The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] jordan peterson Jordan Peterson JORDAN PETERSON

[Oblivion]

I'd say it was unwise to let that fraction of the book out as an article, but once you've been marked for that there's no shedding it.

It's actually super fucking easy to shed a negative reputation.

1) You renounce and apologize for said controversial thing(s) that people criticized you for
2) You disassociate yourself with the people that liked the thing you were criticized by the other group for and start criticizing your former friends instead
3) Repeat 1) and 2) forever

See: John Cole, Charles Johnson, etc.

This also works in the reverse directions (see: Ian Miles Cheong).

Hell, you don't even have to completely change your entire ideology either (see: Rick Wilson, Anna Navarro)

What you DON'T do, is double down on doing the things you were criticized for and then complain that people keep getting the wrong idea.

[Mandark]

Charles Johnson

To anyone who was reading political blogs in the aughts, it's fucking wild that he's the "good" Charles Johnson now.

[Momo]

curly, you're an idiot and you need to stop talking to me, serious.

i'm making this feud happen whether you agree to it or not

Find someone else, I dont come on here to argue 

[agrajag]

There goes Mandark the coward, playing with his loaded dice again. 

[shosta]

hey Jake, I just read The Genealogy of Morals. Can you... please explain to me how Nietzsche is not an anti-Semitic fascist? Did I read this wrong?

[agrajag]

Walter Kaufmann certainly did not believe so.

[shosta]

Yeah, the consensus is obviously that he's not and Nazis just willfully misread him, which is why I'm asking. But, I read this pretty carefully and it's got some vile stuff in it, especially this first essay in that book. Was all this conspiratorial stuff with weak, Jewish slave morality just an "experiment"?

[Mandark]

also he seems to be under the impression that Paris, one of the most international cities of the West historically, was lily white/immigrant free in like 2003, not even 1983 or some date decades earlier

There's a real tendency from people who are concerned with the browning of Europe to overstate how purely white it was recently and how quickly that's changing.

Sam Harris, for example, wrote in 2006 that even with zero immigration, birth rates meant France was on track to be majority-Muslim by 2031. We're almost at the halfway point of that projection and the Muslim share of the population is 5-10%. Whoops.

[CatsCatsCats]

Once more I’m just here to drive by post that Wank Dad is a better title and recommend everyone edit the subject line before posting itt

[shosta]

Was Nietzsche, the guy who left his publisher for being an antisemite, and wrote multiple screeds about how stupid antisemites and antisemitism was, an antisemite? I dunno. Who can say?

What does anti semitism mean then? I'm really confused. I admit he doesn't want to genocide them but it's obvious he views judaism as a blight on Europe, and Jews as poisoning the "blonde beast" Master race of nobles and conquerers. Unless, again, I'm misreading this!

[jakefromstatefarm]

Did I read this wrong?

kind of. Was he an antisemite? I’d say unequivocally yes, though my criteria for determining racism might be different than some on this board. He’s a racialist, in that good late 19th century sense that views populations as discrete units that carry essentialized ‘cores’ of, say, values, temperaments, and mores that can then be evaluated and compared as to their worth. But Nietzsche is primarily a moral psychologist: he autistically analyzes character types in terms of their ethical consequences/interest. ‘Races’ are really personalities writ broad for Nietzsche, and I think it’s in this light that we have to call him a racist.

His anti-semitism needs to be qualified further; stro is right to point out that he isn’t an antisemite if we mean “in league with the antisemitism of his day”. This couldn’t be clearer from his correspondence corpus. In his evaluation of Jewish culture, he sees good and bad. The Old Testament is good, their passivity is bad but largely caused by the necessity of living under the yoke of a hostile European culture. I think it’s also worth noting that in the later Nietzsche -so, including genealogy of morals- his project is a demolition of the metaphysical and ethical baggage that accompanies a Christian worldview. This isn’t the primary concern in his earlier mature works which are less polemical and more phlegmatic, cf. section 205 of Dawn.

So he’s not a hyper nationalist (if anything he endorses a kind of pan-European identity), he’s an antisemite that happens to harbor deep felt admiration for Jewish culture, and he’s not a fascist in any relevant sense for the 20th century because the kind of etatism that necessitates a state cult isn’t anywhere in his work.

[etiolate]

perfect

[benjipwns]

  at when the white girl gets incredulous at the black dude for being in the audience instead of joining them in trying to get the speaker to leave*

when the law school "students" start chanting "FUCK THE LAW" because the law is a construct of the white male oppressors

spoiler (click to show/hide)

*also when she says "you can't speak like that to us, we're adults!" to the administrator

[close]

[Oblivion]

https://twitter.com/willmenaker/status/986643192580902914/

[Momo]

Sam talks about Murray apparently, havent heard this yet, going to listen later

[Momo]

Yeah I liked what Sam had to say here, I still cant care about Murray, but Sam's a sensible bloke.

this doesnt really fit here, but it doesn't fit anywhere else, this is actually super good lol

[etiolate]

Majiid is an interesting case. I've heard criticism that he was far more into terrorism than he admits, but reform is a needed movement. He's also slick as fuck and I think that triggers the conservative Muslims.

You can't discuss IQ with some people. That would include Ezra/Vox. The SPLC being a joke is well established. They exist to scare money out of east coast liberals pockets.

There is an interview with the guy who made that mix. Some Dj from LA.

[Oblivion]

Indeed. The kinds of people to trust on the subject of racial IQ differences is someone like a guy who didn't know cross burning was associated with the KKK.


In other news, it seems Daddy will be making an appearance on Real Time tonight:

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/986732691381874688

Normally, I’d be interested in watching such a thing, but after Maher’s utter shitshow when he invited on Milo last year, I have little doubt he’s going to press Peterson on anything. Similar with Milo, he and Peterson will bond over their mutual hatred of college kids insisting people not use the n-word. Maybe he’ll surprise me. We’ll see.

[etiolate]

Well I'ms ure we'll all sit back in anticipation of whether Bill Maher can impress Oblivion.

[benjipwns]

HBO OFFICIAL VERSION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wLCmDtCDAM

[Oblivion]

As I expected, it was a total ballwashing session. Very disappointing overall, but I did like that Bill threw Peterson a curveball (maybe this wasn't intentional) when he mentioned that Professor who sent those tweets about Barbara Bush, and Peterson kinda just sat there not sure how to respond since this wasn't the type of FREEZE PEACH he normally supports.

The rest of the panel was amazingly useless as well with the exception of Alex Wagner, who made an admirable attempt to push back, though I felt she could have done more with what Peterson provided.

As for Peterson himself, he was mostly on good behavior (though obviously not by choice, given the venue), though he still had few eyebrow raisers like concern trolling over liberals being mean to the poor widdle Trump supporters, and whining about polarization while completely ignoring his own contributions to said polarization.

[etiolate]

you're adorable oblivion

The rest of the panel had pretty lame contributions. "I am raising my kid in the time of Donald Trump!" lol your kid don't fucking care about your performative panic.

[benjipwns]

i liked the part when they went back to other topics and Peterson just sorta disappeared like he had never been there

[shosta]

that's what happens to every Bill Maher guest that isn't on the panel

[benjipwns]

never happened to Christopher Hitchens

[Oblivion]

you're adorable oblivion

The rest of the panel had pretty lame contributions.

The rest of the panel was amazingly useless as well

[etiolate]

The Maher panel isn't really prepared for Peterson discussion. It's kind of View level discussion trying to pretend its something more. Snickering and laughing at their own jokes.

My favorite though was I have three children and the children are fine! They're all three of my party talking points!  So cringe.

[shosta]

It was annoying but unsurprising that the two partisan hack guests wouldn't agree that there's a problem with millennials and younger kids, and then as evidence cite doctrinaire allegiance.

[Mandark]

What's the problem with the kids?

[shosta]

The subject they were talking about was emotional fragility due to overprotection, and how that extends into educational systems. It's up for debate but the answer isn't "I don't see anything wrong with the kids. They believe in climate change!"

[Mandark]

The subject they were talking about was emotional fragility due to overprotection, and how that extends into educational systems.

lmao

[etiolate]

Basically, Maher brought up the bit in the book about not letting your kids do something that makes you hate them, and Maher shared how often other parents confide in him that they really dislike their kids. This became a conversation on having boundaries for kids and not letting them become the sort of person others hate. And the talking heads said some derp shit in response.

[Mandark]

Okay, I can definitely believe Bill Maher hangs out with people who loathe their own children.

[etiolate]

Like your mom?

