Jordan Peterson talks SJWs, ideologies, free speech, religion, and more

Started by PickelledEggs, December 06, 2016, 02:16:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PickelledEggs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04wyGK6k6HE

Probably one of the best things I've watched in a while on most of the subjects, even the religious bits.

Jordan Peterson a professor and clinical psychologist talks about the recent compelled pronouns law that has been implemented in Canada and how it and things like it is a huge warning sign of a tyrannical regime.

There is more things talked about in the podcast. Many more. And it's not as simplified as what I have said in one sentence, so before you reply in disagreement (or even in agreement) watch the video in full.

Definitely worth a listen.

GSOgymrat

I saw Jordan Peterson on The Rubin Report and also watched a video of him debating Bill C-16 at the University of Toronto Faculty of Arts & Science Forum. The debate is worth watching because you hear the other side of the argument. Peterson is definitely an interesting guy and a man of conviction; he becomes verklempt in Dave Rubin's interview. I like Joe Rogan's podcasts but allocating three hours is challenging.

PickelledEggs

Quote from: GSOgymrat on December 06, 2016, 03:48:53 PM
I saw Jordan Peterson on The Rubin Report and also watched a video of him debating Bill C-16 at the University of Toronto Faculty of Arts & Science Forum. The debate is worth watching because you hear the other side of the argument. Peterson is definitely an interesting guy and a man of conviction; he becomes verklempt in Dave Rubin's interview. I like Joe Rogan's podcasts but allocating three hours is challenging.
It definitely is a huge chunk of time. I watched it in a couple of sittings while making/eating lunch and finally while I was working on a portrait commission.

Baruch

Newspeak is double plus good!

Stefan Molyneux is another conservative Canadian I watch some of.  A lot of smart Canadians ... and a lot of SWJ stuff like Euro-peons love.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

drunkenshoe

#4
American culture, western culture over all is and has always been narcissistic. That is the whole cultural idea inherited from Roman Empire which is the supposed roots of Western civilisation. This is not something new. How does that even surprise people?

It's how American capitalism works. It's the American culture itself. People with egos of the size of cathedrals, people who are programmed to think they are entitled to everything imaginable.

As this is something impossible and completely bollocks, under a state and a system that has an overt crushing power over its own people, unfortunately these people have no slightest affect over anything real which is extremely contrary to the state propaganda itself and how they see themselves and this whole thing is how people created a world to fight back.

Something that has always existed in a specific culture and indivudals just got to a tipping point and transformed into a some serious subculture with rising demographics and social media. This is what's happening. You herd a population by constantly pumping it with delusional ideas, inflated claims and attributes of freedom, opportunity, free speech, democracy, superiority and when people actuall start to act as if it was real, you go 'how the hell did that happen?!'. :lol: Dark irony. 

This is not something about Marxism, collapse of the Societ Bloc or blah blah. There is a real problem, but the excuses and answers developed in the video is following the same stupid path as extremist SJWs. And real issues get neglected and drowned under 'pixicans'.


(As my mother language is completely unisex and genderless, I cannot relate what difference they think eleminating gender from language would create. They are in for a surprise.)

"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

PickelledEggs

Did you even watch the video, shoe? You vaguely referenced one thing in it and the rest of your response is on some completely different tangent that misses the point.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


drunkenshoe

I have watched an hour of it. (58 mins) And my problem is the evaluation of the problem(s) from the beginning. Not the problem(s) itself, I recognise them.  May be you are not aware, I don't know.

There is a system that runs on basic pillars, a system that takes its socio-economic, socio-cultural, socio-political powers from those pillars and in return shapes the society and everything in it. And we have series of people -along with the other videos usually posted- trying to treat a specific problem in a specific culture as if it is the result of something that came/injected from 'outside' and caused some sort of an imbalance in a system through a movement backed up by the fraction of the population. This is the analytical map of it.

Just the words 'marxist ideas' gets thrown around to pyschological relationship between intellectualism and marxist tendencies from an individual point of view gets 'explained' is hillarious.

If someone made any argument about any hot topics from a clinical psyhologists' point to defend his/her one in the forum, this thread would get filled by agressive arguments on what kind of an approach the field of clinical psychology itself is.

"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

PickelledEggs

@drunkenshoe, should you, I, or anyone be forced to use words that other people want us to use, in your opinion?

drunkenshoe

You have posted a second post asking me the same question without waiting for my answer and now you are asking me a ridiculous question after I clearly made fun of it and after writing that I recognise the problems presented. OBVIOUSLY I disagree with it.

