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

[benjipwns]

Not sure who the other guy is

Mickey Kaus' "radical centrist" anti-atheism half!

[etiolate]

From the same videoblog channel, John McWhorter and Grenn Loury discuss the backlash to Amy Wax, racial performance differences, racial quotas, affirmative action and their impact.

[Momo]

.. B-benji 

[etiolate]

Can you possibly doxx... the doxx master?

[Mandark]

My darkest fear is that we built society for centuries on the idea that many men would die before hitting age 30. That war, hard labor and risk would ween out the male population so that the need of the people never outweighed society's ability to meet the demand. However, many things have changed. Less men go to war. Less men die young from hard labor. Health has improved. Disease control has improved. We simply have more living men now and society wasn't built to handle their need. So they end up in prison or on the streets or they take their own life in a variety of vices and methods.

To get back to this, the demographics just don't bear this out. The biggest driver of early mortality was disease, not violent deaths, and men aren't a significantly bigger chunk of the American population than they used to be.

[Leadbelly]

I guess this fits...

[benjipwns]

The postmodernists purge another inconvenient truth teller:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/kevin-williamson-firing-by-the-atlantic-cowardly/

The Atlantic has caved to the intolerant mob and fired Kevin Williamson, and in so doing has contributed to a slanderous fiction — that Kevin is so beyond the pale that he has no place at one of the nation’s premiere mainstream publications. His millions of words, his countless interviews, and his personal character were reduced to nothing — inconsequential in the face of deleted tweets and a five-minute podcast dialogue.

Kevin is independent. He’s provocative. Sure, he can troll a little bit, and — no — I don’t agree with everything he says. I’m a moderate, you see. If abortion is ever criminalized in this nation, I think only the abortionist (and not the mother) should face murder charges for poisoning, crushing, or dismembering a living child. So we might differ about the laws in hypothetical-future-America.

But in this America, the one we live in now, Kevin is one of our most interesting and talented voices. Like every single interesting and talented person I know, he can provoke. But so what? Aren’t we adults? Can’t we handle disagreement? Apparently not.

I’ve spent my entire adult life in an academic and media environment that put a premium on shocking the conservative conscience. Advocate for the most barbaric abortion practices? Fine. Celebrate an artist who dips a crucifix in urine? Cool. Decry 9/11 first responders as “not human” because of white supremacy? Intriguing. But the marketplace of ideas isn’t for the faint of heart, and good conservatives learn to simultaneously defend the culture of free speech while also fighting hard to build a culture of virtue and respect.

Look, I know it’s easy for some to dismiss Kevin’s termination as mere inside-baseball media drama. But it’s more than that. It’s a declaration by one of America’s most powerful media entities that it can’t even coexist with a man like Kevin. If he wants to write, he should run along to his conservative home. His new colleagues simply couldn’t abide his presence.

After Kevin was fired, Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti tweeted that she was “very relieved for the women” who work at The Atlantic. Why? What was Kevin going to do to them? Write things that made them angry? God forbid! His ideas might hurt? Have mercy!

And so it goes, the steady, inexorable division of America into the tolerable and the intolerable — with the range of tolerable people narrowing ever-so-rapidly. There’s no grace in this brave new world. There’s no charity. It’s not enough to disagree. Now we must ruin. Now we must humiliate. Saying “you’re wrong” is no longer enough. The argument isn’t sufficient.

[Oblivion]

So much for the tolerant free market.

[benjipwns]

JP once again puts it all on the line against journalisms toughest interviewer

[Momo]

who's the person carl of akkad is responding to?

[hungrynoob]

Tbf I would rather be a radical leftist than a nihilistic atheist.

[etiolate]

who's the person carl of akkad is responding to?

According to the YT comments, he's responding to Kevin Logan


who that is I have no idea

Part of the whole Youtuber world is  constant hot take response videos to each other.

[Nintex]

The beard/dyed slicked back hair is not a good look for JP. It makes him look decidedly even less friendly and more depressed.

He now looks like a proper Bond Villain.

The look suits him.

[jakefromstatefarm]

Won’t somebody please think of the canon? 

[curly]

lmao nobody is trying to read iambic pentameter in 2018

the stuff that gets popular today flaunts traditional rules for verse too, it's just not as impenetrably dense as academic poetry

[curly]

[Crash Dummy]

very old but i've only just got around to reading the last psychiatrist, just working my way through and at times i have no idea what has been said or referenced but entertaining enough to stick with it https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/

[Oblivion]

real story, there was a girl who was interested in me, and I gave her an anthology of Sylvia Plath poems for her birthday, and we straight up just stopped talking

newsfeed

[benjipwns]

beard is going well as he's filled in, but i agree with the slicked hair comment, needs a different style, unless he goes for a total Zod thing

The idea of the death and resurrection has a psychological meaning, in addition to its metaphysical and religious significance. It can be thought of as part of the structure of narrative that sits at the basis of our culture. It includes elements of sacrifice (associated with delay of gratification and the discovery of the future) and psychological transformation (as movement forward in life often requires the death of something old and the birth of something new).

