Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
GostHacked

The Jordan Peterson phenomenon

Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No.  Nor do they have to.  It would, however, be helpful if they didn't muddle the message as he himself has done.

What message is he muddling? He is very careful with his words.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

And so ?  The Laurier professor embarrassed his entire profession.

Would you undo that embarrassment by having all professors adopt pejorative and subjective terms moving forward ?

 

Not one, but three TOP profs at WLU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

You really aren't caught up on The Rebel and their controversies.  

Rebel has their issues, Peterson is not part of their issues.  You are hanging on this ONE bit while ignoring the plethora of other items that show he is not part of the alt-tight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Argus said:

As he sees it, not as YOU see it. I'm sure those lying weasels at Laurier trying to bully Shepherd into their mindthink cadre thought they were doing it in the public interest too, even though they were, of course, completely and totally wrong, and proved themselves so dishonest they shouldn't even be allowed on a college campus.

That was completely infuriating as to how WLU handled that whole affair. Without her recording that session, we would not have known how deeply entrenched that mentality is in universities.  Watching them backtrack but yet still tout the SJW conformity thing (aka groupspeak groupthink) which is detrimental to critical thinking in universities. Sheppard asked the question of should ideas not be challenged in university? If the answer is no, then there is no use of going to a university at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

 You are hanging on this ONE bit while ignoring the plethora of other items that show he is not part of the alt-tight.

He is aligned with them.  Whether or not he is 'part of it' doesn't matter.  He's in a conflict of interest if he promotes a disunifying organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

What message is he muddling? He is very careful with his words.

He has tweeted things that would easily be offensive to many people.  It works against trying to build a common space of understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Argus said:

You're imputing guilt by second hand association.

No.  I think that the problem is that The Rebel posts the offensive material for the purpose of causing disunity, for its own profit.  Making noise to make money is antithetical to professing knowledge.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

He has tweeted things that would easily be offensive to many people.  It works against trying to build a common space of understanding.

I see offensive things posted on this site all the time. It's been working against trying to build a common space of understanding right here on MLW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No.  I think that the problem is that The Rebel posts the offensive material for the purpose of causing disunity, for its own profit.  Making noise to make money is antithetical to professing knowledge.  

So is that a problem for The Rebel? Or a problem for Peterson?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

I see offensive things posted on this site all the time. It's been working against trying to build a common space of understanding right here on MLW.

No it hasn't.  Why bother with false analogies?  An open message board and a published magazine are completely different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

So is that a problem for The Rebel? Or a problem for Peterson?

He shouldn't align with things that damage his reputation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No it hasn't.  Why bother with false analogies?  An open message board and a published magazine are completely different.

What's the false analogy? They are both echo chambers for what people are thinking. The only difference is that those who are at Rebel get paid for their content.

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

He shouldn't align with things that damage his reputation.

What proof do you have that he is aligning with Rebel Media? Did you not read what Argus posted?  OR is that lending to the overall notion that people only read(hear) what they want to read(hear) instead of reading what is actually written?

The interesting thing is that Argus and I do not see eye to eye on many issues, but it's quite clear what he posted in regards to the Rebel media angle.

Edited by GostHacked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Sorta like lumping lelfties everywhere in with university flakes you mean?

Or did I just commit a 'so-what-you-really mean'?

 

No...nothing like that.  "Lelfties" largely embrace the label if only to distinguish themselves from their ideological enemies ("Righties").   There is no "alt-right" in Canada because extremist speech/expression is not afforded constitutional protection compared to the U.S., where the term has come to prominence and the Canadian media's attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

 

What proof do you have that he is aligning with Rebel Media? 

I already posted, twice, an invitation to meet Peterson at a Rebel event.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I already posted, twice, an invitation to meet Peterson at a Rebel event.

Right, but did you read Argus's post that explains this, or are you just going with the notion 'Peterson is bad and should not be listened to at all'.  ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Right, but did you read Argus's post that explains this, or are you just going with the notion 'Peterson is bad and should not be listened to at all'.  ??

I think I have responded to all Argus' posts and your question "What proof do you have that he is aligning with Rebel Media? ".

I didn't say "Peterson is bad", however I think his choice of communication vehicles disqualifies him from speaking to a broad public.  If you want people to listen to you, you have to be careful about your reputation.  He's been utterly stupid about his communication choices and so he will only be listened to by 'deplorables'.  See what I did there ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

....  He's been utterly stupid about his communication choices and so he will only be listened to by 'deplorables'.  See what I did there ?

 

Yes...you imported yet another term from "south of the border".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Yes...you imported yet another term from "south of the border".

Why not ?  I used to mimic my big brother's album choices too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think I have responded to all Argus' posts and your question "What proof do you have that he is aligning with Rebel Media? ".

I didn't say "Peterson is bad", however I think his choice of communication vehicles disqualifies him from speaking to a broad public.  If you want people to listen to you, you have to be careful about your reputation.  He's been utterly stupid about his communication choices and so he will only be listened to by 'deplorables'.  See what I did there ?

His notion is that he talks to everyone. And the best way to engage those who don't agree with you is to talk with them.  Personally I don't like what comes out of The Rebel aside from Gavin McInnes.  I mean even I can agree with Foxnews now and then.

What other communication choices do you consider bad.  And I don't think he has to worry about his reputation, more and more, his reputation is actually increasing and getting better all the time.

Since I listen to him, do you conside me deplorable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Why not ?  I used to mimic my big brother's album choices too...

 

More likely, the berating of a Canadian professor's message and his audience with easily imported labels is a very Canadian thing to do.

OMG...Peterson got "Americanized" at Harvard !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

His notion is that he talks to everyone. And the best way to engage those who don't agree with you is to talk with them.   

He talks to people who will listen to him but his choices have wrecked his reputation and people don't listen.  I used to listen to him but I don't any more because he threw his reputation away.

6 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

What other communication choices do you consider bad.  And I don't think he has to worry about his reputation, more and more, his reputation is actually increasing and getting better all the time.

I guess if somebody was taking money from somebody and advocating for them.  That's called being a shill.   I don't know where you get the idea that his reputation is getting better.  It's pretty hard to qualify that.

 

6 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

 

Since I listen to him, do you conside me deplorable?

You missed my point entirely.  I am going to spell things out for you here since I have had to post evidence three times.  Hillary Clinton called Americans "deplorables".  That told Americans that she thought a large percentage of them were not worthy of respect.  That made her an elitist, and a divider and hurt her reputation.  The Rebel forments disunity and strife in Canadian society, because doing so gets attention and therefore helps the organization.  So the organization has an interest in dividing people.  Like Hillary Clinton, The Rebel seeks to divide people.  A professor who is trying to speak to "the" public shouldn't align with divisive institutions, as it makes it look like he's seeking an audience only on one side of the spectrum.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

He talks to people who will listen to him but his choices have wrecked his reputation and people don't listen.  I used to listen to him but I don't any more because he threw his reputation away.

I believe it is the opposite. He may have wrecked it in your view, but more and more as time goes on seem to support Peterson. Was it just the one thing with Rebel that influenced your choice?

Quote

I guess if somebody was taking money from somebody and advocating for them.  That's called being a shill.   I don't know where you get the idea that his reputation is getting better.  It's pretty hard to qualify that.

Was he ever advocating for The Rebel?  And no, I don't think you really understood what Argus put forth. But whatever, I shall continue.

Quote

You missed my point entirely.  I am going to spell things out for you here since I have had to post evidence three times.  Hillary Clinton called Americans "deplorables".  That told Americans that she thought a large percentage of them were not worthy of respect.  That made her an elitist, and a divider and hurt her reputation.  The Rebel forments disunity and strife in Canadian society, because doing so gets attention and therefore helps the organization.  So the organization has an interest in dividing people.  Like Hillary Clinton, The Rebel seeks to divide people.  A professor who is trying to speak to "the" public shouldn't align with divisive institutions, as it makes it look like he's seeking an audience only on one side of the spectrum.   

Respect is earned, not given.  And you are still going on about The Rebel more than you are going off on Peterson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OMG, are you defending Clinton's deplorables comment now?  'Respect is earned' ?  How does that apply ?

You are throwing old cliches on bad logic and I have no idea why.

Presumably, a public figure has some respect for the public he's speaking to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

He has tweeted things that would easily be offensive to many people.  It works against trying to build a common space of understanding.

So the goal is to not be offensive? To be what, bland and non-controversial? How can you ever cause change without offending someone?

Edited by Argus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×