/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17735262]

What's the deal with all these incel Peterson fanboys swarming this board? I'm tired of seeing threads about people asking if it's worth reading baseless smooth-brains book attacking strawmen and others asking for arguments to be spoon-fed to them instead of you know.. actually reading a book and educating yourself. Maybe you'd have stronger counter-arguments if you bothered to actually get yourself up to speed on topics you disagree with instead of spewing bullshit with no basis in anything.
I guess watching this would be a good start.
https://youtu.be/cU1LhcEh8Ms

[Anonymous No.17735278]

>>17735262
This is also good https://youtu.be/EHtvTGaPzF4

[Anonymous No.17735284]

>>17735278
The Postmodernism FAQ as well. It's so weird how all these smoothbrains act as if a group of "intellectual elite" somehow robbed us all of meaning instead of observing these conditions.

[smoker !HOZlQYR1MY No.17735300]

>>17735262
Oh, you actually see people talking about even possibly maybe reading on this board?

[Anonymous No.17735304]

>>17735284
The problem is that postmodernism was seen this way by its American following in addition to its detractors. The American academic could be forgiven for believing that it's all about relativism if he only experienced the trend secondhand.

[Anonymous No.17735313]

>>17735300
I wish. But at least there has been some okay-ish discussion on these topics in the past but it seems to me like the influx of poltards and illiterate manchildren has gotten especially bad as of late.

[Anonymous No.17735320]

>>17735262
>midwit who tells people to educate themselves because he can't argue posts a youtube video
lmao

[Anonymous No.17735328]

>>17735262
Peterson is literally a genius who will be vindicated by history, it's why mid/lit/s hate him, actually just ressentiment

[Anonymous No.17735332]

>>17735320
I mean I also recommended actually reading books but judging by any "arguments" I've seen on this board that's clearly too much of a task for you.

[Anonymous No.17735337]

>>17735328
Did you even watch the video. I'm being generous in assuming you at least have that much of an attention span. Here's another good one. https://youtu.be/V2hhrUHSD6o
Like honestly I'm not even taking a stand on his psychological perspectives or whatever but any and all of his takes on postmodernism and marxism are complete and utter bullshit.

[Anonymous No.17735338]

>>17735328
>A genius
>30 min+ bloviating sessions where he peddles the most obvious and banal platitudes

It's hard to even disagree with Peterson most of the time because everything he says is the most tepid shit any college graduate should be able to say. His fans are like a group of people who think calculus ruined society but they'll watch a man do basic algebra and shit themselves in excitement.

[Anonymous No.17735343]

>>17735332
yeah you should probably leave and find somewhere better suited to you

[Anonymous No.17735362]

>>17735338
Peterson is a brilliant man. You do yourself no favors denying that it just allows me to put you into the pseud category. It's not a good sign to get filtered by a public intellectual, you can disagree with him no problem but don't pretend like he has nothing to say or is stupid.

[Anonymous No.17735371]

>>17735343
I guess asking for people to actually read on a literature board is too much for retards that can only handle audiobook synopsises on the most banal of subjects.

[Anonymous No.17735375]

>>17735262
This guy calls himself cuck philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17735380]

>>17735362
Not the anon you're replying to but please just watch the videos linked, his takes on postmodernism and marxism are factually wrong strawmen arguments.

[Anonymous No.17735381]

>>17735338
>30 min+ bloviating sessions where he peddles the most obvious and banal platitudes
filtered. They are not "platitudes", as you would have it, if they have to be explained. He is explaining nothing less than the very building blocks of life.

[Anonymous No.17735383]

>>17735362
He really doesn't have anything to say. Everything he says is either a gussied-up cliche or one of the lazy prejudices of his generation. People only follow him because they don't know better and because he uses big words to describe little ideas. He's the idiot's idea of a genius.

[Anonymous No.17735384]

>>17735375
Yeah because he has enough self esteem and self awareness to be able to make fun of himself unlike you incel basement dwellers who probably barely managed to graduate high school.

[Anonymous No.17735387]

>>17735381
If you think what Peterson talks about has to be explained then you're unironically ngmi.

[Anonymous No.17735390]

>>17735381
This is what people without an university degree actually think.

[Anonymous No.17735397]

>>17735384
What does it say about you that you ended up here with us lel

[Anonymous No.17735408]

>>17735387
I have a Master's Degree in Civil Engineering and an annual salary upwards of 80,000 dollars. Peterson has the right idea. You don't and I'm proof of it.

[Anonymous No.17735409]

>>17735262
Jordan Peterson is far more important than most of the pseud authors posted here. Shut up and fuck off back to basedddit.

