Is Jordan Peterson having a middle life crisis?

[Pramit]

JP has some..interesting ideas. Let's just leave it at that. Anyone seeking philosophy or anything other than knowledge of psychology from him are well advised not to. 

[barcos]

@Etherial Cat well from my perspective,he’s coming from the bottom internally.The only thing to do when your at the bottom,is to go all out in finding meaning and purpose.Regardless of where your at,you will over identify.That is the self image.

[Yog]

17 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The alt-lite and alt-right YT rabbit hole is well documented to radicalize young white males.

Young white men who resonate with JP's victim complex will definitely be suseptible to alt-right ideology.

He is unwittingly helping to radicalize people against liberals, progressives, women, social democrats, and LGBTQ.

PragerU and FoxNews are right wing propaganda channels, and he appears in their videos.

Like Trump, he knows not what his words are doing.

The alt-right desperately needs intellectuals and academics to give them an air of credibility. He fits that role.

He is a fool's idea of an intellectual, just like Trump is a fool's idea of a rich person.

This is the basic CNN reporter grade of demonization, filled with lies and ego. Why is it, I don't have a damn clue.
To connect him with the alt right, victum mentality, radicalization, propaganda .... is low and lazy.

Also I do live in a quite red/blue country. Its defending green/leftists I do here for breakfast.
Don't mark this as if you are dealing with some teen Peterson fanboy. I do it because I do not like misrepresentation of peoples perspectives. If it were a better atmosphere in that regard here. I won't be bragging about it.

• The alt right downright hate him, they call him a Jewish Shill, Juden Petersen and make tons of memes about him that you can google, for obvious reasons. I've seen the discord servers, reddit, you-tube channels of the alt right, I have friends that are there, he is a hard taboo topic, they hate him.
• Why hate him, because he is NOT against the left, never, ever ever has he said such thing, only good things about it, he is against radicalization, it is the radical left that currently has the upper hand, makes tons of noise and is unconsciously creating the alt-right. He has criticized the alt-right on multiple occasions.
• The bigger reason why they hate him, is because people LEAVE the alt-right because of his work, that is the fact you got to deal with. They transcend ethnocentric and move into orange. His work helps heal the unhealthy red and the unhealthy blue.
• His most known meme is "clean your room", and he also uses the word responsibility  maybe 50-100 times in 2 hours, that is 70 % of what he talks about... . I cant help but wonder .... how would someone put him in the category of victim mentality promoters . And how does he help in radicalization.
• I do have a theory on why you saw him on PragerU. I would happen to agree with Ken WIlber on this. If you see orange getting crushed by green and blue, you go into orange, expand it, heal it,e, than you go into blue, heal all the damage in there. Firstly you repair where the critical damage is (orange), than you go repair your house from the bottom up.
• I am pretty sure he knows exactly what he is doing with his words. Maybe it gets out of hand sometimes ofc. Having all these years of pressure. But if all you know are some anti radical left ramblings about him and that is like 5% of what he does. I am sure you would get that impression.
• Fact is, he has done way more teaching and healing in a huge diverse spectrum, than damage. And all you hear is damage, that what the news want you to hear. This will be understood in the next 10-20 years.
  
  I'll just like to think of this is that you are having a bad day. Ideology swept over you, you'll work it out. We all do get low sometimes, no problem.
  
  But I am afraid it is going to bite you in the a*s if you go on like this, Especially when you mention something as out of sync as this.
  
  
  
  
  
  
   

 

Edited August 11, 2019 by Yog

[Leo Gura]

@Yog Hahaha

[hundreth]

On 8/10/2019 at 3:04 PM, Leo Gura said:

Most young men who follow him have no idea about the Spiral, so they will not be able to discern the limitations of his worldview.

Moreover, these young men use his worldview to deepen and justify their toxic masculinity and hatred of feminism, creating a gateway into the alt-right, incel-ism, RedPill, white supremacy, and all that jazz.

You could say the same thing about Jesus. Any teaching can be misinterpreted to fit a specific agenda, so why demonize the teacher?

JP can be associated with the wrong crowd, yet both he and Sam Harris do come from a sincere place of trying to understand the world despite having vastly different opinions.

There may be some holes or gaps in JP or Sam Harris' understandings, but the real problem is that our society will demonize them for having a different opinion and stifle all conversation. That is what they are standing up to. You are playing your role in demonizing the man, when we should be encouraging anyone with a sincere purpose to step forward and be part of the conversation. 

Look at someone like Joe Rogan, who is able to converse with and appreciate viewpoints from those across the spectrum including Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris, and now Bernie Sanders and Andrew Yang. If people are becoming radicalized by ideas, the solution isn't to demonize and stifle them, it's to open the conversation and shine light on the misunderstandings for the benefit of everyone.

