Author Topic: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning  (Read 326 times)

Online Sal1981

The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« on: May 25, 2018, 10:11:02 PM »
There have been quite a lot of criticism, valid I think, against Jordan Peterson's book 12 Rules for Life: an Antidote to Chaos. The most telling has been TJ Kirk's in my estimation. He has undertaken to deconstruct and offer an alternative view to Jordan Peterson's book.

The introduction YouTube video to the series:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Chapter 1 - Our Friend, Chaos - The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

(the YouTube vid of the first chapter)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


He uses a naturalistic argument, genetic mutation as the change and driving force with natural selective pressure that produced all the different life.

TJ makes a compelling argument in his book that without chaos, there would be no change, which stands in stark contrast to Jordan Peterson's "clean your room" montage. He uses the history of Martin Luther King jr. and Malcolm X as boiler plates for chaos and a lot of people thereof.

"Chaos is not your enemy, it is your friend." - TJ Kirk.

He uses the notion of order, particularly 2 competing orders, as something that will produce chaos.

Although I personally think that Jordan Peterson has some valid points that I have found compelling in the past, particularly when I read his book, I think TJ Kirk makes a better sell of chaos than Jordan Peterson's narrow view of it.

---

Chapter 2 - The Art of Morality - The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

(the YouTube vid of the second chapter)
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

TJ Kirk starts out with a bleak misanthropic view that I think illustrates pretty well his disdain for Jordan Peterson's "feel-good" view on morality and truth, where he uses a poem to illustrates the metaphysical nature of truth. His points is that views on morality have changed as much as fashion, and illustrates this point on how, historically, homosexuality has been viewed and treated. Where Jordan Peterson's view is clandestine and opaque, TJ Kirk is crystal clear, I think, using Sam Harris' The Moral Landscape and a TED talk to illustrate his view on morality. TJ Kirk's point seems to be that we cannot escape moral relativism and hammers home that he views himself as a moral nihilist.

This isn't all that bleak, TJ found meaning in art, "in entertaining its lies". And here his revised moral nihilism shows, he thinks people should treat morality like art, basically, that it is "deeply personal and completely subjective."
« Last Edit: May 25, 2018, 11:19:45 PM by Sal1981 »
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" --- Richard P. Feynman

Offline Baruch

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2018, 10:17:52 PM »
Sorry, however one derives one's morals, if one is a moral nihilist (extreme relativist) then they are dead to me.  Which means I would treat them the same way I would treat an armed Nazi.  With extreme prejudice.  That might not be moral, but I will feel triggered, well my trigger finger anyway.

Basically this kind of thing gives a green-light to criminality.

Jordan Peterson is using collective social practice as an authority.  Of course one can embrace aa different authority (the Pope) or reject authority all together.  But if you accept no authority, but have no conscience to back that up (which is the meaning I take from this) then they merely prove that dying isn't the worst thing that can happen, evil is.
שלום

Online Sal1981

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2018, 10:27:40 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sorry, however one derives one's morals, if one is a moral nihilist (extreme relativist) then they are dead to me.  Which means I would treat them the same way I would treat an armed Nazi.  With extreme prejudice.  That might not be moral, but I will feel triggered, well my trigger finger anyway.

Basically this kind of thing gives a green-light to criminality.

Jordan Peterson is using collective social practice as an authority.  Of course one can embrace aa different authority (the Pope) or reject authority all together.  But if you accept no authority, but have no conscience to back that up (which is the meaning I take from this) then they merely prove that dying isn't the worst thing that can happen, evil is.
I honestly don't see, specifically, how moral nihilism would lead to criminality. In the latter part of Chapter 2, TJ thinks, in contrast to morality, we have Laws to govern people.

Personally I think objective morality cannot exist, just not in the same flavor as TJ.

I think morals are subjective, but that we are able to infer - from minimising harm - that which establishes optimized moral behavior. Now, this is in no way absolute, but it does become somewhat rigid like Laws of the land.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool" --- Richard P. Feynman

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2018, 11:50:28 PM »
Viewing existence through dualities-- order/chaos, masculine/feminine, good/bad-- makes for good narratives but is very limiting and overly simplistic, and I believe objective/subjective duality is a poor lens when describing moral behavior. I also don't subscribe to moral relativism-- one can see in shades of gray without denying black and white exist. Morals were not handed down by a higher being, they evolved up biologically and socially. Because we are mammals and social creatures, because we have speech and can communicate complex ideas, ways of interacting have evolved that are beneficial to our survival. The more complicated the behaviors and personal interactions the more they become open to interpretation, yet morals are not completely open to an individual's whims because we share the same physiology and because individuals don't exist in isolation. Humans have their own morality, octopuses have their own morality, ants have their own morality. Betraying one's family or close group is considered immoral because we are humans. Octopuses, who don't share our physiology and don't live social groups, have no such moral compunction. For us, when an action is truly immoral it isn't anti-God, it is at its core anti-human.
“You are the sky. Everything else – it’s just the weather.”