[Anonymous No.17735412]

>>17735262
just grow up man
(and have sex)

[Anonymous No.17735415]

>>17735384
In that case for sure he should upload vids of himself kissing black peoples boots in the streets. That would really btfo the chuds.

[Anonymous No.17735424]

>>17735408
>he's a STEMfag
No wonder you think Peterson is interesting. He's what you learn in liberal arts but boiled down to a high school level.

[Anonymous No.17735428]

>>17735387
>>17735390

He actually talks about maybe the most complicated topic there is. The brain being the most complex structure in the universe and culture being the product of billions of brains over God knows how long. Put that in the context of the evolution of both and we don't even know how to talk about it. It's incredible how little has been produced on these topics. I except the advances should at some point come out of the vicinity of information theory which will then certainly sound less religious than it does when it comes from psychologists.

[Anonymous No.17735435]

>>17735424
>he ad hominem attacks people on /lit/
Thank God for STEM. I credit my success to choosing a field of study with career prospects and my psychological health (plus lit recs) to Jordan B. Peterson.

[Anonymous No.17735442]

>>17735428
>The subject is complex therefore what he says is complex

[Anonymous No.17735451]

>>17735300
jesus learn english you faggot

[Anonymous No.17735452]

>>17735380
He's not interesting because of his takes on postmodernism or marxism for that matter. That has been done by far more qualified people. Aside from his personality you watch or read him for the Jungian psychology.

[Anonymous No.17735453]

>>17735424
Kek coping fucking mathlet. How does it feel to know that mathematicians and physicists could do everything you do, but you couldn't do what they do? How does it feel to hold opinions based on whether they make you look good to pseuds, or feel good about being shit at thinking with no honest regard for truth?
I promise you that serious people, people who actually are capable and interested in thinking all laugh at you. You're completely fucking worthless.

[Anonymous No.17735462]

>>17735262
It's not an issue of Peterson, it's an issue of this defeatist POMO (((philosophy))

Peterson is just a leaf, and he happens to disagree with pomo.

[Anonymous No.17735470]

>>17735453
>Math

Enjoy being unemployed, you fucking loser. I hope someone pisses all over you when you're sleeping on the sidewalk. Literally laughing out loud at the thought of you trying to comprehend Marx.

[Anonymous No.17735474]

>>17735453
Lol I'm fully capable of doing math and physics, I just chose the finer things. Keep nursing that feeling of superiority though

[Anonymous No.17735482]

>>17735470

[Anonymous No.17735485]

>>17735442
That's for you to decide. He reasons it out live before your eyes and millions of people are captivated by it, There has never been a phenomenon like that. To pretend there's nothing going on here is just silly. He attempts to decipher what evolution tries to tell us about the fundamental structure of human existence. It's awesome stuff because we used to be able to just enact these things and are no longer capable of doing so.

[Anonymous No.17735492]

>>17735435
based STEMiot
>just study engineering and JBP bro, you'll figure it out

[Anonymous No.17735495]

Why do Redditors pretend like Jordan Peterson isn't the most relevant thinker of our time?

[Anonymous No.17735496]

>>17735485
This post requires no response it's a parody of itself

[Anonymous No.17735500]

>>17735470
So we are pretending that Marx is complicated now? ok.

[Anonymous No.17735506]

>>17735495
What has he done other than repeat Jung and the same old commonwealth liberal party voting upper middle class boomer rhetoric?

[Anonymous No.17735520]

>>17735506
Fucking retard. You couldn't bench your own body weight.

[Anonymous No.17735524]

>>17735520
I bench your mum every night, she weighs a good 80kg.

[Anonymous No.17735529]

>>17735506
People actually pay attention to him and are interested in what he has to say, which makes him relevant

[Anonymous No.17735537]

Attention, anons. This is not the kind of quality discussion I expect from /lit/. Let's raise our standards (and our glasses) and toast to having a scintilla of respect for our opponents. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.17735541]

>>17735496
Honestly I don't see how you can disagree with the Jungian approach in principle (yes, certainly in application). It shouldn't be controversial that information is stored in symbols and stories or that the collective process is capable of creating structures beyond individual understanding. Any cursory investigation of economics will tell you that. I can only interpret your behaviour as having been filtered. Although a paradoxical thing could be going on here in the sense of easier accessibility for people who are a bit less educated than yourself. It should be the case that they are more familiar with the instinctive use of these structures.

[Anonymous No.17735543]

>>17735541
I'm not >>17735506

[Anonymous No.17735548]

>>17735529
Kim Kardashian is more influential than Peterson. What now?

[Anonymous No.17735561]

>>17735543
Well it was addressed to the self-parody comment. Nothing other than maybe the last part I wrote was controversial, at least in the sense of it being his intention. No reason there for feigned amusement.