Pickel, I understand that this video is very enlightening and rich for you. It's not to me. I am sick of you assuming that you know what I think about in this specific topic while almost everything I say flies over your head. Let's not have any conversations in these threads, because honestly, I just can't stand talking to you about it. 



"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

PickelledEggs

Well, when you reply with such a far off tangent, what do you expect from people? You give the impression that you don't know/ don't care what the original topic was. You give the impression that you want to take the original topic, scrap it and argue about something completely different. You don't acknowledge the topic. You don't address the topic. This is why people get frustrated with you, shoe. And this, you specifically, is the exact reason I said for people to watch before replying.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


PickelledEggs

I find it interesting that you can watch 1/3 of someone's talk and be sure that you know what his points are. This is more of a sign to me and other people that you are just simply replying to argue, rather than actually being informed about what the topic is. Argue if you want, but at least be informed about the topic at hand. and at least give the impression that you are talking about the same topic and not some distant tangent.

Shiranu

If you know their entire premise is based on a misconception, then you know the arguments they have to make are irrelevant. Would you say the same if someone watched 58 minutes of a flat earth conspiracy video, and skipped 2 hours, so how can they know what he has to say and that they aren't just arguing against it to argue?
"A little science distances you from God, but a lot of science brings you nearer to Him." - Louis Pasteur

PickelledEggs

Quote from: Shiranu on December 07, 2016, 03:25:12 PM
If you know their entire premise is based on a misconception, then you know the arguments they have to make are irrelevant. Would you say the same if someone watched 58 minutes of a flat earth conspiracy video, and skipped 2 hours, so how can they know what he has to say and that they aren't just arguing against it to argue?
She doesn't disagree with the point. From what I understand, she agrees that the compelled pronoun thing is a bad law. She misses the rest. And she tangents on to something completely different, ignoring it. There are many points that she missed. Many topics. Many, many things. Why? because she arrogantly decided she knows what the video is about by only watching 1/3 of it.

drunkenshoe

Quote from: PickelledEggs on December 07, 2016, 03:01:35 PM
Well, when you reply with such a far off tangent, what do you expect from people? You give the impression that you don't know/ don't care what the original topic was. You give the impression that you want to take the original topic, scrap it and argue about something completely different. You don't acknowledge the topic. You don't address the topic. This is why people get frustrated with you, shoe. And this, you specifically, is the exact reason I said for people to watch before replying.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

Stop telling me what people think or feel about me. Stop telling me what my opinion addresses or not. It's not your job. Your job is to warn me when I break any rules. I don't care about your impression about my posts or my concerns about the topic at hand or how much far off tangent you think my posts are. I am not responsible with satisfying you on how I see issues or think about them. I am not required to fit myself into your understanding of some discussion. 

I am sick of your triggered reactions specific to certain topics written from a mod's point while there is nothing actually wrong, but the only problem is either about how you yourself feel about a poster or his/her assumed opinion.

There is a hundred thing that has been said in that video, you just threw me what triggered you when there was an obvious attitude presented against it.

"science is not about building a body of known 'facts'. ıt is a method for asking awkward questions and subjecting them to a reality-check, thus avoiding the human tendency to believe whatever makes us feel good." - tp

PickelledEggs

Quote from: drunkenshoe on December 07, 2016, 03:48:23 PM
Stop telling me what people think or feel about me. Stop telling me what my opinion addresses or not. It's not your job.
It's not my job? Really? Who are you to tell me what my job is?

Excuse me for taking part in the forum in ways other than my admin/moderator duties.
QuoteI am not required to fit myself into your understanding of some discussion.

Correct. You are not. But if you insist on giving the impression that you are missing the points or topic of a discussion like you chronically do, it's hypocritical of you to get annoyed when people point out the impression you give them. You give me that impression. and I've seen you give others that impression.
Quote

I am sick of your triggered reactions specific to certain topics written from a mod's point while there is nothing actually wrong, but the only problem is either about how you yourself feel about a poster or his/her assumed opinion.

There is a hundred thing that has been said in that video, you just threw me what triggered you when there was an obvious attitude presented against it.

This goes back to the first thing.

If you think the only thing I should be doing is moderating and I should not be discussing things like a regular member, you are arrogantly and hypocritically on your high horse, trying to dismiss what I have to say.

As I said before. If you want to argue, argue all you want. But if you're going to argue about a completely different topic than the one at hand, don't be surprised when no one takes you seriously.