💊 Manosphere Jordan Peterson - Internet Daddy Simulator, Post-modern Anti-postmodernist, Canadian Psychology Professor, Depressed, Got Hooked on Benzos

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I am not a follower of JP's, but I have friends who have fallen under his spell, and I feel like the "it's just banal regular self-help advice" misses the mark. From what little I have heard from youtube clips and friend's descriptions, JP's advice is Jungian and "Mythical" and "makes you feel like you're the hero in a fantasy story", as someone on reddit put it. I feel like a dismissal of "he's just a regular self help guru like Dr Phil" doesn't deal with how good his ...mindset/advice is ...at fascinating people and pulling them under his spell.
I mean, most regular self help stuff - "7 habits", "Power of now", "Secret of positive thinking" etc, isn't Jungian - and Jungian stuff does have a hold on people, I've read people who follow it like a religion even before JP became famous.
 
Hellbound Hellhound said:
Remove Peterson from the controversies surrounding pronouns and campus deplatforming however, and all you're really left with is banal self-help advice and performative moralizing. [...] Peterson is the Žižek to Hitchens' Chomsky.
Click to expand...
Considering Peterson's mediocre record on free speech (the Faith Goldy incident; he rose to fame protesting compelled speech, not free speech) vs. Chomsky's strong record (the Faurisson affair) that analogy is perfect.

I often forget that Peterson is mostly known for his self-help stuff, I only ever knew him for his political relevance.
 
Lemmingwise said:
I know someone just said it was the beginning of his downfall, but I peg it as a couple of months before that. His numbers were already declining and I don't think zizek debate got as much views as the munk debate a year earlier against a blogger and a sociology professor
Click to expand...

Peterson initially declined in my opinion for two reasons, first because he became stale. He had a lot to say, but he was repeating an awful lot of stuff all the time. Not necessarily an issue, but there is only so many times one can listen to a man repeat himself before you stop listening.

Second, the fame got to his head. I remember watching his Biblical analysis where he would go on stage and speak about the Bible for hours and people would clap. However, it was just guff, stream of consciousness nonsense. Sam Harris pointed this out in their debate, and it's true - his interpretation is just that, interpretation. Ironically, Peterson warned - quite rightly - about how speakers and crowds interact. The speaker excites the crowd and visa versa and this is like a self-confirmatory feedback loop. Peterson liked people to clap for him, and all he had to do was open his mouth and people would clap - so eventually he would just saying anything for his little dopamine hit.

As a result the quality of what he put out declined. His lecture series, prior to going viral, is less flashy but the content is more interesting and grounded. He's not wandering about waving his arms giving a show, it's just a camera in his face and slides.

Obviously, the collapse came with the Benzos, and who knows whether this story about "paradoxical addiction" is true or an attempt to save face.

That said I do like Peterson, but he would have been much better served if he didn't blow up the way he did.
 
Last edited:
GedsForth said:
Considering Peterson's mediocre record on free speech (the Faith Goldy incident; he rose to fame protesting compelled speech, not free speech) vs. Chomsky's strong record (the Faurisson affair) that analogy is perfect.

I often forget that Peterson is mostly known for his self-help stuff, I only ever knew him for his political relevance.
Click to expand...

Not too mention Jordan did several interviews with ''the rebel'' and Gavin McInnes.
 
Sweetpeaa said:
Not too mention Jordan did several interviews with ''the rebel'' and Gavin McInnes.
Click to expand...
I know you're just interested in fighting for the canadian left wing, but talking with journalist, whatever your thoughts on their quality, is generally a sign of pro free speech rather than the reverse.
 