[Anonymous No.17735564]

>>17735548
Yes, and she'd be studied too if she had a coherent philosophy. What's your point, retard?

[Anonymous No.17735571]

>>17735561
>he reasons it out live before your eyes... there has never been a phenomenon like that
never ever?
>He attempts to decipher what evolution tries to tell us about the fundamental structure of human existence
Like Peterson, prolix way of saying "he talks about psychological reward"
>we used to be able to enact these things and are no longer capable of doing so
Actually meaningless

[Anonymous No.17735576]

>>17735548
Influential in selling make-up maybe (idk). Peterson deals in ideas and has to be regarded as among the most influential public intellectuals we've seen. Don't misunderstand that as a qualitative statement - for better or for worse.

[Anonymous No.17735591]

>>17735576
Peterson sells lobster ties. It's 2021, being influential only means one has a large following of NPCs.

[Anonymous No.17735618]

>>17735571
>never ever?
Yes, not on this scale. His Bible lectures have millions of views and sold hundreds of thousands of tickets. Maybe I'm missing something here but I can't think of something else of this sort.

>"he talks about psychological reward"
Idk what you're trying to say here.

>Actually meaningless
No. It means that we were able to subconsciously enact complex cultural directives beyond our individual understanding. It's basically about the collapse of tradition and fragmentation of society although we don't really know how this works. It's likely why everything looks like shit now while a handful of primitive and starving people were able to create dazzling beauty. Nvm though we won't be able to come to an agreement here.

[Anonymous No.17735646]

>>17735591
If they were NPCs they wouldn't have listened to the person they were told was a nazi woman hater. I think it's beautiful that ordinary people are so interested in these intellectual presentations. Contempt certainly isn't the right reaction.

[Anonymous No.17735649]

[Anonymous No.17735659]

>>17735618
>we were able to subconsciously enact complex cultural directives beyond our individual understanding
Ah yes everything has its teleological end and now we're going against it. Culture and psychological drive aren't things that are always in play they only count when we're doing (thing I like) in (past era) where (thing I don't like) wasn't an issue. If the essentialist mechanism of the West were working then Pollock would never have painted what he did. Truly all is lost. This is part of those lazy generalizations that his generation would make.

[Anonymous No.17735666]

>>17735646
>only those on the left can be NPCs
Lmao so sad. Anyone who subscribes to identity politics, no matter the flavour, is an NPC.

[Anonymous No.17735678]

>>17735618
Anon have you seen how popular the church channels are on cable tv?
Popularity isn't a sign of validity. It never has been and is becoming less so in the modern age.

[Anonymous No.17735696]

>>17735666
The concept of the NPC is related to the mass audience. A person who follows the dictates of the dominiant ideological forces without critical thought, even to the degree of changing sentiments from one day to another. The right-winger can of course be as silly as the left-winger but the right does not control the centralized education system and culture apparatus. It's very difficult to be a drone and arrive on the right, these sort of people are usually found in a homogenous local enviroment and basically non-existent in Europe for example.

[Anonymous No.17735701]

[Anonymous No.17735718]

>>17735696
Go to pol and tell me most of the posters aren't NPCs. If you can't recognize, you are most likely one yourself.
Is not restricted to the dominant ideology in the media. Boomer conservatives are also NPCs. All the Q fags are NPCs. Flat earthers etc etc I can go on and on with examples of NPCs in communities that don't fit your definition.

[Anonymous No.17735724]

>>17735678
The church channels are not giving intellectual lectures. I've seen them, in large part it's incredibly simple stuff. It's not related.
I did never say that popularity as such is a sign of quality but it is undeniably a phenomenon. He is charismatic but I don't think you can explain it without taking the Jungian approach seriously meaning these lectures are popular because they talk about that which is central to existence. Alright I've talked enough about this, have a good one.

[Anonymous No.17735756]

>>17735718
The pol guys are just young. They follow before they understand. The boomers are fat and content and generally from the sort of homogenous environment I was talking about, the Q thing is complicated. I already told you that right-wingers can be as silly as people on the left. It's a question of size and central directives. Right-wing boomers may be retarded but they generally arrive there on their own. On the left the people have largely never even heard the arguments of the other side. They just think the Q following or the 'Jesus my God Trump my president' guys constitute the intellectual elite of the opposition.

[Anonymous No.17735780]

>>17735756
You are stuck too deep in the left/right division. Doesn't daddy Peterson tell you to reject ideology?

