Author Topic: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] jordan peterson Jordan Peterson JORDAN PETERSON  (Read 36280 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #60 on: February 18, 2018, 10:16:04 PM »
lmao nah.

curly

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #61 on: February 18, 2018, 10:18:02 PM »
like i don't understand what lipstick is for and why women are wearing it except as a tool for attraction, it's certainly not functional

and i would also stipulate that obviously management or men etc. strongly encourage (read: force) women to wear makeup in professional environments (by not acknowledging them or devaluing their opinions when they don't) precisely because those men attribute a lot of a woman's value to her sexual worth.
His claim wasn't that it was merely because of attraction, but because it mimicked what happened when a woman is sexually aroused which implies a causation that isn't scientifically verifiable (like most evopsych theories) and ignores the possibility that it is an aesthetic decision, a way of projecting professionalism, cultural expectation, self-image, etc

Why did men in the 50s pay so much attention to their dress? Was it just because they wanted to bang the secretaries, or were they doing it out of a desire to impress other men? Peterson's argument is so simplistic it collapses immediately.

You don't get to choose how the signals are received. You are not following along. You are not even applying any real world personal experience or else your own experience is completely out of whack with general trends.

Read my other reply. They send sexual signals on a biological level. That doesn't negate their status signal or the person's intent. The point is that you are still replicating sexual displays and that can be recognized by others.

uh no you're not following along? The statement was about why women wear lipstick. I never said it couldn't be interpreted sexually by men. My entire complaint was that he reduces the decision on the women's part to wear lipstick to simply a need to replicate sexual arousal (he literally says that is the purpose of lipstick). Which makes no fucking sense in the workplace! Women in the workplace are probably not trying to come across as in heat!

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #62 on: February 18, 2018, 10:20:09 PM »
Do you know how i know were on completely different pages, because everytime you post that I feel like youre not the one following along.

E: to respond to your edit, then answer why successful and powerful women do not wear makeup the same way. 

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #63 on: February 18, 2018, 10:26:52 PM »
Zizek could solve regional droughts by giving speeches from an open air cropduster.

He's all over the place in his arguments, and you're not sure he understood what he's talking about, but that's sort of his thing.

Quote
Claims about women’s oppression cannot be dismissed by referring to Fifty Shades of Grey, the story of a woman who enjoys being dominated (as one of my critics claims), the suffering of transgender people is all too real, etc.

The 50 shade of Gray was in response to why western feminism tends to overlook the plight of women in the rest of the world. He said there was various reasons, including the enemy of my enemy logic, but also posited it may be the unconscious bubbling out in weird ways. It's a statement about why feminism ignores the plight of women when its politically expedient to do so. Not a suggestion to ignore opression. His objects to C-16 were putely about free speech infringement and compelled speech. It doesn't ignore the trans experience.

I find Zizek amusing, but not always on point.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #64 on: February 18, 2018, 10:49:16 PM »
like i don't understand what lipstick is for and why women are wearing it except as a tool for attraction, it's certainly not functional

and i would also stipulate that obviously management or men etc. strongly encourage (read: force) women to wear makeup in professional environments (by not acknowledging them or devaluing their opinions when they don't) precisely because those men attribute a lot of a woman's value to her sexual worth.
His claim wasn't that it was merely because of attraction, but because it mimicked what happened when a woman is sexually aroused which implies a causation that isn't scientifically verifiable (like most evopsych theories) and ignores the possibility that it is an aesthetic decision, a way of projecting professionalism, cultural expectation, self-image, etc

Why did men in the 50s pay so much attention to their dress? Was it just because they wanted to bang the secretaries, or were they doing it out of a desire to impress other men? Peterson's argument is so simplistic it collapses immediately.

You don't get to choose how the signals are received. You are not following along. You are not even applying any real world personal experience or else your own experience is completely out of whack with general trends.

Read my other reply. They send sexual signals on a biological level. That doesn't negate their status signal or the person's intent. The point is that you are still replicating sexual displays and that can be recognized by others.

uh no you're not following along? The statement was about why women wear lipstick. I never said it couldn't be interpreted sexually by men. My entire complaint was that he reduces the decision on the women's part to wear lipstick to simply a need to replicate sexual arousal (he literally says that is the purpose of lipstick). Which makes no fucking sense in the workplace! Women in the workplace are probably not trying to come across as in heat!