This five-part commentary is an attempt to explain such ideas in detail so that they can be understood, as well as “believed.” 

ilkerbasan
2 days ago
Nietsche announced God is dead.
Dr. Peterson announced God is resurrected.

meusisto
2 days ago
I was agnostic. Deeply considering Christianity (Catholicism/Orthodoxy) now.

Luciano Latouche
2 days ago
Jordan Peterson's attitude has put the new "atheists" (here I'm not talking about unbelievers but people who despise religion in all its aspects and have made it their mission to destroy it) to shame. JP's approach to religion and respect for complex ideas are to be celebrated. No wonder why he's way more respected than all those proponents of anti-theistic nonsense.

[benjipwns]

hey! he made BIG THINK! time for them to step up and be the middle man between JP and SLAVOJ ZIZEK to settle reality forever

[HardcoreRetro]

So... Jordan Peterson is pretty much a self-help guru for the alt-right?

Did the dude just confuse himself in that video? More like Big Stink.

[hungrynoob]

So... Jordan Peterson is pretty much a self-help guru for the alt-right?

lmfao

[Oblivion]

So... Jordan Peterson is pretty much a self-help guru for the alt-right?

lmfao

Right? The man clearly appeals to people from all sides of the political spectrum.

Here's a list of every prominent person on the Left that likes him:

[Mandark]

I wouldn't say the alt-right (if we keep that definition pretty narrow), but his stans are generally MRAdjacent.

[Oblivion]

Isn't the only difference between the alt-right and regular right that the former also happens to like anime?

[Momo]

it was used enough for me to go look it up, took like 2 mins man, alt right is another name for Spencer's neo nazi loons.

[agrajag]

real story, there was a girl who was interested in me, and I gave her an anthology of Sylvia Plath poems for her birthday, and we straight up just stopped talking

maybe the canon would have worked better???

you should have written her a crown of sonnets

[agrajag]

Isn't the only difference between the alt-right and regular right that the former also happens to like anime?

the difference is the memes dog, JP is dat boi

[Mandark]

Isn't the only difference between the alt-right and regular right that the former also happens to like anime?

They also don't like (((globalists))).

[agrajag]

also, the regular ol' vanilla right don't go around calling everyone they don't like cucks, it is said that they are, perhaps, cucks themselves

[Oblivion]

it was used enough for me to go look it up, took like 2 mins man, alt right is another name for Spencer's neo nazi loons.

Spencer is the one who created the name, but it was accepted by people on the right who don't consider themselves to be neo-Nazis. Ex.

“We’re the platform for the alt-right,” Bannon told me proudly when I interviewed him at the Republican National Convention (RNC) in July.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/stephen-bannon-donald-trump-alt-right-breitbart-news/

[etiolate]

I believe the alt-right also encompassed neoreactionaries and dark enlightenment folk. 

[benjipwns]

The weirdest part of the alt-right for me has always been the neo-monarchists and "dark enlightenment" wing. Say what you will about the tenets of white supremacy, dude...

[etiolate]

The neo-monarchists feel that the populace shouldn't be allowed a vote or as much agency as they've been given due to the public being mostly inept at making choices and undeserving of the power they've wielded in a democracy that allows even the dumbest guy in the room to shout what he wants. Important decisions should be reserved for the cultured and intellectual elite, who are as capable of understanding the farmer's plight well enough to speak for the farmer. So they're much like a neoliberal but far more straight forward about it.

[etiolate]

I find the dark enlightenment folk amusing. Perhaps that's rude.

At least they come up with whatever idea they can. The white ethnostate people saw a losing game in identity politics and decided to join it. They also don't seem to realize that European cultures were touched by a geographically wider influence and the great thinkers of the past didn't close themselves off.

I'll get to that literary link eventually.

[Crash Dummy]

skinner vs chomsky

not quite as obvious as when he got btfo by zizek but chomsky gets skinner completely wrong right off the bat and proceeds to write long letters to skinner which he stops reading and ignoring

[agrajag]

[etiolate]

omg the subtitles/cc for that

"slovenian psychoanalyst and philosopher slow-voice dziezeck"

[Oblivion]

Looks like Harris decided to go through with going on Ezra's podcast after all. Listening to it now:

https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/vox/the-ezra-klein-show

[Momo]

this should be interesting, currently listening to Ariel Helwani talk shit, but i'll give this a listen after (please warn me if it turns to complete shit)

[etiolate]

Listening to Ezra Klein makes me want to punch him in the face.  Each time he uses the word problematic. Anyone with a major writing platform should recognize that as a weasel word and remove it from their use, but the state of writing is so ideologically driven rather than quality driven that it keeps flying out of his up-speaking beak.

[etiolate]

Rogan uses it all the time himself. Everyone needs to cut out the word. Whenever you use it, you could probably be far more precise and say what the problem is and if you can't find the problem then maybe it's not problematic?

[agrajag]

I don't mind it when it has specific uses.