― Pema Chödrön

Offline Baruch

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #4 on: May 26, 2018, 12:30:29 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I honestly don't see, specifically, how moral nihilism would lead to criminality. In the latter part of Chapter 2, TJ thinks, in contrast to morality, we have Laws to govern people.

Personally I think objective morality cannot exist, just not in the same flavor as TJ.

I think morals are subjective, but that we are able to infer - from minimising harm - that which establishes optimized moral behavior. Now, this is in no way absolute, but it does become somewhat rigid like Laws of the land.

Nobody obeys laws, not even the government.

Octopi are different from people, so what morals they have, I have little interest in.  Sucker!

For honey bees, being a sterile female slave clone of a much larger queen bee is moral.  Being a Soviet citizen in 1933 is moral too?  Only if the Soviets went to B-school ;-(
« Last Edit: May 26, 2018, 12:33:03 AM by Baruch »
שלום

Offline Hydra009

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #5 on: May 26, 2018, 11:49:04 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Viewing existence through dualities-- order/chaos, masculine/feminine, good/bad-- makes for good narratives but is very limiting and overly simplistic, and I believe objective/subjective duality is a poor lens when describing moral behavior.
Good and evil are just shorthand for "I approve" and "I disapprove".  What is truly important is not what you disapprove, but why you disapprove it.

Quote
For us, when an action is truly immoral it isn't anti-God, it is at its core anti-human.
Precisely.

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2018, 12:25:21 AM »
ContraPoints has one of my favorite takes on Peterson.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
“You are the sky. Everything else – it’s just the weather.”

― Pema Chödrön

Offline Cavebear

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #7 on: May 29, 2018, 02:19:12 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Good and evil are just shorthand for "I approve" and "I disapprove".  What is truly important is not what you disapprove, but why you disapprove it.
Precisely.

Never.  I understand that SOME people equate "evil" with "disagreement" but most don't and I don't. 
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline Baruch

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #8 on: May 29, 2018, 01:49:05 PM »
GSO Gymrat ... no, it isn't about how trannies are bringing about the end of civilization.  It isn't even about stopping hate speech (keeping you from saying you shouldn't say).  But requiring you to say whatever you say, in a particular way, under threat of job loss or legal sanction.

I am the dictator.  You must now say "shrubbery" like in Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail ... every time you leave your abode.  If you don't I will jail you.  Isn't that silly?

Everyone got along when we moved past (Miss/Mrs) and added Miss.  But nobody was jailed for it.  Canada wants to do the equivalent.  Let the polar bears eat them.
שלום

Offline Cavebear

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2018, 02:03:03 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
GSO Gymrat ... no, it isn't about how trannies are bringing about the end of civilization.  It isn't even about stopping hate speech (keeping you from saying you shouldn't say).  But requiring you to say whatever you say, in a particular way, under threat of job loss or legal sanction.

I am the dictator.  You must now say "shrubbery" like in Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail ... every time you leave your abode.  If you don't I will jail you.  Isn't that silly?

Everyone got along when we moved past (Miss/Mrs) and added Miss.  But nobody was jailed for it.  Canada wants to do the equivalent.  Let the polar bears eat them.

:Knight of Ni: We want A SHRUBBERY!
Arthur: A WHAT?
Knights of Ni: Ni! Ni!! Ni! Ni!
Arthur; No! No! Please, please, no more! We will find you a shrubbery.
Knight of Ni: You must return here with a shrubbery or else you will never pass through this wood alive.
Arthur: O Knights of Ni, you are just and fair, and we will return with a shrubbery.
Knight of Ni: One that looks nice.
Arthur: Of course!
Knight of Ni: And not too expensive.
Arthur: Yes!
Knight of Ni: Now…. GO!"
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2018, 02:28:20 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
GSO Gymrat ... no, it isn't about how trannies are bringing about the end of civilization.  It isn't even about stopping hate speech (keeping you from saying you shouldn't say).  But requiring you to say whatever you say, in a particular way, under threat of job loss or legal sanction.

I am the dictator.  You must now say "shrubbery" like in Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail ... every time you leave your abode.  If you don't I will jail you.  Isn't that silly?

Everyone got along when we moved past (Miss/Mrs) and added Miss.  But nobody was jailed for it.  Canada wants to do the equivalent.  Let the polar bears eat them.

Resisting government enforced compelled speech is probably the least interesting or controversial of Peterson's ideas but it is the one that got him international recognition. How many Americans actually support citizens being arrested for not using mandated pronouns? The argument that "free speech" is under attack is one that I believe has been both accidentally and intentionally exaggerated or confused by people for financial and political gain. I've considered writing a post explaining my concerns but I don't think I can condense it into a length appropriate for this forum.
“You are the sky. Everything else – it’s just the weather.”