Sexual display and status display are likely intertwined to the point that they activate similar parts of the brain.

I don't think he thinks that sexual allure is the only reason women wear make-up. It is probably hard to detach it from sexual display. All modern uses likely hearken back to that as their origin.  An honest adult woman likely knows how she does her make-up increases her sexuality and that increases her status and power.

Trent Dole

  • the sharpest tool in the shed
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #65 on: February 19, 2018, 05:39:07 AM »

Fuck this guy.
Hi

naff

  • god is dead. satan lives. the year is 1.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #66 on: February 19, 2018, 06:32:30 AM »
Also no men with V-shaped torsos in the workplace. Shit is hella intimidating and sexy. Also tight polos (especially not tucked in, looking at you Mupepe).
(_,_)

Momo

  • c y b o r e p u n k
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #67 on: February 19, 2018, 08:29:34 AM »
bunch of weaponized likes in this thread  :hitler

Rufus

  • idiot in a hurry
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #68 on: February 19, 2018, 08:33:24 AM »
I find Zizek amusing, but not always on point.
Pretty on point about "cultural marxism" there, though. But then you've moved on to critical theory now, so whatever.
🍕🧀

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #69 on: February 19, 2018, 12:43:11 PM »
Do you know how i know were on completely different pages, because everytime you post that I feel like youre not the one following along.

E: to respond to your edit, then answer why successful and powerful women do not wear makeup the same way.

is this addressing me?

Rufus

  • idiot in a hurry
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #70 on: February 19, 2018, 12:46:32 PM »
No, to Curly's post right above. The last two sentences of it weren't there before the last time I looked.
🍕🧀

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #71 on: February 19, 2018, 01:11:47 PM »
that neckbeard video :lol

There's a You Must Be This Tall To Ride rule about this stuff. You Must Be This Emotionally and Intellectually Mature To Ride the discussion roller coaster. [=- Proceed to emoji your rolleyes and newsfeed here -=]

A new video topic:


kingv

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #72 on: February 19, 2018, 01:30:23 PM »


He looks like quite the homer sitting on that bed. Theoretically this dude would be aware that sitting on a soft ass bed will make him look like he had terrible scoliosis.

Edit: also, re: makeup. If you’re married, you realize quick that women wear makeup for each other and not for men. They are far harsher critics of each other than men are to them.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #73 on: February 19, 2018, 01:51:40 PM »
The odd thing is that I'm rather adverse to make-up on girls. The only time I seem to like it is when they do their make-up in such a way that its hardly noticeable. I do realize that increases in make-up tend to reflect a desired message sent.

The thing to understand is that the great majority of make-up uses draw on the sexual signals even when their motive is not to get the sexual attention of a guy. Everything from status, professionalism and even the sisterly make-up rituals are facial modifications. The modifications make you stick out. It draws attention in a crowd. In competitive situations, it displays that you re competing. This is why in that study of images of women with and without make-up, the female respondents judged the make-up faces as sexual and being sexually competitive.

A guy wants a nice car because the guy desires a nice car. They've like this car their whole life and can finally afford it. It's a status symbol to them and perhaps a symbol of accomplishment. However, that wealth display also sends signals to women. Generally, women respond to wealth and status.

We make these signals elaborate and multi-functional, but they tend to grow from the same seed.

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #74 on: February 19, 2018, 01:58:31 PM »
youd be better banging your face against a wall

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #75 on: February 19, 2018, 01:59:35 PM »


Edit: also, re: makeup. If you’re married, you realize quick that women wear makeup for each other and not for men. They are far harsher critics of each other than men are to them.

