• Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s a good article. I’ll admit that Jordan Peterson is a good psychologist and knows many words and stories, he can make many people feel smart or dumb through his incantations of nonsense. But that’s it, all the rest of it is bunk.

      His essays read like an anthology of writings someone made to finish a book report due tomorrow, after not sleeping for 3 days yet somehow feeling wide awake from the crazed panic.

      Also see this screenshot on Firefox Mobile (Est. reading time 63 - 81min). Readers will be well-advised to skim over the copious amount of Jordan Peterson excerpts. Lol.

    • lowleveldata@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Reading 12 Rules for Life recently and I’d agree that Jordan Peterson is not a good writer that he uses too much words for the ideas he’s trying to say. He’s also too religious for my taste. However it’s a exaggeration that “he has almost nothing of value to say”. There are some insights of value if you skim through his words and it appears to me that he genuinely meant good for the advice he gives. I think he just needs a better editor.

      • yata@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        You haven’t read the linked article, because the author does adress this. They point out that Peterson specifically does hide obvious and banal ideas in his sentences, so that when people finally find some blatant truths in his word salad, it makes it seem like the ideas are much more profound than the platitudes they actually are.

        Here is a quote from the article:

        The inflating of the obvious into the awe-inspiring is part of why Peterson can operate so successfully in the “self-help” genre. He can give people the most elementary fatherly life-advice (clean your room, stand up straight) while making it sound like Wisdom.

        And remember the author actually shows this with numerous in-depth examples from Peterson’s writings. A better editor would do nothing, because Peterson writes like that with intent, the intent being to disguise what a cultish hack he is.

        • lowleveldata@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I read the article and I agreed that Jordan Peterson used too much words as I said. I just don’t agree that “he has almost nothing of value to say” as I said.

          • JTode@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point that is being made, though, is that those things that do have value that exist in his writing, did not originate from him and are available elsewhere to the point of ubiquity. If you only heard about them from him, you should read more.

            • lowleveldata@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why does it matter if it’s “available” elsewhere? Do you complain when a restaurant provides food that is available elsewhere?

              • JTode@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I do my best, when I see an intellectual huckster, to point at it and call it what it is.

                Those who are taken in by hucksters have a tendency to dig in about it, and that’s not my business.

  • Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    If we all followed the teachings of jordan peterson we would be living in a world perfectly suited to jordan peterson. I would sooner live in a world which made jordan peterson suicidal.

    • Tired8281@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d prefer a world where he learned a trade, and spent his life building affordable housing and never considered teaching anyone anything.

  • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    My favourite Jordan Peterson story is how he got himself addicted to benzodiazepines and then felt he knew better than all of western science so he flew over to Russia to be put into a medically induced coma to overcome withdrawals since it was “too hard on him”

    Unsurprisingly, the procedure had many complications and left him requiring extra medical attention for him to recover from the procedure.

    Wonder if he ever kicked his benzo habit…

    • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      My favorite is when someone asked him “Do you believe in God” and he was caught between his reputation as an “intellectual” and the fact that the apes he grifts are gonna hoot extra loud and fling extra poo if he says no. Recognizing that he was between a rock and a hard place, he gave one of the most amusing non-responses I’ve ever heard in my life. What he said was, from memory, “That depends on what you mean by ‘do’, ‘you’, ‘believe’ and ‘God’.” He then blathered on for a minute about how he thinks of God as a symbol for the human capacity for goodness and he believes in that, and no one asked why the symbol for the human capacity for goodness hates trans people and needs money, so everyone left satisfied.

      • PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        He’s an “intellectual” to idiots and a moron to anyone with some critical thinking capacity

        • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          He’s the perfect post-modern intellectual, which is rather funny when you consider how anti-postmodernism he is. He’s a media image of an intellectual, all big words and expensive suits, but his big words don’t really mean anything. The fucking “chaos dragon of feminity” is a hilariously stupid concept that rivals the shit Freud came up with when the cocaine was extra pure, but they eat it up. He and the rest of the so-called “intellectual dark web” provide a thin veneer of logic and rationality to the visceral hate that the alt right runs on, and it makes sense to people who really want and need it to make sense. He gives people the ability to be led around by their emotions and still feel like not only are they not being ruled by fear, but that they’re actually on a level above everyone who doesn’t accept the “cold hard truth” that we all need to be racist, homophobic, xenophobic and basically terrified all of the time.

      • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Realising how precarious a pedestal the far right built him would be a rare moment of self awareness. He’s B-grade meat to them, so they’d Milo him in a heartbeat.

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      You forgot the best part. Before doing that he was (and probably still is) against medicating yourself out of addictions because it’s the “easy way out”. His entire shtick is about the right way of living and then he acts contrarily to his own teachings.

  • TWeaK@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Freedom of speech is between a person and a government, not between a person and a private club they pay yearly dues to be a member of.

    The confusion is that in the US the professional organisations are a part of the government. In Canada, the government gives authority to private groups to manage themselves, and they basically get to be in charge of a job title. Jordan Peterson doesn’t practise psychology anymore and hasn’t for nearly a decade.