Clearly there is a large segment of your viewership who resonates with and has learned something from Jordan Peterson. Instead of seizing this opportunity to connect with your following and teach, you've shut them down and pushed them away. It's such a broad strokes generalization you've made about anyone who sees value in JP, that is what is toxic here. I've listened to hours of JPs lectures, and by your logic I should be a Trump thumping neo Nazi, yet I'm voting for Bernie Sanders in the next election. It's possible to hold partial perspectives, which you've touted when it's convenient regarding pseudoscience - yet you're unwilling to behave this way when it comes to anything that doesn't fit the basic spiral Green / political left agenda. Wake up.

[Leo Gura]

Again. Lol

JP is being called out on his bullshit, devilry, and demonization of feminism, SJWs, socialism, Marxism, and Green.

JP built his entire career demonizing Green. So please spare me the "poor JP" BS. 

You guys still have a lot of growing up to do before you understand Green.

I understand that JP cannot help being the devil that he is. So in the absolute sense I have love for him. But in the relative sense I will still call him out on his devilry because the ideology he spreads is dangerous and toxic.

Do not expect me to be neutral towards devils just to placate you. I will call out devilry where I see it.

[Aliman]

Dear Anti-JP'ers,

JP's politics leave him open to criticism as many of you have pointed out here. I'm not a JP fan in terms of his politics, but I am a fan in terms of his critical ontology and critical metaphysics. I.e., there's more to him than the politics. His Harvard lectures from the early nineties on Maps of Meaning, all of which are on YT, are excellent in terms of their critical ontology and critical metaphysics. ("Critical" here means being against orthodox ontological and metaphysical ideas.) He hadn't read Whitehead nor Heidegger when he started teaching at Harvard and developed his Maps of Meaning course, but he develops some of the same ideas as these thinkers. Note that Whitehead and Heidegger are two of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century. 

On this forum I've heard plenty of anti-JP arguments about his politics (and for the most part I agree), but it would be interesting if anyone thinks that they could argue against his critical ontology or critical metaphysics. If you think you can, then go for it. I'd love to engage in that kind of dialogue.

Realize that this is not simply an abstract discussion. Heidegger and Whitehead's ideas on epistemology and metaphysics apply directly to self-actualization and enlightenment.

Aloha, Aliman

Edited August 12, 2019 by Aliman

[Forestluv]

@Aliman My impression of JP is that he has a fundamental belief in an external, universal, dualistic, objective reality. This imposes a contraction and restrictions. Conversations with someone who believes in an external, universal, objective reality quickly encounter the walls within that paradigm.

[Leo Gura]

Ontology and metaphysics? Lol

That's where he is weakest. He is a dualist. He does not understand what meaning is, what a symbol is, what science is, what religion is, what God is, what language is, what consciousness, what morality is, what evil is, what being is, what mind is, what body is, what thought is, what mysticisim is, what gender is, what ego is, what truth is.

Name one metaphysical thing JP understands.

[abrakamowse]

I never listened to him, not sure why but I feel like some rejection to what he says. But I don't really know too much about him.

Something inside me rejects him or what he has to say.

Edited August 12, 2019 by abrakamowse

[hundreth]

2 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

@Aliman My impression of JP is that he has a fundamental belief in an external, universal, dualistic, objective reality. This imposes a contraction and restrictions. Conversations with someone who believes in an external, universal, objective reality quickly encounter the walls within that paradigm.

This isn't the case. See his discussions with Sam Harris where he spends hours refuting Sam Harris' rational objective morality with metaphysical arguments about the nature of truth.

Then again, I'm not even sure why one's belief in one area determines the worth of their entire body of work. I'd be willing to bet Bernie Sanders believes in an external, objective reality as most materialists do yet we don't throw away all of his wisdom and behave as though he's a simpleton.

Edited August 12, 2019 by hundreth

[Leo Gura]

@hundreth The difference is, Bernie Sanders is not trying to speak about Truth.

JP certainly does not know what Truth is. Neither does Sam Harris.

JP's discussion about Truth with Sam Harris is a joke. Two blind men arguing about an elephant they've never seen.

If JP just simply taught Jungian psychology, that would be fine. But he sticks his nose in all sorts of other issues outside his understanding. He speaks about Marxism, for example, without any sign of having read or studied Marx.

 

Technically, "cultural Marxism" is a conspiracy theory which long predates JP.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory

This is but one example.

Folks who end up following JP don't have enough intellectual rigor and education to understand the strawmen which JP puts up and then knocks down.

[Setty]

The biggest problem I have with the debades around Jordan Peterson is how unnegotiable people tend to be arguing againts him. He is just an obstruction that needs to be trampled and ridiculed just as anyone who would even dare to think he could have a point so we can then focus on creating a more just society where everyone is respected as they deserve. Well except for the likes like Jordan Peterson because those people are deluded lunatics that just obstruct our endeavour of great society. 

What I am trying to say is that Peterson has many flaws and his views might not reflect what really is and should be but if we can't have a civil discussion about these issuses without name calling and belittling peoples opinions and insights how developed are we really? Are we really conscious and loving? Not in my opinion.

And you can say I am low on the spiral and if I were to develop myself more I would see why you are right but that is just a petty belittling and it is the eqivalent of saying: "You are just stupid!".

 

[Aeris]

Jp didn't understand post modernism. He believe this is a delusion.

So he devilize what looks like threat to his point of view of "the good society" 

He project his idea of the good society to tame and soothe the mass to an orange paradigm ( maintain the statut quo ).

What I've seen. Maybe a bias.

[Leo Gura]

@Setty How can someone who does PragerU videos be taken seriously???

There are just far too many higher quality sources you could be learning from.

Gotta be wise with how you allocate your time.

[ActualizedDavid]

24 minutes ago, Truthority said:

You know who I am.

 

Edited August 12, 2019 by ActualizedDavid

[Solonius]

 

 

[Forestluv]

@Setty There is a difference between criticism from above and criticism from below.

Bernie has been green-centered his entire adult life and has deep understanding and embodiment of green. He criticizes Orange from above and he is trying to pull Orange-centered people up to green. It would be a different dynamic if a politician was Blue-centered and criticized Orange from below in an effort to pull Orange back down to Blue. As well, Bernie does not criticize higher stages from below. For example, he doesn’t criticize Turquoise-level views of Marianne Williamson as being irrational or dangerous. And he doesn’t try to proclaim understanding and authority on metaphysics, existentialism and Truth. Bernie stays immersed within his understanding and embodiment of green and genuinely wants to pull people up to green. 

JP could likely make a lot of contributions in his field of clinical psychology. I have a highly conscious friend who is a psychologist and she tells me that JP has offered some insights into psychology. This is at an Orange level. Similar to how a geneticist like Richard Dawkins can make significant contributions at an Orange level. As well, they are qualified to criticize red and blue from above. For example, Dawkins often criticizes the irrationality of blue religion. This is helpful to those transitioning into Orange. Similarly, JP has some Orange level views that can be helpful to pull up red/blue to Orange. Dawkins and JP may have some high orange level reasoning that can have value in some contexts. The problem with people like JP and Dawkins Is that they have blue and/or orange anchors and are viewing green, yellow and Turquoise from below. Yet they are under self delusion they are at a higher stage of consciousness. Unlike Bernie, they criticize higher stages, assuming they have understanding/embodiment of those higher stages. The harm comes in when they misrepresent and demonize higher stages - due to a lack of understanding/embodiment. They may help pull some up to Orange, yet those people will have a harder time evolving higher because they have been conditioned to resist higher stages. People like JP and Dawkins are a deterrent in evolving through and beyond green. Bernie doesn’t do this. Bernie is not under a delusion that he is an authority on higher conscious stages, and he doesn’t misrepresent and demonize higher conscious stages. Bernie is simply expressing his understanding and embodiment of green and criticizes excessive Orange from above.

JP criticizes and stigmatizes green from below. If someone at stage Yellow or Turquoise criticized green from above, it would have a very different dynamic. The difference is totally obvious to someone who has evolved through green and has embodied green. Such a person no longer has the blue/orange baggage and resistance that people like JP and Dawkins have. Somewhat like a fluent English speaker watching an intermediate-level student trying to speak English. To a fluent English speaker, an intermediate level would be totally obvious. Gaps in understanding, misunderstandings in grammar, poor pronunciation, small vocabulary etc. would be totally obvious. This intermediate-level speaker could help pull beginning  students up to an intermediate level, yet not up to advanced stages of fluency. If an intermediate speaker was under the delusion that they had advanced fluency, misrepresented advanced things like the imperfect subjunctive and demonized those with higher levels of fluency than their own, it would have a negative impact on the evolution of the community in terms of learning and communicating in Spanish.

This is not to say that green is beyond criticism. Yet criticism from above has very different dynamics, intentions, impacts and energetics than criticism from below. 

[abrakamowse]

@Serotoninluv  Great explanation, I agree...

[Setty]

@Serotoninluv You make good points and I understand that less developed people consider more developed people threatening to their worldviews so they unconsciously lash out. But I think you consider Peterson less devoleped than he really is (I am posting a few videos of him regarding many "green"  issuses to make a point). This is the problem I have with spiral dynamics arguments as a whole. It divides people into distinct categories that are hierarchical in nature. This might create a big blind spot for us because if we consider ourselves higher on the spiral we might unfairly dismiss that person on the spot without even considering anything he or she has to say. This model often serves as a convinient way for us to be just closed minded. And I think that is a shame because we might lose a lot of potentially deep wisdom from people lower on the spiral. We have to take a person to be something far more complex than something that we can easily label by a color. This is also why I think this model shouldn't be taught in schools because it will only serve as a way for people to not really think about the arguments of anyone disagreeing with them and just make them dismiss people on the spot.

If you took the time to watch these videos please tell me why isn't this person to be taken into account when you are after some insights regarding our society? Is he really so undevelopted and shifts people inevitably into alt-right? I know I selected very specific videos that reflect him in the right light (if obviously not please tell me I might be delusional). And I know you can find a lot of things he said that are not very intellectual but man who didn't say some stupid things throughout their lifes. We were just lucky the camera wasn't recording at the moment.