jordan peterson

  On 2/9/2018 at 4:06 PM, eugene said:

yeah, the only reason people are actually listening to him is exactly because of this whole alt-right/SJW thing he's riding on and getting hyped off, not because he's actually good at anything.

it is, probably. shared lightning fast as a meme and absorbed quickly without questioning.

 

he is the True Post(anti)modern actually.

He will be arrested on a train for masturbating.

  On 2/9/2018 at 4:39 PM, Candiru said:

He will be arrested on a train for masturbating.

 

 

while researching lobsters he'll be lost at sea while diving using some kind of exotic air mixture for 200+ ft depths

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/p/postmodernism

  On 2/10/2018 at 1:08 AM, ignatius said:

 

  On 2/9/2018 at 4:39 PM, Candiru said:

He will be arrested on a train for masturbating.

 

while researching lobsters he'll be lost at sea while diving using some kind of exotic air mixture for 200+ ft depths

TMZ will release pics of him passed out on the beach with a bible and an empty bottle of gin, two lobsters pinching his nipples. He angrily awakens and assaults the film crew, yelling “You philistines! Thou hath never succumbed to the painful pleasures of the lowly and yet mighty crustaceans!”

its been quite hard to watch or listen with his recent British visit, the media is voracious for anything & its partly self-inflicted, the Guardian appears obsessed currently which is a bit weird even for them

 

crying on R5 and a then a large London presentation platform got weepy, nothing wrong with emoting but it suggests a human on the edge at times

how about this for nice campus culture n stuff. guys show up and make comments about the speaker's children:

https://www.peoplesworld.org/article/illinois-student-targeted-by-alt-right-after-confrontation-at-anti-fascist-rally/

  On 2/10/2018 at 1:13 AM, whosebrian said:

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/p/postmodernism

fuggin christ

who actually creates these memes

what the fuck

 

Supposing noone wants to have a real discussion about Peterson's ideas so may as well dank up the thread

I miss limpy

I like him. I also like that he's standing up for free speech.

  On 2/11/2018 at 11:17 AM, roasty said:

Supposing noone wants to have a real discussion about Peterson's ideas so may as well dank up the thread

I miss limpy

 

it's kind of exhausting. and there's just so many things to discuss.. you'd have to pick one or two things or discuss in a sort of macro level his big picture ideas. well, i would because i don't even understand it all or care enough to try to understand it more. :(

 

there are people who are professionally outraged who seem to have these discussions continuously on line. sort of makes me not even want to listen. it's like opening the door and seeing a giant ball of hardening oatmeal covered in razor blades bouncing around grumbling.. [closes door.. backs away...]

 

his free speech stance especially in a university setting is relevant.. see evergreen college in washington for example.. and i think the challenging of university students seem like a good thing in a college... 

 

the pronouns thing seems pretty specific to canada and that law they want to pass regarding hate speech..  it feels strange..  i's easy to let lines of thought go to extremes and fears of a fascist like control of language. feels very modern type of concern.. like everyone has too much time to think about these things and we'd be better off keeping busy but that's probably my lazy brain... or apathy. 

 

what i find sad is that often a university will invite a controversial speaker as a means to debate that person's ideas but then the student body is so offended they just shout everyone down and no discourse can happen.  it's a bummer because that's where the actual debate of those ideas and intellectually picking apart of things could happen, be filmed, put on youtube etc and people might come to understand each other better or ideas better.. and then make actually be informed and figure out why they are angry or not or whatever.. 

The pronouns thing is very specific to Canada, and has no bearing on an individual’s freedom of expression

Tell that to Lindsay Sheperd, who merely raised the issue for the sake of discussion

Sorry, I should clarify - your private freedom of expression is in no way limited. If you work for a publicly funded institution like a public university, then discrimination on the basis of gender identity and gender expression in that institution is not acceptable.

 

What happened with Shepherd was obviously wrong, as no complaint had been submitted. Still, her freedom of expression has hardly been limited - she has a very popular twitter account. It's almost as if her professors haven't heard of the Streisand effect.

According to Peterson the new legislation in Canada was going to make it so it's illegal to not use someone's chosen gender pronoun under the guise of it being a hate crime - that's limiting free speech and imposing expected speech, which is completely unacceptable.

Edited February 12, 2018 by Zeffolia

Which is an entirely inaccurate interpretation of the law, as I explained up thread.

How does it have no bearing on an individual's freedom of expression and how is it not doing that, I've seen you make the claim but I've not seen you prove it

Is it this particular section of the bill that's being amended: http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-16/royal-assent

 

I have a very limited understanding of legalese due to my job but the keyword here seems to be 'discrimination' that this subsection of the bill refers to:

 

  Quote

the prohibited grounds of discrimination are race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, marital status, family status, disability and conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted or in respect of which a record suspension has been ordered.

I'm not quite sure of the bit I've italicised, but the first section seems to just be the addition of 'gender identity or expression' to the existing list. So as in the past you'd be right to kick up a fuss if you were told you can't have the job because you're a homosexual, you now can do the same if you're told you don't have the job because you identify as a 'Xi', but still can't complain if you're just crap.

The kind of person who would dye their hair green and chop off their genitals, or walk around crossdressing and insisting people call them made up words, obviously have extremely poor judgement.  Job creators should have the right to discriminate based on that.