    Yet he’s kept his professional membership going. This way, he can say “As a psychologist, I think [some bullshit about something that has nothing to do with psychology].” This is more than enough for the College to properly reprimand him, as he’s bringing the entire profession into disrepute - but they didn’t even do that, they just asked him to attend a couple courses.

    He could always quit the profession. He’d still have all the qualifications and accomplishments, he’d just have to talk about it in the past tense, ie when he was actually relevant.

    • Dienervent@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Good article?

      The comments that formed the basis of the complaints against Dr. Peterson included comments on a podcast in which he commented on air pollution and child deaths by saying “it’s just poor children…”

      This quote is the most disgusting out of context character assassination I’ve seen in a long time.

      I got suspicious because while Jordan does say things that women and/or trans people often find deplorable. I know that he’s a strong supporter of the poor (at least in rhetoric) and as a family man I assume of children as well.

      The full context can be found on Spotify. Episode #1769 of “The Joe Rogan Experience” start from about 15:30. He’s the one that brings up how 7 million poor children die from indoor particulate pollution. Joe doesn’t believe him and gets a fact check, which eventually leads to Jordan sarcastically saying “Well, it’s just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyway…”

      It’s such an insane mischaracterization of what he said, you can’t take the article seriously. Probably would have to write off the entire website that article is from, honestly.

        • nicktron@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, he’s being downvoted because he’s adjacently defending JP. If you don’t know how JP is human garbage at this point, and you’re willing to come to articles to defend him, you’re a fan. And therefore, a twat.

          Edit: yes the article is BS but that doesn’t change what he’s selling.

          • Nelots@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            What the hell were they supposed to say? Should they have agreed that the article was good just because JP is a PoS? Despite the clear and disgusting BS inside it? Is that really what you want?

            Misinformation is misinformation and needs to be cleared up, no matter who the target is.

            • Dienervent@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t know how to reach these people or whether they’re reachable at all. Yes, my main motivation by a very long shot was to correct absurd levels of misinformation in a community where I believe most members care about not spreading misinformation.

              What worries me is that so many people seem to be living in an echo bubble that’s radicalizing them to hate people they shouldn’t be hating.

              So yes, there’s a lot of not so great things about Jordan Peterson. But all things considered he’s not that bad. And I haven’t paid attention closely for the last few years, but I wouldn’t be characterizing him as a piece of shit.

              The author of the article is a worse piece of shit than Jordan Peterson. People who seem to take pleasure out of Jordan’s suffering due to his Benzodiazepine addiction are even worse.

              But, looking at some of Jordan’s twitter comment, he’s definitely a bit of an asshole. But 95% of people seem to be assholes when they go on twitter.

              The only really bad thing about him is his political views. But even there, there seems to be less malice and less self serving talk than most right wingers (other than the apparent or effective grifting). But even the grifting, in my opinion, is not as bad as most people (both on the left and on the right). Still, right wing ideology is a very problematic from a liberal perspective (which is my perspective). But at the same time today’s mainstream and increasingly radical left ideology is also problematic from a liberal perspective. Regardless, I still don’t think that someone’s anti-liberal social views necessarily makes them a piece of shit regardless of if they’re on the left or on the right. But it does make it easy to become one.

      • JTode@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is why I’ve kinda stopped consuming other people’s political writing, and only shitcomment about it. People of all stripes cannot resist the urge to make the story just a liiiiiitle better.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        he’s a strong supporter of the poor (at least in rhetoric)

        “Well, it’s just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyway…”

        Never mind how laughable that first quote is, it is inherently incompatible with the second, since the entire Malthusian myth is based in classist eugenics

        https://usfblogs.usfca.edu/sustainability/2023/04/20/overconsumption-not-overpopulation-debunking-the-overpopulation-myth-and-eco-fascism/

        https://www.theworldmind.org/home/2021/12/10/the-dangerous-myth-of-overpopulation

        https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/blog/2019/03/how-racist-myths-built-population-growth-bogey-man/

        Imagine still jumping to the defence of this bigoted useless grifter… 🤦‍♀️😂

  • fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    …being subject to a code of ethics or having to be more responsible and thoughtful in how one expresses oneself in public forums is part of the package one accepts in exchange for the privilege and benefits that come with being a licensed professional”.

    Indeed. If Mr Peterson wants to present as a practitioner of a regulated profession, they have to follow the rules. They are not owed a right to practice, they are given a privilege to practice.

  • bloopernova@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What is it with those guys and insultingly weak legal arguments?

    “I was off duty as a psychologist when I made public statements”.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It pained me to discover that my brother liked one of his books in 2020. I’m very careful to not stress our relationship because he’s otherwise a decent person. I shudder to think what other content he might expose himself to over time and what that will mean for our relationship.