― Pema Chödrön

Offline Cavebear

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #11 on: May 29, 2018, 02:32:02 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Resisting government enforced compelled speech is probably the least interesting or controversial of Peterson's ideas but it is the one that got him international recognition. How many Americans actually support citizens being arrested for not using mandated pronouns? The argument that "free speech" is under attack is one that I believe has been both accidentally and intentionally exaggerated or confused by people for financial and political gain. I've considered writing a post explaining my concerns but I don't think I can condense it into a length appropriate for this forum.

By "mandated pronouns" do you mean constructions like hir and hem or his/her?  Just asking.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2018, 03:20:27 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
By "mandated pronouns" do you mean constructions like hir and hem or his/her?  Just asking.

It doesn't need to be ze or zer or whatever. If I tell you to refer to me as "she", even though I look like I do in my profile picture, and you refuse I could go to law enforcement or my Human Resources manager, file a grievance, and there would some penalty for your behavior supported by legislation. This is a fringe idea that few Americans would support-- I certainly wouldn't and I applaud Peterson for bringing the Canadian legislation and the topic in general to public awareness. Yet there are issues with what people are calling "freedom of speech" that are not so fringe and don't get so much publicity. There are also issues that people believe to be violations of free speech that I think are merely issues of etiquette and norms.

BTW, ContraPoints is transgender but she isn't talking about pronouns or free speech. She says what she thinks Peterson get's right ("Somebody's got to whip those neckbeards into shape") and dissects what Peterson means by "postmodern neo-Marxism." I like Peterson, I agree with a lot of what he has to say and I think having a therapist as a popular intellectual celebrity is personally entertaining, but I think ContraPoints has good criticisms in that Peterson's "postmodern neo-Marxism" idea is contradictory and the ideals he believes to represent "the West" are cherry-picked. My biggest criticism of Peterson is that he uses narrative and archetypes to support his ideas but he acts like his narrative is objectively verifiable, that history has proven these narratives. This is just not true. For example, his narrative that "women are chaos and men are order" is a completely fabricated dichotomy that I find of dubious utility. I can easily create the opposite narrative, that women are order and men are chaos, by selecting different myths and archetypes. Personal narratives and cultural narratives are two very different things.
“You are the sky. Everything else – it’s just the weather.”

― Pema Chödrön

Offline Cavebear

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2018, 03:23:50 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It doesn't need to be ze or zer or whatever. If I tell you to refer to me as "she", even though I look like I do in my profile picture, and you refuse I could go to law enforcement or my Human Resources manager, file a grievance, and there would some penalty for your behavior supported by legislation. This is a fringe idea that few Americans would support-- I certainly wouldn't and I applaud Peterson for bringing the Canadian legislation and the topic in general to public awareness. Yet there are issues with what people are calling "freedom of speech" that are not so fringe and don't get so much publicity. There are also issues that people believe to be violations of free speech that I think are merely issues of etiquette and norms.

BTW, ContraPoints is transgender but she isn't talking about pronouns or free speech. She says what she thinks Peterson get's right ("Somebody's got to whip those neckbeards into shape") and dissects what Peterson means by "postmodern neo-Marxism." I like Peterson, I agree with a lot of what he has to say and I think having a therapist as a popular intellectual celebrity is personally entertaining, but I think ContraPoints has good criticisms in that Peterson's "postmodern neo-Marxism" idea is contradictory and the ideals he believes to represent "the West" are cherry-picked. My biggest criticism of Peterson is that he uses narrative and archetypes to support his ideas but he acts like his narrative is objectively verifiable, that history has proven these narratives. This is just not true. For example, his narrative that "women are chaos and men are order" is a completely fabricated dichotomy that I find of dubious utility. I can easily create the opposite narrative, that women are order and men are chaos, by selecting different myths and archetypes. Personal narratives and cultural narratives are two very different things.

Meaning no disrespect to anyone, but I can't tell the players without a program.  I avoid, I guess, I hope for understanding when I'm inaccurate.
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!

Offline Baruch

Re: The Order of Chaos: An Antidote to Meaning
« Reply #14 on: May 29, 2018, 07:54:36 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Resisting government enforced compelled speech is probably the least interesting or controversial of Peterson's ideas but it is the one that got him international recognition. How many Americans actually support citizens being arrested for not using mandated pronouns? The argument that "free speech" is under attack is one that I believe has been both accidentally and intentionally exaggerated or confused by people for financial and political gain. I've considered writing a post explaining my concerns but I don't think I can condense it into a length appropriate for this forum.

Yes, because he is Canadian, instead of American, academic rather than journalist, traditional rather than avant guard ... he must be wrong.  No, Canada is a beta test, America is the real test.  Enslave all Americans, eventually.  Everything will be forbidden, except for what is mandatory ... for the children.

Yes, most Americans don't support the Bill of Rights.  That is so 18th century, totally obsolete.  We need more iPhones please.  The real attack on free speech is in GB, they are the alpha test, but they don't have a bloody constitution, let alone a bill of rights.  Pr126 chose the wrong country, the other four Anglophone countries are better, if less traditional.

Yes, Tass is right, Pravda is right ... so say the leftovers from the 1960s.
שלום

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk