruism and friendship aren't slave-only emotions, what the fuck is this retarded ayn rand strawman

>> No.11157645

>>11157560
memri tv

>> No.11157650

>>11154706
He sees it as life-hating rather than life-affirming. It was all about guilt and self-denial according to him, which may have been true of the Religion in general or maybe just the flavor of Protestantism that was popular at the time. Christianity is a preparation for death rather than a celebration of life, in his view.

>> No.11157708

>>11157312
Umm sweety... When exactly did I deny the holocaust in my post?
Even so called holocaust deniers don't actually deny the holocaust. They disagree on the way it happened. So why don't we now move on to the question of the Jewish people and their massive influence on modern politics?

>> No.11157710

>>11157312
most people who use that phrase aren't interested in a Jewish genocide. They borrow a lot of terminology from Hitler because they were lied to their entire lives about his motives, but they're not Hitler worshipers unless they're very dumb

>> No.11157719

>>11157710
When you live ironically long enough, eventually it stops being ironic.

>> No.11157725

>>11157708
How can you disagree with Foucault so much, while striving so hard to personify all his examples?

>> No.11157733

>>11154470
He was challenged on how Solzhenitsyn viewed the Soviets and the Jews and their relationship but he just stuttered and passed on the question.

>> No.11157734

>>11154958
Based.

>> No.11157766 [SPOILER] 
File: 149 KB, 640x623, 1526409137389.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11157766

>>11154418
>glosses over it
There is nothing he does but 'gloss over' things, like lipstick to straw swine.

>> No.11157767

>>11157719
It's not ironic. People are most enamored with Hitler shortly after they lose faith in secularism, equality, etc. They usually grow out of it once they mentally escape the modern "everything politically relevant happened in the 20th century" framing. The fact is that Hitler was a weeb who fell for eastern religion. He was still one of the better figures of the last 100 years, but the guy wasn't a god.

>> No.11157774

>>11154418
He makes an argument from utilitarianism, he isn't a Christian.

Also
>implying Nietzschean criticisms of Christianity are valid

There's a reason he never really merited a serious response by theologians.

>> No.11157795

>>11157774
He had some pretty good criticisms of how it was and is practiced in much of the world, though. If you can't read Beyond Good and Evil without losing your faith, it's a sign that you either understand the theology poorly, or are in a terrible denomination.

>> No.11157797

>>11157733
I don't understand how he couldn't just say some pablum like "Yes, I'm familiar with those facets of Solzhenitsyin's works but I don't subscribe to each and every one of his beliefs, I judge for myself blah blah blah", it's not like he's not good at blathering bullshit.

>> No.11157803

>>11157795
Using "you" generically, of course

>> No.11157864

>>11157767
>LARPing as a Nazi isn't ironic, because they actually agree with everything but the symbolism.

>> No.11157868

>>11157767
Because his greatest contributors are Jews (Ezra Levant) and his wife is possibly as well. He has to dance around it because answering it honestly destroys him and his world view (the worst thing to ever happen was the Holocaust).

>> No.11157874

>>11157868
Meant to reply to >>11157797

>> No.11157880

>>11157868
>>11157874
Fuck off, retard.