    • karlhungus@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I read one of his books before i knew who he was, and found although the advice was mostly common sense (if a bit context free) advice, followed by long rants about traditional family’s, and backed up by bible. I found myself thinking “what about behaviourism research?”, you know there has been progress in the last 100 years. I’m ashamed that the traditional family shit didn’t tip me off.

      I’ve found him come up in my google feeds often too, It’s insidious.

      In terms of convincing your brother about how off this guy is, generally there are how to approach things on line (i.e. you can’t always take a logical approach). I’ve also encountered this kind of thing in my extended family, I’ve got distant aunts that likely voted for trump, and they are otherwise decent people (i.e. not racist, and supportive).

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nobody is forcing him to be a member of the profession – to paraphrase one of his tweets that was complained about “You’re free to leave [the profession] at any point.”

    Jordan Peterson really is free to leave the profession - he doesn’t need the money. Meanwhile a psychologist who isn’t independently wealthy can’t express controversial opinions without risking his livelihood. I don’t think “only the rich can exercise freedom of speech” is good policy.

    • mrbubblesort@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meanwhile a psychologist who isn’t independently wealthy can’t express controversial opinions without risking his livelihood

      Oh fuck off with that. The opinion he expressed was, and I quote, (about child deaths) “it’s just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyways”. A licensed medical professional should never say something like that, period, even in jest.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t know the context for that quote and I don’t think it’s particularly relevant to my argument. Even if we assume the worst possible interpretation, H.L. Mencken still said it best:

        The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.

        • escapesamsara@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re right, that’s why I support genocide. There are too many oppressive laws aimed at oppressing the rights of fascists, or as I’ve taken to calling them, people with genocidal thoughts they’d like to turn into actions. You can’t start oppressing them, otherwise someone could use those laws to oppress me!

      • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Copy and paste of another user’s comment:

        Good article?

        The comments that formed the basis of the complaints against Dr. Peterson included comments on a podcast in which he commented on air pollution and child deaths by saying “it’s just poor children…”

        This quote is the most disgusting out of context character assassination I’ve seen in a long time.

        I got suspicious because while Jordan does say things that women and/or trans people often find deplorable. I know that he’s a strong supporter of the poor (at least in rhetoric) and as a family man I assume of children as well.

        The full context can be found on Spotify. Episode #1769 of “The Joe Rogan Experience” start from about 15:30. He’s the one that brings up how 7 million poor children die from indoor particulate pollution. Joe doesn’t believe him and gets a fact check, which eventually leads to Jordan sarcastically saying “Well, it’s just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyway…”

        It’s such an insane mischaracterization of what he said, you can’t take the article seriously. Probably would have to write off the entire website that article is from, honestly.

    • mycatiskai@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      He isn’t free to leave the profession because part of his con is that he is using his professional status when he writes something or says something as a psychologist.

      His worth as a propagandist is that he can attach that professional status to his messages, if it’s “disgraced” psychologist, or “struck off” psychologist then it has less impact because he has been found to have broken his professional conduct to the point where he lost the title.

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I think there are plenty of people who aren’t already Jordan Peterson’s fans but wouldn’t want to be forced out of their profession for something they said outside of work. His fight will appeal to them whether or not he wins in court.

            • escapesamsara@discuss.online
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Which means they don’t understand the situation and never will. This is not ‘forced out of their profession for something they said outside of work,’ this is ‘an electrician declaring electricity doesn’t exist and encouraging people to cut down power lines.’ This is not ‘oh no he said he likes pizza rolls instead of pizza,’ this is ‘a professional in a field has stopped updating his knowledge in said field and has actively advocated against large parts of his own field based on nothing but his own mental and moral failures.’

              Peterson was free to address his ‘concerns’ in a scientific way, giving him the basis to actually argue his points as valid, if alternative scientific fact. The truth his nothing he has ever stated is scientifically defensible; and when you’re licensed to use science in a way that can help or kill people, you need to stay up to date with the science and only use the most up-to-date peer reviewed science.

              He is free to speak however he likes, he is free to get almost any profession he likes and speak how he likes, he can’t essentially go against 70 years of scientific advancement because he wants to make money on the side catering to people with 1860s beliefs on science.

  • gascown@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Freedom of speech goes to die in favour of the rainbowtards. America as a continent deserves annihilation before this fascism disguised as libertarianism spreads to better places.

  • Aux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Freedom of speech IS a freedom from consequences. Sadly most people using freedom of speech term today don’t understand that it doesn’t apply to the context of the discussion. The whole article is just complete nonsense.

    • grte@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The idea that you can say reprehensible things then have your rights violated because others don’t want to associate with you anymore is the complete nonsense. Further, Canada doesn’t go by ‘freedom of speech’, it goes by freedom of expression.

        • grte@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, I very much do. You don’t seem to understand the laws of the country involved, though.

            • grte@lemmy.caOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That principle being, in your opinion, “I can say whatever I want and you have to associate with me?” I suggest you do some more studying.

              Also, freedom of speech doesn’t exist in Canadian law, so I guess not.

              • Aux@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                What are you even talking about? Once again, you just don’t understand freedom of speech. Just like most people.