[ 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: 50 KB, 885x516, 0AA7D31F-0D20-4B4E-A579-407FA13AEC4B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11632603 No.11632603[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>rips off DFW and sucks at it
>takes almost all of his ideas from Jung, Freud, and Nietzche
>is too much of a pussy to fully admit he’s a Christian
Why do people like this guy again?

>> No.11632608

>>11632603
Because he is one of the smartest men to ever live.

>> No.11632615

>>11632603
If anything he's to much of a pussy to admit he's not christian

>> No.11632621
File: 106 KB, 1280x720, a talking meme.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11632621

Jordan "Netflix TV shows are on the same level of complexity as great literature" Peterson

>> No.11632802

Something something Disney something something lobster something something

>> No.11632957

>rips off DFW and sucks at it

Pardon?

>> No.11632963

>>11632621
We've been over this

>> No.11632970

There are real and interesting points to be made against him yet /lit/ always makes the easiest and most dishonest arguments possible and calls everyone who points out their shit tactics a fanboy. It's disappointing. I wish debate weren't just a game of interpreting the other party with as little charity as possible and dashing the arguments they never actually made

>> No.11632972

>>11632957
no that guy but while he obviously doesn't rip off dfw at all i've recently been rereading IJ and the convergence is really striking. DFW has absolutely no relationship to jung as far as I can tell, but he is influenced by nietzsche.

>> No.11633051

>>11632603
seems people take his arguments to heart and let their emotions get the better of them. i haven't seen to much rebuttal that isn't drenched in emotions and offensiveness

>> No.11633053

>>11632957
>”postmodernism” is bad
>irony is too bláse now
>genuineness is in short supply and is seriously needed

>> No.11633073

>>11633053
the "metamodernists" have been pedaling this trite for some time. While DFW did it ironically I'm afraid Peterson, Shia Leboof and James Franco are quite sincere.

>> No.11633081

>>11632603
Finally a sensible tripfag.

>> No.11633110
File: 44 KB, 800x450, 1534265669945.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11633110

>>11632603
>/lit/ actually thinks this is the way to criticise intellectuals.
Not a single quotation or even a charitable retelling of his views. Not a single refutation; not even an attempt at one! Just

>haha he's a pussy lmao

>> No.11633125

>>11633110
>Jordan Peterson
>intellectual

>> No.11633143

>>11633125
See what I mean. If you think he's not worthy of the title then prove it. Quote his works. Refute him.

>> No.11633151

>>11633143
post something jordan peterson has written and I will refute it.

>> No.11633152

>>11633151
"my name is Jordan Peterson"

>> No.11633153

>>11633143
Pretty easy to poke holes in his flimsy understanding of post modernist philosophy

>> No.11633161
File: 428 KB, 1400x2100, 1533949373744.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11633161

>>11633073
>irony is better than sincerity

>> No.11633168

>>11633151
That's not how it works. YOU made the claim that he's not an intellectual, so the onus is on you to substantiate it.

>> No.11633173

>>11633152
How is that "his" name? Am I to believe he invented the names "Jordan" and "Peterson" and he is the only man in the history o the panet to have been called that?

You see the man is a fraud

>> No.11633182

>>11633173
Peterson btfo

>> No.11633183

>>11633152
Citation, please?

>> No.11633191

>>11633168
I'll shove my hard intellectual cock deep inside your pale skinny onus, you little bitch. Now give me an assertion so I can shut him down and BTFO jordan peterson and everyone can pat me on the back and say "well done anon"

I'm not gonna be bothered reading things when I can just refute things other people read.

>> No.11633196

>>11633161
>he thinks they are being ironic
you are like a little baby

>> No.11633198

Let's talk about this debate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxYimeaoea0

>> No.11633201

>>11633153
>Pretty easy to poke holes in his flimsy understanding of post modernist philosophy
Everybody's understanding of it is flimsy. The only people who claim to understand it are pseuds whove realized that they can pretend to understand it because no one else understands it enough to call their bluff

>> No.11633207

Problem with peterson is that he doesnt drive his points home. Until he gives definitive answers he wont be convincing.

Why doesnt answer if he believes in God. Hes clearly an atheist larper.

>> No.11634762

>>11632603

>> No.11634776

>>11633152
he's a pussy lmao

>> No.11634781

>>11633201
Nah. Read "Encyclopedia, Genealogy and Tradition."

>> No.11634783

>>11633201
>Everybody's understanding of it is flimsy
no

>> No.11634785

>>11634781
Not him, but blow it out your ass.

>> No.11634814

>>11633143
>quote his works

the self help book or the book of Jungian bullshit? or maybe some YouTube clip where he "DESTROYS postmodern neo-Marxist social justice warrior transgender university freshman!"?

>> No.11634836

>>11633168
lmao, what? is the default assumption about anyone who gets famous for talking a lot on any medium that'll accept them that they're an intellectual now?

>> No.11634838

>Don't even like Jordan and disagree with almost all of his points.
>/lit/ retards are literally too retarded to properly criticize him regardless even though there's so much to criticize.

