jordan peterson

-

i read that lol

these two seems to me as highly intelligent, as highly educated, as highly moral, as real truth seekers, as world class intellectuals 

it also seems to me that intellectuals here on watmm can rival them or surpass them in all the mentioned but i just can't remember who that was atm, so pls show your self, show your greatness! remind me of who you are again and let the world know your genius fgs!

/ppl

/watmm

  On 4/23/2019 at 11:00 PM, MDM Chaos said:

Zizek is a windbag with no qualms about talking vehemently about things he knows nothing about. Just listen to him talking about depleted bee populations. Plus he hates Chomsky, so he can shove it IMO.

Pretty much. Zizek respects Chomsky though, given how often he cites Manufacturing Consent in his talks. I think its more their schools of philosophy: Chomsky comes from the cognitive psychology, political and lingustic sciences and is someone that critiques not only the content but the way someone uses language for persuasion methods. Zizek is with the psychoanalysis/german school of thought and comes off as anti-scientific and bordering on charlatanism with his use of posturing and polysyllables to hide the lack of scientific theory on a subject.

Having said that, Zizek is a great 'pop icon' and I think he has a shot at de-programming the Jordan Peterson followers and make them interest in learning more about political theory outside of the usual conservative dogma.

  On 4/23/2019 at 11:02 PM, user said:

-

Sorry if this is a repost. But it's pretty close to my meagre and meaningless opinion or whatever.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/20/jordan-peterson-slavoj-zizek-happiness-capitalism-marxism

They don’t really seem to disagree all that much.

Also congrats to opening a new Jordan Peterson thread everyone.

The funny thing is I’m a more extreme anti capitalist than anyone here, but I find myself confused why the left is so contraryily dismissive and hateful toward Peterson.

Actually I’m not confused.

Well you have to hand it to him, he’s said a lot of silly shit.

  On 4/24/2019 at 2:52 AM, MDM Chaos said:

Sorry if this is a repost. But it's pretty close to my meagre and meaningless opinion or whatever. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/20/jordan-peterson-slavoj-zizek-happiness-capitalism-marxism

Good piece. Didn't agree with all of it, but definitely a good critique. The WWE comparison was right on the nose :)

Zizek is great. I once asked him about something he wrote re the Lacanian doppelgänger; barely heard a word of his answer for being distracted by his constant caffeine vibrations & beard-smoothings/de-spittlings (but it was doubtless exceedingly illuminating).

Peterson is a moron.

You guys are all proud inaugural members of the reactionary left.

It seems like many of you watched this debate through a reductive binary lens, or you didn’t watch it at all.

I don’t understand how it’s mutually exclusive to like Zizek’s ideas and Peterson’s. I agree with both of them on different points. For those of you saying Peterson got destroyed, lol, I don’t know what you watched, but Zizek flat out says he agrees with Peterson on his criticisms of the communist manifesto.

Maybe what you are seeing is Peterson’s body language. He is going up someone with huge intellect, which he doesn’t seem to do often. You can tell he is nervous and even intimidated. But he stands his ground pretty well. Zizek indeed does not spend any time talking about why Marxism is good, but most of the time talking about why capitalism and happiness are easily corruptible, all of which I agree with.

It’s funny, he basically is putting forth an ideology of collapsitarianism, which I have tried to articulate in the forum for the past 6 years, an effort that has largely branded me a “nutter” oy oy blimey m8.

Zizek’s description of trump’s conservatism as a post modern act is 100% spot on. Zizek is a fascinating speaker.

Man, this thread is a bunch of center left unbeknownst capitalists celebrating a video they haven’t watched for doing something it doesn’t do.

I believe we're in massively different threads :S

Edit: you guys!

I admit I never gave Peterson the time of day for the longest time, because of the way he presents himself with the suits, and the way the IDW posts his videos edited incoherently with click bait titles. I assumed he was basically a heavier version of Shapiro, who I despise, but he really is not.

I actually, ironically first watched some JBP videos after an episode of the Theory of Everything podcast, which is phasically hyper progressive, in case you aren’t familiar.

A huge portion of the anti progressive movement is comprised of really dumb people, and I fully understand anyone’s reservations about people who make millions of dollars by selling books to them. But objectively, I think it’s a C minus at best read of Peterson to group him with Shapiro’s ilk. For example, I heard Shapiro talking about Judaism on JRE, and he knows astonishingly little about biblical Judaism for someone who makes Judaism part of his platform. I’ve never heard Peterson talk so ignorantly about any topic.

Ironically, I predict the downfall for Peterson will come from capitalism itself, and I foresee this happening soon. Money is evil.

There’s a sign of this in this debate itself. He fucking brags about people scalping tickets. I’ve seen that behavior before. He’s seems to more and more be mentioning the great multitudes of people who come to see him speak. Maybe few people are immune to it, but it’s sad to see.

can't even reply to sheathe posts. sheathe wins. Fatality. 

re: Ironically, I predict the downfall for Peterson will come from capitalism itself, and I foresee this happening soon. Money is evil.

Surely, Jordanson agreeing to do a debate on a topic he admittedly was unprepared for is already an example of this having already happened. 
Same thing happened last month or so when Peterson was on an australian program called QandA, and any time anyone asked him a question, he was unable to answer with any relevance based on being an outsider talking about australian topics and having nothing to add to the conversation a lot of the time. But still, it was the most viewed episode of QandA in months because the celebrity man was on it. 

