I thought you were familiar enough with JP to know when I'm misrepresenting him? It's in his book. Read it, don't read it, just drop the claim to expertise. — Kenosha Kid
I just did. Are you claiming he didn't say: — Kenosha Kid
The point is that you're exhibiting a pattern of behaviour at losing your shit when a prejudiced person is called out on their prejudice then having to back down when you can't justify yourself. — Kenosha Kid
I don't know the context, who are "these" suburban housewives, — Judaka
As for the idea of equality between women and men, JP is not on board:
"it’s so whiny, it’s just enough to drive a modern person mad to listen to these suburban housewives from the late ’50s ensconced in their comfortable secure lives complaining about the fact that they’re bored because they don’t have enough opportunity. It’s like, Jesus get a hobby. For Christ’s sake." — Kenosha Kid
I don't know the context, who are "these" suburban housewives, I imagine he's talking about a small number of people, perhaps even as small as 3-4, who he actually listened to. — Judaka
This quote seems to be from here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html
The same article which states your same misinterpretation of what enforced monogamy is, right? — Judaka
You said you could justify your comments about JP being sexist and what do you give me? Misinterpretations, a quote about the reliability of a rape accusation and an out of context quote that means shit all. — Judaka
JP is evidently overtly sexist, i.e. a non-sexist person could not have said the things he said and meant them. — Kenosha Kid
How he meant them? What a horrible joke, you mean the hysterical performance of how you interpreted quotes with no context and a clear misunderstanding of what he meant by enforced monogamy? — Judaka
His view of relationships is in terms of utility *for* men, such as his bizarre notions of enforced monogamy to make teenaged boys less likely to shoot up their own school. Don't fancy that socially awkward, aggressive, racist guy in your class? Tough shit, JP says women should arrange themselves to benefit men so that men don't have to control themselves. — Kenosha Kid
Here you're claiming to be very familiar with JP's words so no such out. It is reasonable to assume that you're familiar with the kind of stuff I've mentioned and you defend his patriarchal, non-egalitarian, rape-dismissive, incel-esque views as perfectly fine and not deserving of the label 'sexist'. — Kenosha Kid
He was talking about a survey of university-educated women in the '50s, most of whom espoused that sentiment. JP believes, as counterpunch clearly believes, that these women had no right to complain: men say it is good enough for them, therefore they should too. That is oppression. — Kenosha Kid
When I say it's not good enough, you say that just shows how lousy my character is. — Judaka
If you want to appear very profound and convince people to take you seriously, but have nothing of value to say, there is a tried and tested method. First, take some extremely obvious platitude or truism. Make sure it actually does contain some insight, though it can be rather vague. Something like “if you’re too conciliatory, you will sometimes get taken advantage of” or “many moral values are similar across human societies.” Then, try to restate your platitude using as many words as possible, as unintelligibly as possible, while never repeating yourself exactly. Use highly technical language drawn from many different academic disciplines, so that no one person will ever have adequate training to fully evaluate your work. Construct elaborate theories with many parts. Draw diagrams. Use italics liberally to indicate that you are using words in a highly specific and idiosyncratic sense. Never say anything too specific, and if you do, qualify it heavily so that you can always insist you meant the opposite. Then evangelize: speak as confidently as possible, as if you are sharing God’s own truth. Accept no criticisms: insist that any skeptic has either misinterpreted you or has actually already admitted that you are correct. Talk as much as possible and listen as little as possible. Follow these steps, and your success will be assured. (It does help if you are male and Caucasian.) —
I hope that in the sober light of day you reread your post with the word "hysterical" in mind, both in terms of how often you use it, and in terms of the pitch of your post. — Kenosha Kid
What had been drapetomania became depression. ... Modern man runs away from a life that seems to him a kind of slavery.
Thomas Szasz, "The Sane Slave: Social Control and Legal Psychiatry," American Criminal Law Review, vol. 10 (1971), p. 346 — wiki
Madness is necessarily social, and necessarily delegitimising. — unenlightened
The problem with politically correct lefty keyboard warriors; apart from their overwhelming ignorance — counterpunch
alternative (equally scientific) positions — Isaac
The problem with politically correct lefty keyboard warriors; apart from their overwhelming ignorance, is their overwhelming ignorance of the implications for society - of their supposed moral goods. — counterpunch
it ended with me apparently representing him correctly and just being wrong for disagreeing. — Kenosha Kid
That's a very shallow cover for an ad hominem attack. — counterpunch
I haven't read everything, but I have read extensively. It's always open to you to cite your hypothetical:
alternative (equally scientific) positions — counterpunch
You really don't think there's even so much as an active debate among scientists about the positions you espouse as 'scientific'. — Isaac
I'm saying that left wing politically correct positions are adopted for the purposes of causing disruption — counterpunch
Yeah right. Because the 34 murders, including 8 children and 266+ of suicides in just one year* directly linked with schizophrenia, even with a strong psychiatric profession, were just them expressing their legitimate difference of opinion about who was and was not a demon/devil/whatever. How repressive of us to try and convince them otherwise. — Isaac
Is the argument that if I am critical of psychiatry, I must be in favour of murder and suicide? — unenlightened
necessarily social, and necessarily delegitimising. — unenlightened
Peterson came to public attention because he refused to use politically correct gender pronouns; and I think that is key to understanding who he is, and why he's so popular. — counterpunch
Exactly. He's great at exploiting "outrage" manufactured by the media — Xtrix
mainly conservative media — Xtrix
Gives the right an "intellectual" — Xtrix
conservative political persuasion have come to largely dismiss or reject: academia and science — Xtrix
Is the argument that if I am critical of psychiatry, I must be in favour of murder and suicide?
— unenlightened
Yes, that's basically it. If you see madness as
necessarily social, and necessarily delegitimising.
— unenlightened
...then you get an increase in murder and suicide. — Isaac
mainly conservative media
— Xtrix
I disagree. It's lefty media who are outraged by him. See Cathy Newman. — counterpunch
This is predictable. Try to get beyond this thinking of "left" and "right." That's reducing things to the level of sports teams. — Xtrix
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.