[Mandark]

Nah, she's super proud of my brother.

[etiolate]

[Mandark]

The subject they were talking about was emotional fragility due to overprotection, and how that extends into educational systems.

The reason it's hard for me to take this or similar complaints seriously is cause I remember the early 90's, when a bunch of trends peaked. Compare the current youth rates for violent death, pregnancy, failure to finish high school, incarceration, etc. to what they were back then.

If there's a case that "the kids are too sensitive" is a real, important problem having a material impact on society to the degree that we should give a shit and make fixing it a priority, I haven't heard it yet.

[curly]

"there's something wrong with the children" is the First Take, the Take from which all other Takes descend, and it will be the Last Take.

[shosta]

The reason it's hard for me to take this or similar complaints seriously is cause I remember the early 90's, when a bunch of trends peaked. Compare the current youth rates for violent death, pregnancy, failure to finish high school, incarceration, etc. to what they were back then.

If there's a case that "the kids are too sensitive" is a real, important problem having a material impact on society to the degree that we should give a shit and make fixing it a priority, I haven't heard it yet.

I can't point to an empirical metric. Actually, I can't even think of one that would be meaningfully related. I concede that's usually a good starting point for claiming anything is ever a problem at all. But I can point to the qualitative shift in the zeitgeist. I know you don't bristle at it but other people do. I imagine it would be something like an intractable axiomatic difference if we were to actually discuss it.

[curly]

Differences in values between older and younger generations certainly exist, the question is whether these differences are problematic. I generally believe that the handwringing over the youth is more an expression of the anxieties of older generations about becoming superannuated than a true reflection of reality.

[seagrams hotsauce]

The reason it's hard for me to take this or similar complaints seriously is cause I remember the early 90's, when a bunch of trends peaked. Compare the current youth rates for violent death, pregnancy, failure to finish high school, incarceration, etc. to what they were back then.

If there's a case that "the kids are too sensitive" is a real, important problem having a material impact on society to the degree that we should give a shit and make fixing it a priority, I haven't heard it yet.

I can't point to an empirical metric. Actually, I can't even think of one that would be meaningfully related. I concede that's usually a good starting point for claiming anything is ever a problem at all. But I can point to the qualitative shift in the zeitgeist. I know you don't bristle at it but other people do. I imagine it would be something like an intractable axiomatic difference if we were to actually discuss it.

'qualitative shift in the zeitgeist' lol jeesh buddy put down the thesaurus and just say 'i don't know, it just feels like it's true to me'

[seagrams hotsauce]

dp

[curly]

in defense of my own wordiness i'm pretty high

[shosta]

Differences in values between older and younger generations certainly exist, the question is whether these differences are problematic. I generally believe that the handwringing over the youth is more an expression of the anxieties of older generations about becoming superannuated than a true reflection of reality.

Sometimes the changing social dynamics really chafe inflexible old timers. But other times the outcries come from people who rub up against the new culture and feel like there's a real disequilibrium. Confusing the two is frequent but wrong. I think Bill Maher falls in the latter camp and he mentions he had difficulties with universities before as a "politically incorrect comedian".

As a counterpoint, though:

[agrajag]

The reason it's hard for me to take this or similar complaints seriously is cause I remember the early 90's, when a bunch of trends peaked. Compare the current youth rates for violent death, pregnancy, failure to finish high school, incarceration, etc. to what they were back then.

If there's a case that "the kids are too sensitive" is a real, important problem having a material impact on society to the degree that we should give a shit and make fixing it a priority, I haven't heard it yet.

I can't point to an empirical metric. Actually, I can't even think of one that would be meaningfully related. I concede that's usually a good starting point for claiming anything is ever a problem at all. But I can point to the qualitative shift in the zeitgeist. I know you don't bristle at it but other people do. I imagine it would be something like an intractable axiomatic difference if we were to actually discuss it.