Just out of curiosity, where do you think that competition comes from?

benjipwns

  • I suggest you educate yourself on this matter.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #76 on: February 20, 2018, 12:01:14 AM »
you know he also has a ba in political science aswell right?
lmao a ba
Okay, ill bite, what do you devote your life to?
hey buddy, some of us threw good money after bad to get a masters or two
salad

benjipwns

  • I suggest you educate yourself on this matter.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #77 on: February 20, 2018, 12:03:26 AM »
where is benji
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jordan-peterson-clinical-psychologist-canada-popularity-convincing-why-left-wing-alt-right-cathy-a8208301.html
http://thephilosophicalsalon.com/a-reply-to-my-critics-concerning-an-engagement-with-jordan-peterson/
these are obvious fakes, or Zizek "paid" a TA to write them for him

they almost got me with the digression into the plot analysis of fifty shades of grey but then it got back on topic too fast

zizek is the best
salad

curly

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #78 on: February 20, 2018, 01:31:27 AM »
Quote
Jacques Lacan wrote that, even if what a jealous husband claims about his wife (that she sleeps around with other men) is all true, his jealousy is still pathological: the pathological element is the husband's need for jealousy as the only way to retain his dignity, identity even.

Zizek calling Peterson a giant dad :lawd

shosta

  • just a thought
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #79 on: February 20, 2018, 01:41:56 AM »
How could jealousy be pathological if it's observed in most humans
在你的梦里

benjipwns

  • I suggest you educate yourself on this matter.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #80 on: February 20, 2018, 02:08:33 AM »
because so on and so on and so on
salad

curly

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #81 on: February 20, 2018, 02:39:41 AM »
I'm guessing he means it in the sense of a compulsion

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #82 on: February 20, 2018, 06:52:51 AM »
you know he also has a ba in political science aswell right?
lmao a ba
Okay, ill bite, what do you devote your life to?
hey buddy, some of us threw good money after bad to get a masters or two

i think a phd and and 120 research papers has a pretty harsh demand on time .

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #83 on: February 20, 2018, 06:56:19 AM »
Quote
Jacques Lacan wrote that, even if what a jealous husband claims about his wife (that she sleeps around with other men) is all true, his jealousy is still pathological: the pathological element is the husband's need for jealousy as the only way to retain his dignity, identity even.

Zizek calling Peterson a giant dad :lawd

im missing some context here, but does claiming your wife slept with another man only come from a place of jealousy?

benjipwns

  • I suggest you educate yourself on this matter.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #84 on: February 20, 2018, 07:54:57 AM »
you know he also has a ba in political science aswell right?
lmao a ba
Okay, ill bite, what do you devote your life to?
hey buddy, some of us threw good money after bad to get a masters or two

i think a phd and and 120 research papers has a pretty harsh demand on time .
that's only like most of an American PhD and 95 American research papers though
salad

shosta

  • just a thought
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #85 on: February 20, 2018, 07:59:01 AM »
Yeah but he wrote a self help book ey
在你的梦里

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #86 on: February 20, 2018, 08:49:27 AM »
you know he also has a ba in political science aswell right?
lmao a ba
Okay, ill bite, what do you devote your life to?
hey buddy, some of us threw good money after bad to get a masters or two

i think a phd and and 120 research papers has a pretty harsh demand on time .
that's only like most of an American PhD and 95 American research papers though

does that include both your masters?

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #87 on: February 20, 2018, 09:21:33 AM »

jorma

  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #88 on: February 20, 2018, 09:51:06 AM »
you know he also has a ba in political science aswell right?
lmao a ba
Okay, ill bite, what do you devote your life to?
hey buddy, some of us threw good money after bad to get a masters or two

i think a phd and and 120 research papers has a pretty harsh demand on time .
that's only like most of an American PhD and 95 American research papers though

does that include both your masters?

User banned (permanent): Implying curly is a slave.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #89 on: February 20, 2018, 12:36:19 PM »


So Vice posted the full interview, and shock and awe, the "context" seems to somehow make Peterson sound even worse than the edited version.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #90 on: February 20, 2018, 01:04:44 PM »
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/965848084008726528

This is the kind of rigorous academic research you'd expect from the leading right-wing intellectual in the western hemisphere (tm).

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #91 on: February 20, 2018, 01:07:44 PM »
Sweet Jebus

Jay Kang can not follow along with the conversation at all. They did really cut up the interview. Kang also lied about the length of the make-up conversation on twitter. He made it seem like the original clip was the total length of the topic and it was Peterson's fault for not expanding upon it when the truth is they did talk a lot more about it and VICE cut that longer discussion out. Jay could have just admitted the expanded upon it and didn't have space in the time budget rather than blame JBP.

I'd say if you think this makes it worse then you're not understanding the conversation. I'm tired of explaining it though. hungrynoob is right, it's rather futile in effort. People should not still be hung up on the make-up bit at this point.

Rufus

  • idiot in a hurry
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #92 on: February 20, 2018, 01:20:55 PM »
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/965848084008726528

This is the kind of rigorous academic research you'd expect from the leading right-wing intellectual in the western hemisphere (tm).
Conversely
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/965848267232718848

Mind the comments. Suddenly, scrutiny abounds. :doge
🍕🧀

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #93 on: February 20, 2018, 01:34:41 PM »
In both links, America is an outlier, which (my assumption) leads to the question of what makes America an outlier in both? Because "guns" doesn't asnwer the outlier question in the first link.

In my opinion, American culture has to do with being an outlier in both situations, and it's not modern culture but something deeper than that.  Modern media probably does have something to do with it in regards to the fame seeking, but a people develop a way of being over time and that becomes a part of culture. American culture is a bit on the paranoid side. In Sweden, the people are pretty placid and unquestioning. In America, it's a culture of rebellion. Both have their good and bad sides to that collective personality.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #94 on: February 20, 2018, 01:57:36 PM »
Sweet Jebus

Jay Kang can not follow along with the conversation at all. They did really cut up the interview. Kang also lied about the length of the make-up conversation on twitter. He made it seem like the original clip was the total length of the topic and it was Peterson's fault for not expanding upon it when the truth is they did talk a lot more about it and VICE cut that longer discussion out. Jay could have just admitted the expanded upon it and didn't have space in the time budget rather than blame JBP.

I'd say if you think this makes it worse then you're not understanding the conversation. I'm tired of explaining it though. hungrynoob is right, it's rather futile in effort. People should not still be hung up on the make-up bit at this point.7

Dude...he said we don't need anti sexual harassment laws because women could have went to the police in the 60s  :doge. This is not someone who seems to have much understanding of how sexual harassment works.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #95 on: February 20, 2018, 01:59:51 PM »
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/965848084008726528

This is the kind of rigorous academic research you'd expect from the leading right-wing intellectual in the western hemisphere (tm).
Conversely
https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/965848267232718848

Mind the comments. Suddenly, scrutiny abounds. :doge

Likes on that tweet: 125
Likes on the other tweet; almost 7k

 :thinking

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #96 on: February 20, 2018, 02:13:51 PM »
5 mins in, before getting to the makeup part, Kang seems to be confused as the difference between a conversation and a divisive shouting match.

10 mins in, kang is lost. hes looking for an admittance of an absolutist outcome that its women's fault for wearing makeup in the workplace that sexual harassment exists, and he is not saying that at all. Hes posing the idea that we dont know exactly what the limits are about what is acceptable sexualisation in the workplace, and that he feels that is an important conversation to have if we are to eliminate it. And that denying the purpose of makeup is an example of hypocrisy because you cant deny that and have an important conversation about sexual harassment in the workplace, you cant have it both ways, and thats his stance on it. Theres a lot of mental gymnastics to assume that hes saying its womens fault for weaking makeup in the workplace, so its their fault for getting harassed.

12 mins in, i felt like kang was literally starting to get it, and then went back to reframing his words to suit his own conclusions.

Anyway, in regards to Jordan's tweets, hes said on multiple occasions, he retweets stuff that he finds interesting and it does not always reflect what he actually believes. But if youre going to use a tweet on a completely unrelated subject to try dismantle his viewpoints, thats probably shows more to do with your bias than his.

Also, Jordan Peterson, right wing.  :sabu




Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #97 on: February 20, 2018, 02:16:33 PM »
Hes posing the idea that we dont know exactly what the limits are about what is acceptable sexualisation in the workplace, and that he feels that is an important conversation to have if we are to eliminate it. And that denying the purpose of makeup is an example of hypocrisy because you cant deny that and have an important conversation about sexual harassment in the workplace, you cant have it both ways, and thats his stance on it.

I'm not watching the video, but that sounds dumb as shit.

hungrynoob

  • boo
  • Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #98 on: February 20, 2018, 02:19:03 PM »
Hes posing the idea that we dont know exactly what the limits are about what is acceptable sexualisation in the workplace, and that he feels that is an important conversation to have if we are to eliminate it. And that denying the purpose of makeup is an example of hypocrisy because you cant deny that and have an important conversation about sexual harassment in the workplace, you cant have it both ways, and thats his stance on it.

I'm not watching the video, but that sounds dumb as shit.

yeah we get it, you think women like to paint their face just for the fun of it.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #99 on: February 20, 2018, 02:55:44 PM »
Bret Weinstein and Heather Heyer are currently on Rogan pod talking about biological evolution in regards to sex/gender.



« Last Edit: February 20, 2018, 03:05:02 PM by etiolate »

shosta

  • just a thought
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #100 on: February 20, 2018, 03:02:49 PM »
I'm not watching the video, but that sounds dumb as shit.
One of the interesting ramifications of the nordic gender equality paradox is that human behavior has a way of manifesting itself in ways you don't expect. So with sexual behavior, we already know what happens when you artificially limit it in some extreme cases. Priests molest boys and boys in Indian villages become gang rapists. So making the explicit requirement that there should be no flirtation in workplaces could have unknown effects on human behavior in and out of the workplace and it could even increase harassment or sexual misconduct. One of the things he talked about in the video actually was that men and women tend to underscore a conversation with the opposite sex with a little bit of sexual tension, which is readily apparent to anyone who's talked to anyone else and is fun and enjoyable and totally consensual by the way if you're not a moron and can pick up on social cues. So his point is "we don't know what will happen" and also that we should have a dialogue about it to figure out where the right lines are with the right trade-offs.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2018, 03:20:36 PM by Shostakovich »
在你的梦里

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #101 on: February 20, 2018, 03:17:37 PM »
Hes posing the idea that we dont know exactly what the limits are about what is acceptable sexualisation in the workplace, and that he feels that is an important conversation to have if we are to eliminate it. And that denying the purpose of makeup is an example of hypocrisy because you cant deny that and have an important conversation about sexual harassment in the workplace, you cant have it both ways, and thats his stance on it.

I'm not watching the video, but that sounds dumb as shit.

intellectual cowardice

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #102 on: February 20, 2018, 04:58:08 PM »
One of the interesting ramifications of the nordic gender equality paradox is that human behavior has a way of manifesting itself in ways you don't expect. So with sexual behavior, we already know what happens when you artificially limit it in some extreme cases. Priests molest boys and boys in Indian villages become gang rapists. So making the explicit requirement that there should be no flirtation in workplaces could have unknown effects on human behavior in and out of the workplace and it could even increase harassment or sexual misconduct. One of the things he talked about in the video actually was that men and women tend to underscore a conversation with the opposite sex with a little bit of sexual tension, which is readily apparent to anyone who's talked to anyone else and is fun and enjoyable and totally consensual by the way if you're not a moron and can pick up on social cues. So his point is "we don't know what will happen" and also that we should have a dialogue about it to figure out where the right lines are with the right trade-offs.

My dude, this is basically that Megan McArdle blog post about gay marriage that benji posted a couple weeks ago, plus some argumentum ad puncta caerulea.

When someone's reduced to vague, menacing warnings about unintended consequences, it's usually a good indicator they've exhausted any actual defense of the status quo. Also I think the example of priests runs the other way here.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #103 on: February 20, 2018, 05:13:24 PM »
The point of the exploratory discussion is that we haven't had a real exploratory discussion. You assume the matter is settled based on untested assumptions, so the entire conversation sounds like "menacing warnings about unintended consequences" that mean nothing to you when the unintended consequences are real questions for people who look at these things on an evolutionary scale.

Does sexual harassment exist yes? Yes. Do we denounce it? Yes.  Does it still happen? Yes.

So why does it happen? And can we eliminate it? Do we want to fully eliminate it? Where is the line of what we are willing to do stand?

If you fill all these unknowns with assumptions and don't pay attention closely to what people do in response then we are driving blindly upon the subject.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #104 on: February 20, 2018, 05:17:54 PM »
on an evolutionary scale.

I think you mean "from an evolutionary perspective" unless those effects are going to take millions of years to show up.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #105 on: February 20, 2018, 05:21:24 PM »
The evolutionary scale is different biologically and socially. Social adaptation and change occurs much faster than biological. They both have a scale that evolves. This question exists on both formats at once, but we have to mostly face it on the social behavioral side while still worrying about the longer term evo scale. 

curly

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #106 on: February 20, 2018, 05:21:44 PM »
In both links, America is an outlier, which (my assumption) leads to the question of what makes America an outlier in both? Because "guns" doesn't asnwer the outlier question in the first link.

In my opinion, American culture has to do with being an outlier in both situations, and it's not modern culture but something deeper than that.  Modern media probably does have something to do with it in regards to the fame seeking, but a people develop a way of being over time and that becomes a part of culture. American culture is a bit on the paranoid side. In Sweden, the people are pretty placid and unquestioning. In America, it's a culture of rebellion. Both have their good and bad sides to that collective personality.

lol this is pretty dumb my dude

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #107 on: February 20, 2018, 05:39:07 PM »

Also, Jordan Peterson, right wing.  :sabu

Not right wing, just no. 1 with right wingers.

The mysteries of life.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #108 on: February 20, 2018, 05:57:31 PM »
It's a silly argument because it's clear that Peterson himself doesn't actually believe evo-psych is a valid approach. He keeps up the act because it's the best strategy to get money and attention, thus moving him up the dominance hierarchy.

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #109 on: February 20, 2018, 06:02:35 PM »
this is a fun thread of ignores for me
püp

shosta

  • just a thought
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #110 on: February 20, 2018, 06:10:46 PM »
Not right wing, just no. 1 with right wingers.

The mysteries of life.
Dunno where you live but where I'm from, the right wingers don't believe in climate change or evolution, don't think inequality is a serious problem, and don't think the nation-state is a dangerous idea if it's the end goal or highest ideal. They also hate literature and psychology.
It's a silly argument because it's clear that Peterson himself doesn't actually believe evo-psych is a valid approach. He keeps up the act because it's the best strategy to get money and attention, thus moving him up the dominance hierarchy.
That's a surprising conclusion to me. What makes you think evolution isn't at the immutable core of everything Peterson believes in?
« Last Edit: February 20, 2018, 06:15:50 PM by Shostakovich »
在你的梦里

curly

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #111 on: February 20, 2018, 06:11:35 PM »


So Vice posted the full interview, and shock and awe, the "context" seems to somehow make Peterson sound even worse than the edited version.

Haha this guy is a fucking moron in just the first minute he says there's no evidence workplace harassment has gotten better in the last forty years and that in the sixties women had recourse against sexual harassment because they could go to the police. You chumps are getting grifted so hard by this clown.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #112 on: February 20, 2018, 06:14:45 PM »
The streets are extended gutters and the gutters are full of blood and when the drains finally scab over, all the vermin will drown. The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the whores and politicians will look up and shout "Listen to this TED talk by Jordan Peterson!"... and I'll look down and whisper "lmao"

benjipwns

  • I suggest you educate yourself on this matter.
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #113 on: February 20, 2018, 06:16:17 PM »
you know he also has a ba in political science aswell right?
lmao a ba
Okay, ill bite, what do you devote your life to?
hey buddy, some of us threw good money after bad to get a masters or two

i think a phd and and 120 research papers has a pretty harsh demand on time .
that's only like most of an American PhD and 95 American research papers though

does that include both your masters?
no, they're both fully American

it's a joke about the Canadian exchange rate god dammit
salad

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #114 on: February 20, 2018, 06:17:32 PM »
Not right wing, just no. 1 with right wingers.

The mysteries of life.
Dunno where you live but where I'm from, the right wingers don't believe in climate change or evolution, don't think inequality is a serious problem, and don't think the nation-state is a dangerous idea if it's the end goal or highest ideal. They also hate literature and psychology.
[

Yes, because those are the things Jordan fucking Peterson is known for.