BurningPewter said:
I am not a follower of JP's, but I have friends who have fallen under his spell, and I feel like the "it's just banal regular self-help advice" misses the mark. From what little I have heard from youtube clips and friend's descriptions, JP's advice is Jungian and "Mythical" and "makes you feel like you're the hero in a fantasy story", as someone on reddit put it. I feel like a dismissal of "he's just a regular self help guru like Dr Phil" doesn't deal with how good his ...mindset/advice is ...at fascinating people and pulling them under his spell.
I mean, most regular self help stuff - "7 habits", "Power of now", "Secret of positive thinking" etc, isn't Jungian - and Jungian stuff does have a hold on people, I've read people who follow it like a religion even before JP became famous.
Click to expand...
JP's Jung spergery and any given reaction to it is actually a pretty useful indicator for who may have read 12 rules and thought it had some good points, and who are the autistic essayists who form his cult.
 
Lemmingwise said:
I know you're just interested in fighting for the canadian left wing, but talking with journalist, whatever your thoughts on their quality, is generally a sign of pro free speech rather than the reverse.
Click to expand...

The rebel was almost a parody in its early beginnings, it was ever to be take seriously. Sun news and Michael Coren were fine.
 
ditto said:
Is there anyone Zizek doesn't loathe?
Click to expand...

I think to not be loathed by him you need to be a person who dedicates his life to the pursuit of knowledge, not interested at all in monetary pursuits and with a predilection for banging 20 year old students. He'll give you a pass if you are like that, and probably will buy you a hotdog.
 
Deathfromabove said:
Not really interested in Petersons philosophy or book shilling just want to know why he of all people had such a strong internet push-back. I haven't seen him touch "scary" topics like race with a ten foot pool and when it does come it he pushes the same egalitarian stuff the left does. And I mean the people who have a problem with his teachings not his lolcow shit.
Click to expand...
If i had to guess i'd say most people saw him as an easy target.... which he would be if it wasnt for his ability to form parasocial relationships
 
Given how quickly Peterson shut down his speech generator (pussy) I doubt that the estate would allow a publication that wasn't written by him. And it does have the Petersonian arrogance to match.

Beyond that, two things. One, I have zero simpaties for researchers who in this current climate don't cover their asses and play the political game. Second, this is just my observation but Hudlicky (lmao, hud-licky) looks like a complete kiddy diddler with that pedo moustache and creepy stare.

TomAS.png TOMAS2.png
 
Justtocheck said:
Given how quickly Peterson shut down his speech generator (pussy) I doubt that the estate would allow a publication that wasn't written by him. And it does have the Petersonian arrogance to match.

Beyond that, two things. One, I have zero simpaties for researchers who in this current climate don't cover their asses and play the political game. Second, this is just my observation but Hudlicky (lmao, hud-licky) looks like a complete kiddy diddler with that pedo moustache and creepy stare.

View attachment 1405743View attachment 1405744
Click to expand...
He looks like the creepy lovechild of Neil Breen and Edward James Olmos.
 
Lemmingwise said:
It reads like he writes. Particularly that "I should be gloating, but I'm more responsible than that" is typical Peterson.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree. Peterson's normally a clear writer (at least when he's writing for a popular audience; I have not read Maps of Meaning), and this is just a wordy, overstuffed mess. I mean, my fucking god, look at this sentence (hell; look at any of them):
The first story emerges at Brock University, in cahoots with the scientific journal Angewandte Chemie — the former an educational institution of moderate reputability; the latter a prestigious place of scientific publication among chemists.
Click to expand...

I cringed hardest at "a prestigious place of scientific publication among chemists." That's just weird. Like, ESL-tier weird. Why not, "a prestigious journal of the chemical sciences?" And "moderate reputability" instead of "moderate repute"? Seriously, the whole sentence is just a mess from stem to stern, and it's not just that one sentence. I C&Ped it as an example specifically because it represents the point in the article when I first thought, "This doesn't read like anything I've ever read by Peterson. Did he even write this?" But I could have grabbed plenty of other strangely-worded, over-wrought sentences out of it to illustrate my point.

Reading this without knowing anything about the author, I would guess that the writer was either well-educated, but had learned English as a second language; or was an undergrad trying to show off. And the whole damned article is like this.

So I cannot help but think that either somebody else wrote it, or his brain damage has seriously fucked his ability to communicate clearly and concisely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom