Thoughts on Jordan peterson

[Joseph Maynor]

I posted a video in my Journal of Peterson discussing Jung and it quickly digressed into ideological BS, so I had to remove it.  The intro was like a ruse to assert some kind of conservative talk radio BS.  The intro about Jung was good.  He had me fooled for about 2 seconds.  Beware of false prophets!  I agree with Leo on Peterson.  I get a bad vibe.  I have no problem with conservative arguments by the way, and it might be an insult to conservatives to call Peterson one. To me conservative talk radio is comedy anyway.  The problem with it is people get swept up by the ideology and become closed off.  But liberal radio functions the same too.  My policy is to steer clear of all News and Infotainment.  Are you guys and gals doing that?  It’s great let me tell you!  That’s the bad part of culture.  Leo needs to do another video on the bad parts of culture.  Not all culture is healthy or wholesome.  And you have to control your informational intake actively — it doesn’t happen by default!

Edited April 11, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[stevegan928]

On 4/8/2018 at 5:25 PM, Omario said:

First and foremost if you don't know who Jordan Peterson is don't bother reading any further.

 

ah yes, and by the looks of the rest of your comment you didn't either. listened to much of Peterson and never thought for a second he's trying to turn men into victims. he may not understand postmodernism but he understands self-help on at least a basic level pretty well. 

so yeah, if you have trouble listening to someone you disagree with on a few points just stop here. because on one hand his lectures are extremely helpful, but on the other hand you'll occasionally hear him say something that goes against the paradigm we populate here on the forum. 

however if you are gifted with the ability to pick what you like from a philosophy while leaving out what you dislike, i strongly recommend Peterson. 

[Dinesh Karki]

On 4/11/2018 at 3:36 AM, Joseph Maynor said:

And you have to control your informational intake actively — it doesn’t happen by default!

Thank you @Joseph Maynor. Where I can get high quality information?

[Omario]

 noice........ But i feel as if though Jordan Peterson's aim is to achieve this sense of dominance/disagreeableness, Im not sure whether this something Thats related to his past but thats probable, It certainly creates a bias in which he chooses to acquire ideologies. Thats why hes a slightly conservative (Chances are that your also one because you've been brainwashed by this nibba) , Thats why he is promoting the shitty dominance hierarchy,

the list... goes...on...

Although he has practical and influential knowledge, and certainly he's made himself to be  an influential man, there is a plateau to his ideologies and @Leo Gura hit the nail on the head explaining it.

 

Edited April 14, 2018 by Omario

[Omario]

@Outer

 He leans more towards conservatism than he does liberalism. (1)

(2) You egotistic motherlover, the dominance hierarchy is the largest obstacle to enlightenment that is why it is, and i quote "shitty'', who the fuck said it was false?

Dont debate me here.Now.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Omario

[Omario]

@Leo Gura you (and therefore me)  are a prophet.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Omario

[Omario]

@Outer I dont know what im talking about? Im persuasion level 99 my nibba

Well done, monkey. 

It has everything to do with enlightenment.

And no he doesn't just state a fact of nature.He implies that we as humans have a biological mechanism within us that makes us organize our selves in dominance hierarchies according to the values of which we give individuals according to our perception of competence, and on that note that we should start to articulate our position within this system so that we could be of most benefit to society. There are thousands of reasons to question this, simply because we aren't as fucking simple as lobsters, and serotonin and octopamine aren't the only 2 chemicals that neurologically have an effect on our psychology.

In summary its ape shit because whether true or not its ideology, and i repeat, that  is the single most soul sucking obstacle between the average individual and his enlightenment.

Also for you of course judging by your pathetic bio. 

        Persuasion level 10: Cult Leader

        I don't meditate. I have had 0 mystical experiences. I am almost completely unenlightened.

Oh please, I crown you the Milo Yiannopoulos of actualized.org

Edited April 14, 2018 by Omario

[Omario]

@Outer 

I think I have developed brain cancer from debating with you (the Milo of actualized.org) for the past few hours.

When you have reached enlightenment, you don't go "oh look at that buddah looking motherfucker hes more enlightened than me so that means hes higher in the enlightenment dominance hierarchy, oh fuck I have to meditate harder"  The whole point of enlightenment is that you surpass this kinda stuff and maybe fly to mars while your at it.

And since I've schooled you big time, might as well be of some help, after all that's the purpose of this forum.

Here's the hierarchy you should be concerned about

 

Please don't debate me any further. 

p.s Im the true cult leader

[Omario]

@Outer you know what im sorry, i hope you enjoy stroking Peterson's shaft while you sit on the lap of your straw man

[RichardY]

Burn Bady Burn Disco Inferno!

 

[Omario]

@RichardY idk who you are but god bless you

[Vipassana]

Pure chimpery 

[Akim]

Seeing this thread is making me reconsider the value of debate but I will post it anyway.

I get that if you cling to a set of concepts as absolute truth or trust every word of some person this is going to severely limit your growth.
But what is wrong with hierarchies?

He is not advocating corrupt third word system where there are slaves, lower cast or your worth is nothing and you have no rights if you are not politically connected or rich. On the contrary he says it is a bloody miracle that in some developed countries all individuals are supposed to have equal rights. How hard it is to build such a society and people should be grateful to live in it and take responsibility for it's maintenance, constant revitalization and development.

What he is saying is that some things are better than others. There is hierarchy of values. There is good and bad. And some good can be better than other good. Like in the video about hierarchies in the beginning of the thread he says that speech, vision and ability to confront terrible unknown is at the top of hierarchy. What is wrong in prioritizing some things over others?

Also what is wrong with competition? If a person is good in creating a Youtube channel that helps people he gets money, recognition and higher status for that. People admire and want to emulate him and his opinion is valued more that a stranger you encounter. People like Peterson and Leo compete with each other in a place of Youtube for views and their outcome is different. What is wrong with that?

Are those dangerous controversial ideas? That there are hierarchies, that some things are better and some are worse? That some people are better at something and some are worse at it? He is not saying that competition and hierarchy is always the guiding principle. Mother can love all her children unconditionally and help all of them regardless of their success, and that is great. Inequalities of outcome lead to hoarding of opportunities by some people, and it is not a good thing, world as a whole is worse because of that. And people lower in the hierarchy rightly feel injustice and have nothing to loose so it leads to violence and instability. But it is not clear what to do about it, how we can tune and improve a complex societal system without it breaking. We should be careful instead of calling for revolution and violent redistribution. People tried that, it didn't work.

What is wrong with disagreeableness? Isn't is good to stand up to yourself and be assertive? Isn't it good to challenge people ideas? That is how ideas get stronger. It is good to have your ideas get dismantled, may be a little bit ego hurt, but may be it is a good thing, it is probably too coddled anyway. People help each other improve their knowledge graph. What is wrong with intelligent debate for that? It is easier than self inquire, other people are probably more motivated to dismantle your knowledge graph than you and they have ideas new to you.

I get there are trolls that just enjoy sowing mutual hate and other negative emotions. But should we give up all debate because of them? They may want to live in hell they are creating, but most people don't and it is our responsibility to not give up and make things right.

[Egoisego]

Jesus was actually one of the most psychopatic leader ever accordingly to science. So much for him being enlightened. Which some of you tries to say. I just wants to point out how you guys cherrypick. And i want to give a hug to "Outer". What a real dude!

accept your ego, everybody have an ego. You are already enlightened, if you want to be a sick man or a happy giving man, go for it !

Edited April 15, 2018 by Egoisego

[Joseph Maynor]

On 4/12/2018 at 7:21 PM, Dinesh Karki said:

Thank you @Joseph Maynor. Where I can get high quality information?

That's a hard question to answer.  High quality information for me might not be high quality information for someone else on the path.  That's because we all need different things at different times.  At 40 years old, what is gonna advance me on the path is gonna be different than what was gonna advance me on the path 1 year ago, 5 years ago, etc.  1 year ago I was trying to figure out Enlightenment and didn't even know my Life Purpose yet.  5 years ago, I wasn't even really doing Personal Development explicitly.  10 years ago, I was very much more immature than I am now.  20 years ago, I was really still a kid, although I felt grown.   

Edited April 15, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Echoes]

I highly enjoyed his Maps of Meaning lectures and Personality lectures. But all of his involvement with this whole SJW stuff is foreign to me. I don't know why he is doing all of this. It seems to me that he gets a sense of importance out of what is really not relevant at all outside of this specific bubble.

[Monkey-man]

Best thing JBP does is cartoons.

I want JBP to make archetypical analysis of every Disney cartoon.

Are there any good books, websites, videos about archetypes and meanings in Disney cartoons, and in movies in general?

Edited April 20, 2018 by Monkey-man

[Leo Gura]

Peterson is distracted in the Lesser Jihad. He is wrapped up in waging an intellectual crusade, and his followers are doing the same.

All of these issues of men's rights, liberalism, capitalism vs Marxism, etc. are issues of self-survival. Which is orthogonal to consciousness.

Consciousness has nothing to do with intellectual crusading. Consciousness reveals that all intellectual, moral, and idealistic positions are false, and ultimately obstacles to the solution of the worlds problems.

The counter-intuitive move in this case is to drop the desire to argue and turn inward.

All criticism is untenable. Anyone who takes their own criticisms of anything in reality seriously has not awoken. Criticism comes from the arrogance of thinking you know what is right and that you are in control.

Classic self-deception traps. All of this I explained in my Self-Deception episodes.

[Dinesh Karki]

Is it worth to listening Peterson or not?

[Leo Gura]

@Dinesh Karki Every perspective has some worth. It's worth listening to Hitler or Bin Laden. But you have to understand how to understand what you're hearing and put it into proper context and avoid the trap of subscribing to ideological positions in service of self-survival.