/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.9591204]

Is he a pseud?

[Anonymous No.9591211]

make that eight

eight peterson threads on /lit/ right now

[Anonymous No.9591214]

>>9591211
I yearn for death

[Anonymous No.9591224]

>>9591214
spbp

[Anonymous No.9591227]

>>9591204
Pseud of pseuds

[Anonymous No.9591241]

>>9591211
>eight peterson threads on /lit/ right now
That is disgusting. Every thread should be a Peterson thread.

[Anonymous No.9591331]

I'm quite intrigued by this guy. I've listened to both of his three hour Joe Rogan podcasts, both of His Sam Harris Podcasts (The first one being a two hour argument on an axiom for 'truth'), a substantial amount of his Youtube videos, and have skimmed a pdf of Maps of Meaning and have slotted it in to my to read pile.

I can understand why /lit/ and other corners of the intent are heralding him as the new Messiah for his stance against SJW's, gender pronouns and the c-16 legislation, and his dislike of new-atheism.

My only criticism of him is the way he deliberately misrepresents postmodernism. I have no bias or desire to defend postmodernism, I was just curious as to why he is doing this. The more exposure to him I had, the more evident it became. For instance, throughout both Rogan podcasts, he belittles postmodernism at least fifty times, yet the only substantial criticism in those six hours was:

"Postmodernism doesn't care about the constraints of reality at all, all they do is say you can interpret the world however you want," and:

"They have an infinite number of ways to look at a finite set of objects; an infinite number of ways to interpret the world, and their next conclusion is that there is no right way so you can do it any old way. This is a vision problem the postmodernists have."

He then grouped Derrida, Foucault, Marx, Otherkin, feminists, leftists, and SJW's together as one handy strawman to attack and began a tangent about leftists playing identity politics.

I agree with Peterson on a tremendous amount, but it became clear that what he disliked, in addition to the various groups and people mentioned, was basic relativism. Of course, the postmodernists don't believe that all subjective notions about reality, no matter how ludicrous, are equal. Their lean towards materialism gives them a Bayesian model from which to rank the truth probability of a claim. It's a similar method to the workings of empiricism. But Peterson needs to claim that they are basking in a swamp of absolute relativism so he can very carefully sweep under the carpet the idea that he does not have objectivity. He then uses his counterfeit triumph against postmodernism as a pedestal to dismiss subjectivity, and after doing those two things, he is free to pluck the logos from thin air and pretend the cunning ideology he is about to create, and dismissal of every group he dislikes, has axiomatic grounding.

What he is doing is very clever, and I agree with him on most individual issues or remain neutral. I just find it unfortunate that he can't just say he hates relativism of all stripes. He hates cultural relativism, and, for lack of a better term, 'leftist identity politics' so much that he pretends that Foucault and Derrida, even Korzybski, held the belief that every subjective opinion is operating on equal footing because he needs them as an enemy for his anti-left stance and for the various manifestations he wants to create from Hebrew mythology

[Anonymous No.9591339]

>>9591241
there is but one meme and peterson is his prophet

/lit/ shalt have no other threads besides him