I fucking hate this board I don't even know why I keep coming here.

>> No.11634848
File: 25 KB, 669x514, 1500082900410.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11634848

>>11634838
do your own homework

>> No.11634864

>>11634848
I've written several papers refuting Jordan Peterson's works and have actually argued with him in person when I attended one of his seminars at the University of Toronto. The only person here not doing their homework and posting braindead ad hominem in leu of actual refutations is you, brainlet.

>> No.11634876
File: 673 KB, 786x818, jbp3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11634876

>>11632603
he's not a writer or a philosopher, he's a professor and a media figure. his prominence is purely political. the reason people like him is because someone wants them to.

>> No.11634882
File: 176 KB, 482x372, 1500758750278.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11634882

>>11634864
Then why do you care? We all know it.

>> No.11634885

>>11634882
Because making a thread here criticizing his works should have actual intellectual analysis of his works to begin with, not just "HURR DURR HE'S A PUSSY LMAO XDXD". You're contributing to the entropy of this board.

>> No.11634889

>>11632603
His ideas primarily comes from William James

>> No.11634895

>>11634885
again, that's just preaching to the choir

>> No.11634899

>>11634889
JBP doesn't know shit about pragmatism, pseudlord Sam Harris ripped him apart over that on his dumb podcast.

>> No.11634900

>>11634895
If actual intellectual discussion were common practice then I wouldn't have made the post to begin with, therefore it's not preaching to the choir.

>> No.11634910

>>11634899
He literally just articulated philosophical pragmatism's epistemological framework throughout that entire podcast. I can guarantee you that he's read William James.

>> No.11634912

>>11634864
I'm very interested in seeing your work and hearing about your discussions with him, anon

>> No.11634915

>>11634899
You have to be completely brain dead to walk away from that podcast thinking Harris won

>> No.11634924

>>11634900
Intellectual discussion doesn't belong in Peterson threads

>> No.11634930

>>11634912
The backups of my papers are only tied to my university account so I don't have immediate access to them sadly. A lot of my criticism for him ties back to his tying of religion with hierarchal themes. I also conceded a few points relating to his view of linguistics and semiotics.

>> No.11634932

>>11634915
I didn't say that, I said that when Harris pressed him on the topic he fell to pieces.

>> No.11634938

>>11632970
/Thread

>> No.11634950

>>11634932
He didn't though. It took him a while to slowly get it all out but he remained perfectly coherent and reasonable throughout. It was Harris constantly stopping the conversations and saying "I just don't think we can get past this" that made it seem like he wasn't making any sense. He was very clearly laying out his framework and Harris wouldn't let him continue just because they differ axiomatically

>> No.11634954

>>11634950
okay, but they're still both pseuds

>> No.11634971

>>11632603
I thought he was jewish or crypto jewish?

>> No.11634974

>>11634971
he's a neo-crypto-judeo-Bolshevik

>> No.11635027

>>11633073
are you actually putting him with Lebouf and Franco in earnest? I dare say I'd agree with you if I were as bad at being sincere as you seem to be. You need to at least be accurate to do that.

also the term "meta modernist" is synonymous with "post-modernist"

if anything, being cynical and peevish about sincerity and deciding to comprehending the immense value of meaning as an inherent ethical focal point is very much trite in 2018.

>> No.11635036

>>11633125
Having a PhD and having tenure at a well-reputed institution is what most sane people would consider the traits of an intellectual

.....or do you not believe in research, publication, or academia?

>> No.11635061

>>11635036
Also was an associate professor at Harvard

>> No.11635075

>>11635036
>>11635061
excellent, so I suppose you have no fundamental issues with JBP's "Marxist" "SJW" "Postmodern" colleagues? they're entitled to the same kind of respect he is, by your reasoning.

>> No.11635080

>>11635075
Just popping in to say this post put a smile on my face :)

>> No.11635081

>>11633201
I don't buy into the fact that we should all admit it's too obscure for anyone to truthfully claim that they comprehend it. Even if it's true insofar as post-modern continental stuff is ]]essentially[[ long-form prose in that it equates more strongly with literature than philosophy, it doesn't inherently provide a logical barrier to anyone who reports on its content in summary...

especially if these post-modern writers, who are truly dense writers, are being utilized in the form of over-the-top punk movements in universities that are incompetent at critical discourse.

it's incredibly ironic because you simply cannot work in academia if you cannot function critically in discourse. these young students have no grasp of what true value their favorite authors offer because they're not patient enough to think about ways of furthering dialogue


in short, you're wrong because we need a way of understanding intellectual slovenliness by young college punks. even if it's summarized absurdly, we need a taxonomy to understand the general currents of writing that have [[somehow]] led to this impasse.

we need to integrate analytic and continental philosophy and eventually force scientists and business students to study philosophy. that's how we solve this division.


and everyone should read Wittgenstein

>> No.11635203

>>11635027
>also the term "meta modernist" is synonymous with "post-modernist"
You're an idiot.

>> No.11635242

>>11634814
>If it's not a book it doesn't exist
Imagine being such a brainlet that you don't know about publishing papers in academia