"Your squat form is problematic, and I am going to explain why"

If you use it to mean "this person has an ideology that doesn't align with mine" then fuck it

[etiolate]

Yeah if you can explain the problem then it's fine. If you are avoiding explaining the problem you have or are not even sure what the problem is then its weasely as hell.

[agrajag]

What about "This person has a squat form ideology that doesn't align with mine"?

then you're jason blaha

[etiolate]

I don't remember where Peterson uses the term problematic. I am guessing he's using it to imply that its worrisome. Rogan uses it both seriously and mockingly, so it depends on which time he's using it. Rogan abuses it as a weasel word sometimes when he should state the specific problem.

Ideally, you want the term narrowed down to a worthwhile limitation of meaning. So strip down its use until you get to that point. Be it "filled with many problems" or a definition that belies its weak usage, such as "disagreeable".

[Momo]

everyone knows problematic is a meme word now that means "having racist or sexist views".

more like that means ' if you dont stop what you are saying now I'm going to accuse you of having racist or sexist views'

[Momo]

okay tired of listening to Ariel now, and Joe Rogan has two trash guests on, time to listen to this Vox x Sam love.

[etiolate]

etoilet is very problematic

I do present a problem to bullshitters like yourself.

[agrajag]

okay tired of listening to Ariel now, and Joe Rogan has two trash guests on, time to listen to this Vox x Sam love.

Fine then listen to this jacked furry dude who Jason Blaha ran afoul of rip the Blahino a new asshole, non-negotiable.

[etiolate]

etoilet is very problematic

I do present a problem to bullshitters like yourself.

What is it that you think I'm bullshitting about

Well, on this page, both the question you made and the response to my answer. You're just shitposting.

[Oblivion]

Uh..you guys know that Ezra goes into quite a bit of detail about why he thinks Murray/Harris are "problematic", right? Like, he doesn't just accuse them of that and leave it at that, like some people I know...

[etiolate]

Uh..you guys know that Ezra goes into quite a bit of detail about why he thinks Murray/Harris are "problematic", right? Like, he doesn't just accuse them of that and leave it at that, like some people I know...

In this pod, he goes into his disagreements with Murray, which seem to be on Murray's view on social policies and Ezra's inability to understand Murray. He doesn't get into specifics about his issue with Harris much.

I mean, Harris repeatedly brings up the fact that the Vox pieces called it junk science, that Harris fell for junk science, and behind this all is an old archaic racism. (Which implies terrible things about Harris and Murray both.)

And each time, Ezra does not respond to that. He dodges it over and over and over. He's a fucking weasel.

[etiolate]

Charles Murray is a racist with an agenda and there's nothing noble about defending him.

Are you saying that's what Ezra's issue with Harris is?

[curly]

The neo-monarchists feel that the populace shouldn't be allowed a vote or as much agency as they've been given due to the public being mostly inept at making choices and undeserving of the power they've wielded in a democracy that allows even the dumbest guy in the room to shout what he wants. Important decisions should be reserved for the cultured and intellectual elite, who are as capable of understanding the farmer's plight well enough to speak for the farmer. So they're much like a neoliberal but far more straight forward about it.

Neoliberalism is more than another word for elitism
I'm talking to a wall here but once again you're totally clueless about capital- labor power dynamics (i.e. the shit that actually matters)

[Oblivion]

Still going through the podcast.

Harris brings up MLK as someone who was against identity politics.

[etiolate]

Are you saying that's what Ezra's issue with Harris is?

When I read the email exchange between Harris and Ezra I agreed with you that Ezra came off as a smarming punk. But when I looked more and more into Murray the evidence is quite high for ignoble intentions and sloppy science. If that hitpiece's point is that Sam Harris is another idiot to be suckered into defending that racist then the polemic is correct. The details about their exchanges since then and the quality of the Vox hit piece itself are irrelevant to me since the broad strokes are correct. So maybe unexpectedly, I think Ezra is wrong and and the Vox piece is right.

This is mostly evidence of what I've always thought about Sam Harris, that he's a third rate loser and a waste of anyone's time.

Have you listened to the Harris/Murray pod that started this all?

[etiolate]

You should listen to it.

[Crash Dummy]

2:18:22
 

if i can get through the entire migos album you can definitely get through this

[Momo]

After listening I think this Klein guy is a bit of a log, I think better of him than last week, but still. Guy talks about what he thinks Harris is doing and Harris has to interject after every sentence. Dude needs to learn the difference between data and ideas derived from data, his continual need to try and tie data to the worst possible ideas that can be derived from them is super frustrating to listen to. Also 100% of this is US society and culture battle shit so I cant give a fuck about it besides noting I dislike people who argue like Klein. The bit about 'Are you comparing x to y' at the end of an entire two hour conversation sealed his disinterest in anything Harris said. The last 10 minutes is a shit show in fact.

No and I'm worried it'll be a waste of my time. But I've got nothing better to do today, so I might as well.

Harris is always worth listening to, if you're a detractor or fan(I'm neither) he's usually pretty verbose about his ideas so you can follow his logic easily and criticize or take it on-board as you want. I'm continually puzzled(not really) that he's constantly misrepresented by the media considering he's so precise and verbose.