Author Topic: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] jordan peterson Jordan Peterson JORDAN PETERSON  (Read 243099 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #840 on: April 21, 2018, 08:31:59 AM »
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

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #841 on: April 21, 2018, 01:34:22 PM »
i liked the part when they went back to other topics and Peterson just sorta disappeared like he had never been there

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #842 on: April 21, 2018, 02:27:06 PM »
never happened to Christopher Hitchens

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #843 on: April 21, 2018, 03:10:35 PM »
you're adorable oblivion

The rest of the panel had pretty lame contributions.

The rest of the panel was amazingly useless as well

:thinking

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #844 on: April 21, 2018, 04:07:15 PM »
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.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #845 on: April 21, 2018, 04:29:48 PM »
What's the problem with the kids?

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #846 on: April 21, 2018, 04:53:54 PM »
The subject they were talking about was emotional fragility due to overprotection, and how that extends into educational systems.

lmao

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #847 on: April 21, 2018, 04:55:16 PM »
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

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #848 on: April 21, 2018, 04:57:29 PM »
Okay, I can definitely believe Bill Maher hangs out with people who loathe their own children.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #849 on: April 21, 2018, 04:59:15 PM »
Like your mom?

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #850 on: April 21, 2018, 05:01:25 PM »
Nah, she's super proud of my brother.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #851 on: April 21, 2018, 05:09:35 PM »

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #852 on: April 21, 2018, 05:45:02 PM »
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

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #853 on: April 21, 2018, 05:51:34 PM »
"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.

curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #854 on: April 22, 2018, 01:21:58 AM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ σt ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #855 on: April 22, 2018, 01:30:46 AM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ σt ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #856 on: April 22, 2018, 01:31:25 AM »
dp

curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #857 on: April 22, 2018, 01:35:58 AM »
in defense of my own wordiness i'm pretty high

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ σt ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #858 on: April 22, 2018, 01:48:20 AM »
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

seagrams hotsauce

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #859 on: April 22, 2018, 01:50:10 AM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #860 on: April 22, 2018, 01:51:22 AM »
i qualified three things with 'to me' in that post, so there, my high crutch is on the table too

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ σt ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #861 on: April 22, 2018, 02:59:40 AM »
It's not like the foundations of society are at risk, but then again, nobody said that.

breh

breh

curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ σt ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #863 on: April 22, 2018, 03:11:29 AM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #864 on: April 22, 2018, 06:04:42 AM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #865 on: April 22, 2018, 02:33:08 PM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #866 on: April 22, 2018, 03:04:12 PM »
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.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #867 on: April 22, 2018, 03:07:51 PM »
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

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #868 on: April 22, 2018, 03:08:28 PM »
Hilariously enough, Damore tried to sue Google using a law that some SJW no doubt came up with to protect dipshits like Damore.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #869 on: April 22, 2018, 03:09:57 PM »
Why do you join conversations that you have no idea how to handle?

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #870 on: April 22, 2018, 03:13:22 PM »
What did I say that was incorrect?

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #871 on: April 22, 2018, 03:27:35 PM »
I have to say, one thing that I really hate about these discussions on "free speech" is that it's done in remarkably bad faith by the side that allegedly supports it. Just look at all the "free speech" advocates going nuclear whenever somebody exercises speech that they don't support like Colin Kaepernick, the Starbucks coffee cup incident, department stores saying "Happy Holidays", the list goes on and on. This isn't (and hasn't ever been) an actual debate on "free speech" because one side has no intention of ever letting the other to exercise their right to speak.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #872 on: April 22, 2018, 03:30:18 PM »
Here's part 2 of that: https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-skeptics-are-wrong-part-2/

To understand how this operates, you have look at your average campus demographic. There is a silent majority that is for free speech, but that majority is there to actually be a student. Then there is a vocal minority who are there because they thought the 60s were cool and like protesting. It's that minority that runs for student elections and creates the entire atmosphere. The majority look at it as 4 years of putting up with these people so they can get a degree and move on. Most of the campus had their head down.

You don't have enough time for shutting down a speaker if you're in an intensive study. The students who ran Weinstein out of Evergreen weren't his own biology students. It was students with time and anger to spare. And they effectively tarnished the whole college by themselves. It's a risk to stand up so most don't.

This behavior pattern isn't contained to colleges.

jakefromstatefarm

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #873 on: April 22, 2018, 04:02:15 PM »
This is why I'm confused by the vocal denials that anything at all has changed. When you actually ask everyone, it seems like there's wide agreement that something has!
there seems to be an obvious distinction to make here between perceived changes and real ones, which I assume is why mandark mentioned “material conditions” or whatever all those posts ago

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #874 on: April 22, 2018, 04:12:32 PM »
Yeah, a polling result on whether people believe in a trend isn't actual evidence of the trend itself (e.g. people always say crime is getting worse even when the opposite is true), even though that poll can be useful or interesting for other reasons.

El Babua

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #875 on: April 22, 2018, 04:13:01 PM »
So any talk of TPUSA running an organized effort to take over student governments throughout the country?