[Anonymous No.17735783]

>>17735262
It's a psy op to dumb down all public fora

[Anonymous No.17735798]

>>17735659
I have nothing against a thousand Pollocks (sad as that is it would actually constitute an improvement), but not a single Bernini amongst billions of people? Where's Bach or Shakespeare? Gladly I would take a Picasso. Statistically speaking we should produce these people in the dozens or even hundreds. No reason to believe the talent isn't there. This demands an explanation you can't just brush that off.

[Anonymous No.17735806]

>>17735780
>Sounds like you're stuck in the same divide, sunshine. Worry about your own damn eye before you attack your neighbor for the thorn in his. That's written in the New Testament and it's like, yes, that's exactly right. You can indulge your own proclivity for criticism, but it will leaving feeling empty and like a shell of a man you could have been had you only worked on yourself first, roughly speaking.

[Anonymous No.17735817]

>>17735780
I'm not a follower of Peterson (not even sure what you would follow) and you completely misinterpret his views. Ideology to him is that which is outside of the spontaneous evolution of society meaning in this case the liberal state.

[Anonymous No.17735835]

>>17735756
You're talking about libcucks, not actual leftists, though.

[Anonymous No.17735854]

>>17735835
The problem with libcucks is mainly that they have adopted ideological notions of the left. I have basically no problem with liberals from say the '50s. They're significantly more based than the mainstream right of today.

[Anonymous No.17736241]

>>17735854
I just wanted to clarify something from your last post, saying that "the left" knows nothing about its opposition, yet there are countless studies and analysises of right wing thought from the left, which, unlike most right wing rhetoric, doesn't fall into strawmen arguments and silly conspiracy theories.

[Anonymous No.17736287]

I honestly don't give a shit about Derrida or postmodernism, I just like to make their fans look stupid by angering them with simple questions which they refuse to answer

[Anonymous No.17736324]

>>17736241
I have never seen accurate modern assessments of the right. I don't even think it's possible, you would have to accept aspects of reality that are so taboo in your environment that it would get you cancelled and possible stomped. Neither do I see a conspiracy view on the right. I mean it's clumsy at times when it comes to explaining the dynamics which created the situation but nothing too dramatic. I'm really not sure what you mean.

[Anonymous No.17736787]

>>17736241
Nah it's intellectually dishonest psychopathologizing

[Anonymous No.17737024]

>>17735262

[Anonymous No.17737039]

>>17735462
Christcuckoldry is fake. Give it up.

[Anonymous No.17737186]

>>17737039
I'm not even Christian. I'm an atheist TVRC, joke's on you.

[Anonymous No.17737200]

>>17737186
You’ll never be white.

[Anonymous No.17737584]

>>17736241
>yet there are countless studies and analysises of right wing thought from the left, which, unlike most right wing rhetoric, doesn't fall into strawmen arguments and silly conspiracy theories.
Lol. Never mind the fact that every time some right wing machinations are uncovered they screech for their lives as if it's outright illegal for the right to machinate. Also, all these studies just deliberately misinterpret the texts which usually happens when they try to fit the phenomenon in their own retarded leftist envelope, and like that other anon said, it usually ends in dishonest psychopathologizing. They're not studies, they're just a more lucrative way to preach their own ideology. Dialectics is a meme.

[Anonymous No.17737650]

>>17735262
Derrida? the ultimate pseud desu, but I'm glad he fooled a bunch of Americans and assorted foreigners into thinking he was deep
t. fellow frog

[Anonymous No.17737711]

>>17737200
Did you just assume that I WANT TO be a W*iteoid?
TURKS ARE BLACK
Internet kids...

[Anonymous No.17737739]

>>17735337
Sir, this is /lit/. I don't give two shits about your vlogs.
>and all of his takes on postmodernism and marxism are complete and utter bullshit
Can you elaborate in your own words without using some youtuber as a crutch?

[Anonymous No.17737765]

>>17735383
He takes common archetypes and myths, elaborates on the truths contained within them and expands on their meaning and value to humanity throughout history. He takes common sense and breaks it down to why it's so common and how it makes sense.

[Anonymous No.17737773]

>>17735428
>Put that in the context of the evolution of both and we don't even know how to talk about it
The word for this specific phenomena is memetics.

[Anonymous No.17739343]

>>17736287
Based, everyone on 4chan, whether they're correct or not, deserves to be treated as the retard that they are
>>17735262
Peterson is easier to understand than Derrida and Derrida fans almost always refuse to explain things here, whereas people who are "anti-pomo" will gladly rant about the Frankfurt School, Postmodernism, and the Jews until the bump limit is reached. Maybe there'd be more interest in Derrida if you could spoonfeed us, since we're not going to fucking read

[Anonymous No.17739382]

>>17735262
>>17735278
Kek I knew it would these two videos. Another good place to start would be by having sex