I predict Peterson will eventually start a Koresh-like compound of incels with himself as their leader, sitting on a large aztec/native american/jungian archetypes throne carved of alabaster

carved of a lobster. 

  On 4/24/2019 at 10:24 AM, hello spiral said:

I predict Peterson will eventually start a Koresh-like compound of incels with himself as their leader, sitting on a large aztec/native american/jungian archetypes throne carved of alabaster

I demand more detailed fanfics to justify this thread

Zizek: smooth beard smooth brain

  On 4/24/2019 at 10:16 AM, bitchroast said:

re: Ironically, I predict the downfall for Peterson will come from capitalism itself, and I foresee this happening soon. Money is evil.

 

Surely, Jordanson agreeing to do a debate on a topic he admittedly was unprepared for is already an example of this having already happened.

Same thing happened last month or so when Peterson was on an australian program called QandA, and any time anyone asked him a question, he was unable to answer with any relevance based on being an outsider talking about australian topics and having nothing to add to the conversation a lot of the time. But still, it was the most viewed episode of QandA in months because the celebrity man was on it.

I agree. There was a winner and a loser of the debate: and they are both Peterson. He defeated himself.

To be fair, the average person touting Marxism that Pererson comes into conflict with likely knows even less about it than he does, so he is used to talking about Marxism as binary class struggle. Marxism is a lot more about aceticism than it is binary class struggle.

Peterson always talks about the “fundamental problem of living” in an admittedly pop philosophy way, and he always describes it in a way that doesn’t disagree with Marx.

i realised i haven't finished the debate video, also btw. i finished the main "chunk" and thought QandA was going to be boring, but it's actually got peterson and zizek clarifying their points and getting them to clarify previous points, so it's a lot more substantial than i had assumed. .woopz.

  On 4/24/2019 at 4:44 PM, bitchroast said:

i realised i haven't finished the debate video, also btw. i finished the main "chunk" and thought QandA was going to be boring, but it's actually got peterson and zizek clarifying their points and getting them to clarify previous points, so it's a lot more substantial than i had assumed. .woopz.

I'm not letting u get more posts than me in this thread m9

  On 4/24/2019 at 8:52 AM, sheathe said:

I admit I never gave Peterson the time of day for the longest time, because of the way he presents himself with the suits, and the way the IDW posts his videos edited incoherently with click bait titles. I assumed he was basically a heavier version of Shapiro, who I despise, but he really is not.

 

I actually, ironically first watched some JBP videos after an episode of the Theory of Everything podcast, which is phasically hyper progressive, in case you aren’t familiar.

 

A huge portion of the anti progressive movement is comprised of really dumb people, and I fully understand anyone’s reservations about people who make millions of dollars by selling books to them. But objectively, I think it’s a C minus at best read of Peterson to group him with Shapiro’s ilk. For example, I heard Shapiro talking about Judaism on JRE, and he knows astonishingly little about biblical Judaism for someone who makes Judaism part of his platform. I’ve never heard Peterson talk so ignorantly about any topic.

 

Ironically, I predict the downfall for Peterson will come from capitalism itself, and I foresee this happening soon. Money is evil.

This was the longest I heard Zizek and Peterson speak. Peterson more so, I've never really mustered enough time to listen to him lecture. Interestingly for me the same time I read a lot of negative dismissal of Peterson my co-worker, who def votes left and is generally liberal, was talking about how much he enjoys his lectures. He was even kind of shocked that people on the right politicize him so much. He was like "I just find his lectures fascinating, he's a bit redundant and long-winded sometimes though"

My main gripe with Peterson is not charlatanism or dressed-up intellect. I actually find him rather compelling and earnest, it's more of this half-baked conclusion aspect to his arguments. In the debate when he tacked on "Judeo-Christian" values at the end of a point it was so clunky and forced. It was like that part in South Park where gnomes explain their underwear collecting scheme: "1. collect underwear 2. ? 3. profit" This seems to be his weakness time after time. His ventures into sociopolitical arguments simply fall apart.

Skip to 8:10

Zizek didn't own Peterson, he just offered more fascinating and compelling insight on the fly. A lot of this has to do with the debate format and question, which as pointed out here, really diminished the potential of this meetup directly pitching their ideological leanings of capitalism versus marxism against each other. The whole thing felt so misfired.

It was telling when Zizek mentioned the idea of "god being an atheist" at the point where Jesus asks God why he forsake him and Peterson, a biblical lecturer, said "he never though of that before." 

Regarding his controversial standing. It's sad that Shapiro even occupies the same space as Peterson. The true critique is that Peterson is a gateway into alt-right YT channels and paleoconservative garbage like PragerU and likewise this legit academic "cross-over" figure for that community. I feel like this true but overblown. I also feel that political correctness and SJW hysteria is true but VERY overblown. It's not a major threat to modern social debate and freedom of speech, it's at most a byproduct of other ideological ills in contemporary politics. Either way, Peterson doesn't try to distance himself from this, quite the opposite really - passively allowing it without overtly embracing it. JRE seems to get flack as well for being so neutral, which I find a bit unfair as well critique wise. As far as his intellectual standing, I don't have enough knowledge to say 100% that he's not that smart but I do know for the right-wing sphere the standard is so low he immediately stands out as far more legitimate.

  On 4/24/2019 at 4:34 AM, sheathe said:

They don’t really seem to disagree all that much.

I noticed this too, seems to be part of the conclusion to that guardian article (which was a good summary) that MDM Chaos linked