Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

by Guest Thu Mar 22, 2018 8:44 pm

The New York Review of Books sneered at him, but he’s for real. To have David Brooks and the Trumpists in his corner, he has to be.

In the last year, or so, Jordan Peterson, the University of Toronto clinical psychologist turned internet sensation, has emerged as arguably the most important intellectual figure on the right today.
His new book, 12 Rules for Life, is No. 1 on Amazon. New York Timescolumnist David Brooks has called this “The Jordan Peterson moment,” and The Atlantic’s Conor Friedersdorf has puzzled over why liberal interviewers don’t seem to hear what he is saying.

As you might expect, controversy has followed, most recently having to do with a negative review about his book. In response to a New York Review of Books essay by the Indian novelist and essayist Pankaj Mishra titled, “Jordan Peterson & Fascist Mysticism,” Peterson tweeted at Mishra: “And you call me a fascist? You sanctimonious prick. If you were in my room at the moment, I’d slap you happily.”

Not since William Buckley threatened Gore Vidal has intellectual pugilism been so accessible to the masses.
Peterson doesn’t mind honest criticism of his book, but this was a bit much. Aside from calling Peterson a fascist, Mishra wrote about Peterson’s friendship with a Native American on Vancouver Island, saying that Peterson was “pretentiously but harmlessly romancing the noble savage.”

“To me, that just crossed the line,” Peterson said. “I’ve been helping [his Native American friend] develop his artistic career… for 15 years. I thought that was a really dirty blow, and I also thought it was racist.”

Still, should Peterson have pushed back so hard? Twitter “rewards impulsivity,” Peterson concedes, “but he went somewhere that I don’t think it was acceptable to go… I think if a conservative writer had said what he said, they would have been absolutely taken apart.”

Fair enough. But it’s also interesting that Peterson got away with calling someone a “sanctimonious prick.” He wasn’t “taken apart” for saying that. When Jordan Peterson calls someone a “sanctimonious prick,” I tend to believe him. If Sean Hannity said that about someone, I wouldn’t buy it.

In a world where the right is coming apart, Peterson bridges divides. His fans on the right are a disparate and motley crew. He can have David Brooks sing his praises, but a lot of Trump supporters treat him with equal reverence.

Although Peterson has emerged as one of the most important thinkers on the right, the fact that he hails from Canada, plus the fact that focuses primarily on hot-button culture-war issues such as the war on men, illiberalism on college campuses, and political correctness run amok, means that he has said surprisingly little about American domestic politics.

So would he have voted for Donald Trump? You might think this question would have elicited a slam dunk “Yes!” coming from a man who has become something of a regular guest on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Tonight.

“Jesus,” says Peterson, “that’s a hard question.”

“I think what I would have done was walk into the voting booth with the intention of voting for Clinton, and then, at the last minute, gone, ‘To hell with it. I’m not doing it,’ and voted for Trump,” he said.
(Listen to streaming audio of my full 47-minute conversation with Jordan Peterson or download the podcast on iTunes.)

Like many on the right, this is a question he struggles with.

“For the entire election, virtually, I thought, well, Clinton has the experience necessary to at least keep the status quo in motion. So, in some sense, she was a conservative choice,” he continued. “Because she’d been in politics so long.”

Ultimately, though, Peterson became concerned about Clinton’s ideological direction. Likewise, he believes that Americans concluded they liked “the unscripted, impulsive lies of Trump better than the conniving, scripted lies of Clinton.”

“I think I would have impulsively voted for Trump at the last moment,” Peterson concedes. “But it wouldn’t have been with a sense of delight—I can tell you that.”

This was an academic exercise for a Canadian, but the fact that he reasoned through this hypothetical question, and answered with a sort of intellectual honesty is why Jordan Peterson matters—and why economics professor Tyler Cowen says he’s our most influential public intellectual (even if he doesn’t know it yet).

The smart answer for a guy pandering to the Fox News crowd would be to praise Trump. The smart answer for a professor trying to win friends in academia would be to praise Clinton. But Peterson did neither: He thought about it. And his nuanced answer is the kind that we don’t see enough from political commentators these days.

Unlike the recent slew of rising star right-wing politicians and pundits who predictably let us down by playing to the lowest common denominator, don’t expect Peterson, a 55-year-old professor turned “overnight” internet sensation, to fall prey to the same temptations.

In a world where the most talked about conservative celebrities tend to come from the anti-intellectual fever swamps (or pretend to), Peterson has emerged as a bit of a unicorn: a bona fide academic who still sounds like a professor, has cultivated a huge following on YouTube and social media, and generally drives the left crazy by attacking identity politics and political correctness in eloquent fashion.

For what it’s worth, Peterson doesn’t see himself as a conservative, so much as a “terrified traditionalist” who generally believes in exercising caution over endorsing sweeping or radical cultural changes.

He is an academic. He sounds like an academic. He isn’t abandoning his academic credentials.

Not since Buckley has the right boasted such firepower. It’s no wonder people are so mad.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/yes-jordan-peterson-really-is-that-smart?ref=home

by veya_victaous Fri Mar 23, 2018 3:00 am

You might be asking: Why young men though? Why aren’t young women flocking to him to the same degree as young men?

Well, he attracts a lot of young men on the peripheries of society. Young men who aren’t particularly successful and spend a lot of time on the internet, but have been told they’re the beneficiaries of an oppressive patriarchal system which bestows upon them “male privilege” — their ticket to success that somehow isn’t working.

“We’re so stupid. We’re alienating young men. We’re telling them they’re patriarchal oppressors, denizens of rape culture and tyrants-in-waiting. It’s awful … It makes me sad, deeply,” he said in an interview with the BBC.

Dr Peterson treats young men like individuals. He recognises that life is difficult and depressing for everyone. He acknowledges their emotional struggles when a lot of people don’t and he’s providing them with a solution. He doesn’t talk down to them. And he doesn’t lecture them about any advantages they may hold.

Unlike young women, young men rarely confide emotionally in their friends. Instead, they quietly look to mentors and authority figures. And they’ve found one in Dr Peterson, whose essentially just providing the emotional support to young men that young women have always provided each other.

While young women were taking care of each other, encouraged and inspired by their feminist sisterhood, lost and isolated young men had nothing — despite being told they had everything. Well now they have Jordan Peterson.

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/mind/jordan-peterson-is-preaching-to-a-generation-desperate-to-grow-up/news-story/c1996c25c093450c7aad68000f9d0101

Cause You still need Brains and skills,
and the Confidence to be the Beast, the Tyrant and oppressor.

by Guest Fri Mar 23, 2018 6:40 am

veya_victaous wrote:
You might be asking: Why young men though? Why aren’t young women flocking to him to the same degree as young men?

Well, he attracts a lot of young men on the peripheries of society. Young men who aren’t particularly successful and spend a lot of time on the internet, but have been told they’re the beneficiaries of an oppressive patriarchal system which bestows upon them “male privilege” — their ticket to success that somehow isn’t working.

“We’re so stupid. We’re alienating young men. We’re telling them they’re patriarchal oppressors, denizens of rape culture and tyrants-in-waiting. It’s awful … It makes me sad, deeply,” he said in an interview with the BBC.

Dr Peterson treats young men like individuals. He recognises that life is difficult and depressing for everyone. He acknowledges their emotional struggles when a lot of people don’t and he’s providing them with a solution. He doesn’t talk down to them. And he doesn’t lecture them about any advantages they may hold.

Unlike young women, young men rarely confide emotionally in their friends. Instead, they quietly look to mentors and authority figures. And they’ve found one in Dr Peterson, whose essentially just providing the emotional support to young men that young women have always provided each other.

While young women were taking care of each other, encouraged and inspired by their feminist sisterhood, lost and isolated young men had nothing — despite being told they had everything. Well now they have Jordan Peterson.

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/mind/jordan-peterson-is-preaching-to-a-generation-desperate-to-grow-up/news-story/c1996c25c093450c7aad68000f9d0101

Cause You still need Brains and skills,
and the Confidence to be the Beast, the Tyrant and oppressor.

That is an opinion peice, just like mine, which mine of from a left wing media source

He would wipe the floor of your views

Care to try?

Write to him, he is easily contactable

The man is often labelled wrong, by critics, who cannot challenge him

Just as you are doing now

by veya_victaous Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:07 am

news.com.au is a Murdoch owned website

I have seen him he is just a demagogue attracting weak men, nothing to see here

He is right men don't get the automatic leg up like they used to, leaving the weak disenfranchised

But what he doesn't tell his followers is that's they way it should be because men are not women, back in the caveman it was the same, females gossiped and worried about internal social status while picking berries, While men gained social status through action and success. the dispossessed young men that seek comfort from him are simply the weak hunters those that relied on relied on status award for nothing more than having a dick

He can't wipe the floor with my views since they are the same but unlike him I don't think it is wrong, I say we can make it harder still and it will be ok, it was harder than this for blacks and women in the past.

The very reason men like you seek him out is the same reason why I ignore him , He like you is a terrified traditionalist or regressive for a term of the same meaning. I am a tyrannical progressive so I will proceed to drive social change of my own accord.

by Guest Sun Mar 25, 2018 2:28 am

veya_victaous wrote:news.com.au is a Murdoch owned website

I have seen him he is just a demagogue attracting weak men, nothing to see here

He is right men don't get the automatic leg up like they used to, leaving the weak disenfranchised

But what he doesn't tell his followers is that's they way it should be because men are not women, back in the caveman it was the same, females gossiped and worried about internal social status while picking berries, While men gained social status through action and success. the dispossessed young men that seek comfort from him are simply the weak hunters those that relied on relied on status award for nothing more than having a dick

He can't wipe the floor with my views since they are the same but unlike him I don't think it is wrong, I say we can make it harder still and it will be ok, it was harder than this for blacks and women in the past.

The very reason men like you seek him out is the same reason why I ignore him , He like you is a terrified traditionalist or regressive for a term of the same meaning. I am a tyrannical progressive so I will proceed to drive social change of my own accord.

Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart 3489511464

The above shows you do not know the first thing about the man

This is all the left can ever do, they dont actually take on his views and points, they seek to deligitimize, based off groundless accusations

I do not seek him, I just am interested in views and reasons he makes. There are things I certainly do not agree with him, but that does not lead me to the absurd conclusion you make above

I mean how many of his lectures have you watched and listened to?

The answer would be none, espcially with the load of crap you just posted

by veya_victaous Sun Mar 25, 2018 6:27 am

For what it’s worth, Peterson doesn’t see himself as a conservative, so much as a “terrified traditionalist” who generally believes in exercising caution over endorsing sweeping or radical cultural changes.

A quote from YOUR op.

What more do i need to add?
I agree, weak men like you are worse off, but that is no reason to 'exercise caution' when it comes to progress, to also quote him 'get a thicker skin' and to add my own 'grow a set of Balls' so you don't get so terrified of change. What are you lot going to do in the next 10 to 20 years when AI comes to Fruition?

and Typical Didge Hypocrisy Attack me like you claim i am attacking him even though I agreed with him Razz

Can you Address any of the points I made?

I already know the answer is, No.

by Guest Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:03 am

veya_victaous wrote:
For what it’s worth, Peterson doesn’t see himself as a conservative, so much as a “terrified traditionalist” who generally believes in exercising caution over endorsing sweeping or radical cultural changes.

A quote from YOUR op.

What more do i need to add?
I agree, weak men like you are worse off, but that is no reason to 'exercise caution' when it comes to progress, to also quote him 'get a thicker skin' and to add my own 'grow a set of Balls' so you don't get so terrified of change. What are you lot going to do in the next 10 to 20 years when AI comes to Fruition?

and Typical Didge Hypocrisy Attack me like you claim i am attacking him even though I agreed with him
Can you Address any of the points I made?

I already know the answer is, No.

PMSL, so again with the pathetic ad hominem attacks

What does the above statement prove? Its the views of the writer and have never denied that he is a Liberal conservative. Where and lets make sure you understand this, I do not share all his views. I certainly agree on a number, which I am happy to discuss. Still waiting for you to actually speak on them

Sorry, but not only is this more about what you think of people. It fails to tackle any views he does actually hold.

I mean you claim I seek him out and that is not why I listen and read what people think. Its because i critically look at all views, unlike yourself. Its why I have changed views over time

What points did you make that were actually about his many views?

I have never been petrified of change and have in fact argued the opposite and that how people are gernally cuturally pessimistic. You fall under this category, when you deny progress for indegenious Australians through self determination and even more insultingly, think you speak for them. When you do not. I am for progression, but against SJW's forcing people to do things against their will, which is what most social justice warriors do.

If you want to think of me as weak, I am sure this plays into your sexual fantasies, all hard behind your PC lol

Be my guest on that. Laughing

People did not even seek him out in many cases, it was regressives like you kicking up a stink about him, that brought him to the media attention. You see the regressives are in a spin what to do with him. As everytime they protest him, they end up helping him garner more people listening to him.

In other words its backffiring on them, mainly due to the fact. They continue to do what you are doing. Not actually speaking about his many views

Like I said, its clear you have not listened to any of his lectures

Now my little princess, lets see if you do want to engage his many views.

Do you agree with his stance on people being forced to say pronouns?