You seem to defend a lot of these types of people (Peterson, Damore, etc)for some reason...

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #115 on: February 20, 2018, 06:17:57 PM »
And benji actually looked up the exchange rate to make it accurate.

I know because I looked it up while considering making the same joke, but didn't want Boogie to arrest me.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #116 on: February 20, 2018, 06:25:20 PM »
It's a silly argument because it's clear that Peterson himself doesn't actually believe evo-psych is a valid approach. He keeps up the act because it's the best strategy to get money and attention, thus moving him up the dominance hierarchy.
That's a surprising conclusion to me. What makes you think evolution isn't at the immutable core of everything Peterson believes in?

This was a reprise of my famous and much-acclaimed public choice theory zinger.

I'd like to thank everyone for their outpouring of support for this gag, and I hope to see you all next week when I use it again for the authors of Freakonomics.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #117 on: February 20, 2018, 06:25:51 PM »
It's a silly argument because it's clear that Peterson himself doesn't actually believe evo-psych is a valid approach. He keeps up the act because it's the best strategy to get money and attention, thus moving him up the dominance hierarchy.

 :confused


shosta

  • just a thought
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #118 on: February 20, 2018, 06:46:24 PM »
looks like etiolate's goal in creating a controversial thread was extremely successful
Yes, because those are the things Jordan fucking Peterson is known for.
They're not, but look: you were mocking the claim that Jordan Peterson isn't right wing. Besides the fact that collapsing people into one of two ideologies along a single political spectrum is totally inadequate, I was pointing out that even if you tried to you'd get a lot of contradictions. People on the right love him because he criticizes the political left but that's a temporary alignment on social issues, not an accurate or by any means complete characterization. So when you say "but no. 1 with right wingers, go figure," well, that's on you to go figure that out, actually.

Quote
You seem to defend a lot of these types of people (Peterson, Damore, etc)for some reason...
You're going to have to help me figure out what "these types of people" means. I mean that, and I hope you don't find that tedious. The last time I "defended" Damore, I was just pointing out that I thought the ruling's verbiage was inane. I don't think he made a good argument though and I also don't think he did a good or socially smart thing. In short I support his firing or at least some kind of punishment.

Peterson is different because I find myself enamored with him intellectually. I remember reading hungrynoob posting something that read close to a religious experience some time ago and it seemed rather stupid and silly. And then I tried looking him up and my first exposure to him was this video where he said ideology leads to genocide and I immediately dismissed him because it was such a reductive and uninteresting argument. And boring, too! But his name kept popping up and then this interview thing happened so of course I had to figure out why the fuck this guy had a fucking religious cult that seemed to be entirely composed of right wing manchildren and red pilled losers. Well, the short story is that I haven't been so invigorated philosophically and intellectually since I first read Dostoyevsky's Notes From Underground when I was 14, or George Orwell's Politics and the English Language. (I'm also uneducated, so it's not like I have a lot of exposure to anything of real caliber anyway, so don't think I'm comparing him to these two or anyone important at all. I'm just saying that, relatively speaking, I have found him important.)

Probably a shorter and better answer is that I utterly despise misrepresentation for political ends. It doesn't matter where or to whom it's happening.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2018, 06:50:50 PM by Shostakovich »
在你的梦里

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Swallow It Down
« Reply #119 on: February 20, 2018, 06:48:16 PM »
Peterson is different because I find myself enamored with him intellectually. I remember reading hungrynoob posting something that read close to a religious experience some time ago and it seemed rather stupid and silly. And then I tried looking him up and my first exposure to him was this video where he said ideology leads to genocide and I immediately dismissed him because it was such a reductive and uninteresting argument. And boring, too! But his name kept popping up and then this interview thing happened so of course I had to figure out why the fuck this guy had a fucking religious cult that seemed to be entirely composed of right wing manchildren and red pilled losers. Well, the short story is that I haven't been so invigorated philosophically and intellectually since I first read Dostoyevsky's Notes From Underground when I was 14, or George Orwell's Politics and the English Language.

Jesus you have the worst taste.