'qualitative shift in the zeitgeist' lol jeesh buddy put down the thesaurus and just say 'i don't know, it just feels like it's true to me'

stouza annihilated

[shosta]

"Shostakovich", more like "shut the fuck up, bitch"

[seagrams hotsauce]

acting like the foundations of society are in peril because the youth of today or too over sensitive about identity politics is just such a silly debate to me on all fronts. first off, your average college kid isn't going around screeching at everyone who doesn't use gender pronouns correctly. the perception that 'kids these days are a new breed' is conflated since the most vocal proponents of such issues always garner the most attention, not to mention that for decades the media at large has loved the perennial topic of blaming young people for all types of shit. fretting about the potential actions of a relatively powerless group of people when there is actual shit to worry about rings hollow as fuck to me. telling kids who will likely spend most of their lives in debt who've seen the concept of upward mobility all but vanish 'hey snowflake pipe down grow thicker skin' is just such a massive waste of time and effort to me

[seagrams hotsauce]

i qualified three things with 'to me' in that post, so there, my high crutch is on the table too

[shosta]

I was on the UC Davis campus when Milo's talk was being protested last year, and they had to bring the campus police out to break it up. It seemed rather churlish to me. If that's an outlier, then so be it, but from over here it looks like par for the course. What I'm talking about isn't the content per se but the breakdown of traditional discourse. Small but vocal groups of college students actually do have a fair amount of power now, not in important things like "disappearing social mobility" but in the ability to bully faculty, corporations, media organizations, etc. It's not like the foundations of society are at risk, but then again, nobody said that.

[Oblivion]

It's not like the foundations of society are at risk, but then again, nobody said that.

breh

breh

[curly]

https://twitter.com/dril/status/987936547549974528

[Mandark]

I can't point to an empirical metric. Actually, I can't even think of one that would be meaningfully related. I concede that's usually a good starting point for claiming anything is ever a problem at all. But I can point to the qualitative shift in the zeitgeist. I know you don't bristle at it but other people do. I imagine it would be something like an intractable axiomatic difference if we were to actually discuss it.

There are a couple heuristics I like that I think apply to figuring out whether campus PC culture/general post-millenial sensitivity is a Serious Problem.

First, is there a history of people freaking out about similar things in the past, only to look silly in retrospect? For sure. Not just worrying about The Kids Today in general, but about campus radicalism (60's/70's) and political correctness (90's). There's a good reason to think that as a society, we're inclined towards seeing these as much bigger problems than they actually are.

Second, if you're talking about a social/political movement, what is it opposing, and which is likely to cause more harm? That's roughly the point of the Stewart Lee clip you posted, and for me the practical downside of anti-racism vs. racism isn't even a debate.

[jorma]

Differences in values between older and younger generations certainly exist, the question is whether these differences are problematic. I generally believe that the handwringing over the youth is more an expression of the anxieties of older generations about becoming superannuated than a true reflection of reality.

I mean when i was young i was rolling my eyes at granny when she was telling me about her interactions with the negro servants on her trip to africa in her youth, or when she leaned into me and asked if i didn't think that the streets of stockholm were a bit dark these days. She wasn't evil or maliciously racist or anything, just out of touch.

Why be surprised if the same thing happens to me as i grow old? Just on different topics, like using the word distinguished mentally-challenged or whatever. I would assume that most people will be content with rolling their eyes like i did, rather than the cutting all ties thing that the worst of the REE crowd favour.

All i know is that the moral high ground the social studies warriors like to perch upon today wont be seen as that for the generations that come after them.

[etiolate]

Every generation is different with its own touch on society. Sometimes there can be problems within generational culture.

https://heterodoxacademy.org/skeptics-are-wrong-about-campus-speech/

You have to be aware of the groups that deplatform and have a negative attitude towards free speech even if they do not represent a majority. Mainly because this attitude comes from ideas taught in colleges and those ideas are taught with the intention of spreading. These people either go back into the university or end up in HR. (Look at the Damore situation and lawsuit.) Small groups can create large changes.

[Oblivion]

Indeed, imagine if say someone in college was taught that the free market uber allles and that management should be able to fire any employee for any reason they choose, and then grew up to be a judge and ruled in favor of an employer over someone like Damore.

[shosta]

Jonathan Haidt

[etiolate]

There is a class action lawsuit still going in which people are coming forth with discriminatory practices. (That follow along identity politics and critical theory lines.)

And Damore being fired for pointing out how HR was not accomplishing their goal is a power move by a smaller group within a large company.

[Oblivion]

Hilariously enough, Damore tried to sue Google using a law that some SJW no doubt came up with to protect dipshits like Damore.

[etiolate]

Why do you join conversations that you have no idea how to handle?

[Oblivion]

What did I say that was incorrect?