Lets see if you misread what he has said or actually get this right

by veya_victaous Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:33 am

typical Dodgy didge
Now can you address any of the points?

Your the one that launched ad-hominem attacks
I just posted a counter article and added what I know is also required to succeed

I never even heard of him until last week when he was touring Australia Rolling Eyes

And I heard him say the same "he's not a conservative but a terrified Traditionalist" in his interview with Tom Ballard

See IF he had a thicker skin (and a set of balls) he'd have no issue calling people by whatever gender noun they want, It is actually a typical argument from you though 'They did/are it too' . Why would a Strong individual be offended by a thin skinned persons wish to be called what ever? how thin does Peterson's skin have to be for that get under his skin? They have paper thin Skin, So you Behave like you have paper thin skin too.. rather pathetic.

For real insight read early Buddhist Philosophy the first truth is 'life is pain, life is suffering' which is something peterson also says the difference is that Buddha being wiser and smarter than this demagogue made the point that The strong Soul on the path to enlightenment will try and make others lives easier and even if it makes their own harder.

LOL and I am the 'Tyrannical Progressive' FORCING You Terrified Traditionalist Praying for regression to use them Razz

I am What you weaklings Hate, a Successful White man Standing up for for Non-white non-men.

It may backfire it's true, a big enough group of rats can kill a lion. But as lion I can't bring myself to fear the rats, It is just not in my nature, being the beast, the tyrant and oppressor requires thick skin and a hefty set of Balls after all. Razz

by Guest Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:43 am

veya_victaous wrote:typical Dodgy didge
Now can you address any of the points?
Didge wrote: What points? i am still waiting for you to actually make some on his actual views

Your the one that launched ad-hominem attacks
Didge wrote:I think if you look back it was you, making unfounded claims onto me, called me weak willed and a traditionalist. Which the later is comical, considering I support, gay, rights, women rights, gender pay equality etc

I just posted a counter article and added what I know is also required to succeed
Didge wrote:But as seen you do not know much at all and are only going off what two writers think

I never even heard of him until last week when he was touring Australia
And I heard him say the same "he's not a conservative but a terrified Traditionalist" in his interview with Tom Ballard
Didge wrote: Thank you for proving my point. If you only heard of last week, you clearly have no idea on his many views.

See IF he had a thicker skin (and a set of balls) he'd have no issue calling people by whatever gender noun they want, It is actually a typical argument from you though 'They did/are it too' . Why would a Strong individual be offended by a thin skinned persons wish to be called what ever? how thin does Peterson's skin have to be for that get under his skin? They have paper thin Skin, So you Behave like you have paper thin skin too.. rather pathetic.
Didge wrote: I knew you would miss the boat on this. His issue is on the Government enforcing compelled speech. Which is completely ridiculous. He has said if asked he would call people by their preferred gender,
but he would not be forced into this and he is right. If such speech is going to change, it will happen naturally,
as it has over the years, by people taking this up. This is also not coming from all Transexuals, but a minority,
that wants this forced onto people

For real insight read early Buddhist Philosophy the first truth is 'life is pain, life is suffering' which is something peterson also says the difference is that Buddha being wiser and smarter than this demagogue made the point that The strong Soul on the path to enlightenment will try and make others lives easier and even if it makes their own harder.
Didge wrote: I have read and no thanks, I find it tedious, boring and not life changing what so ever

LOL and I am the 'Tyrannical Progressive' FORCING You Terrified Traditionalist Praying for regression to use them
I am What you weaklings Hate, a Successful White man Standing up for for Non-white non-men.
Didge wrote: PMSL, considering I have never feared you and never will, where again you call me a traditionalist, proves what a whackadoodle you are Veya. You have never been able to force me to do anything and as seen most people do not follow such totalitarian views that you hold, because they are Totalitarian,
by forcing. Hence why most people ridicule you regressives

It may backfire it's true, a big enough group of rats can kill a lion. But as lion I can't bring myself to fear the rats, It is just not in my nature, being the beast, the tyrant and oppressor requires thick skin and a hefty set of Balls after all.

A lion?

PMSL, your ego is something to behold, but I see you as a mere rabbit and you certainly do not have thick skin. But you keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better

Cool

by nicko Sun Mar 25, 2018 11:09 am

A Lion?

by Sponsored content

Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

The New York Review of Books sneered at him, but he’s for real. To have David Brooks and the Trumpists in his corner, he has to be.

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart

Re: Yes, Jordan Peterson Really Is That Smart