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #876 on: April 22, 2018, 04:55:05 PM »
Well we could point to the numerous times it happens on campus.

https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/


But I believed from the moment Mandy shat out his mouth that it was another dishonest question and he was going to weasel out of anything.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #877 on: April 22, 2018, 05:13:46 PM »
Bonus: Out of 450 Universities in the theFIRE database, 136 earned a red flag rating for free speech and student right issues. This includes many major state colleges and ivy league schools.

If you throw in the yellow speech code rating, which is for policy that is vague enough to abused and restrict speech, then you probably hit over 50% of the universities.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #878 on: April 24, 2018, 06:38:31 PM »
Quote
tylerk
3 hours ago
If I saw men masturbating on the subway on the way to work, I would cringe. If I saw men masturbating on the subway every day, week after week, month after month, no doubt the "cringe factor" would dissipate over time. And that is the fatal flaw in social change. One can be conditioned to accept horror.
which of you is riding the subway with this guy

Nola

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #879 on: April 24, 2018, 08:09:23 PM »
Bonus: Out of 450 Universities in the theFIRE database, 136 earned a red flag rating for free speech and student right issues. This includes many major state colleges and ivy league schools.

If you throw in the yellow speech code rating, which is for policy that is vague enough to abused and restrict speech, then you probably hit over 50% of the universities.

Long care post warning:
spoiler (click to show/hide)

In the context of what this most recent discussion is seemingly about: is there a notable uptick in the advocation and/or sympathy for free speech restrictions compared to past generations of university students, primarily coming from the left, I am not sure what you think you are providing evidence of here?

For this to be adequetely meaningful, it would need to include some historical anchor we could weigh the present trend against. And it would need to siphon out, stratify, and organize the context in which these events are happening. So as to make a more informed value judgement. As is, your "cases" link is throwing into the same basket a college Republican group trying to ban a science teacher for saying in class that people that vote for Republicans are tacitly supporting murder and dislocation by way of denying climate change(like happened at my school) with left-wing protestors trying to ban Milo from speaking. I guess it could be evidence toward it's present state of being on a broad, indiscriminate level, but we both know you see the causation and problem more specific. And have long argued to it being a troubling trend predominately amongst the left.

However, as evidence for consideration, if you look at a wide collection of surveys across age and political spectrum, like two recent YouGov/Economist polls and a Pew Survey, it does seem to undercut the current Peterson style thesis that there is something uniquely wrong with the free speech values of the children(and more specifically the dirty millennial leftist, Marxist post-modernists).

Almost across the board, you tend to find a wider range and stronger advocation for speech restriction amongst older, Republican people surveyed than younger, liberal participants. And greater advocacy for a wider range of restrictions amongst Republicans than Democrats. However, the inflection points differ. The right tends to favor bans on trans, gay, non-Christian speech in institutions and restricting their allowance in society. Followed up closely by things like banning flag burning or protesting the National Anthem. While the left is slightly more willing to ban and restrict issues stemming from prejudice. However, the aggregate percentage of those groups advocating given restrictions comes out higher and wider on the older, right leaning participants. Basically the one place that the left seems to take a harder line on free speech restrictions are when it comes to issues of prejudice. Which has always made me suspicious about why so many like Peterson only seem to give a shit about that particular inflection point of anti-prejudice and not the still much larger issue of people advocating restrictions on speech because of their prejudice???

Some charts to illustrate some of the above:

spoiler (click to show/hide)





[close]

I've asked this before, but why should I have a greater outsized concern about liberals on campus over-correcting for real issues of prejudice in society and our economic systems than actual Republicans and older conservatives and their much larger and broader assaults on speech? Like trying to jail teachers that protest their wages or work conditions? Want to pressure companies to fire people that protest racism by way of the national anthem? Or legislate a ban on certain civic protests entirely? Ban political dissent they don't like? De-humanize and suppress immigrants, religious minorities, and POC for political gain and personal desire? Ban LGBTQ literature in libraries? Restrict LGBTQ rights more generally? Whom actively vote for autocratic candidates and are consistently supporting any and all underhanded ways to undermine and corrupt core democratic institutions and processes from the national level down to the student government level(as El Babua alluded to)? Especially the core Trumpian white, non-college graduate?

It is really hard to take seriously someone that wants to tell me that the real nexus of problems in this country is 19 year old college liberals getting too worked up on social media and campuses over racism when you step back and take in any sort of objective perspective on free speech issues in this country.
[close]
« Last Edit: April 24, 2018, 08:54:48 PM by Nola »

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Wank Dad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #880 on: April 24, 2018, 08:46:38 PM »
Bonus: Out of 450 Universities in the theFIRE database, 136 earned a red flag rating for free speech and student right issues. This includes many major state colleges and ivy league schools.

If you throw in the yellow speech code rating, which is for policy that is vague enough to abused and restrict speech, then you probably hit over 50% of the universities.

From FIRE: Report: Campus speech codes decline for 10th straight year

Quote
  • Just under one third (32.3 percent) of surveyed institutions received FIRE’s poorest, red light rating for maintaining speech codes that both clearly and substantially restrict freedom of speech. This year’s figure is seven percentage points lower than last year and almost 42 percentage points lower than in FIRE’s 2009 report.
  • Most institutions — 58.6 percent — receive a yellow light rating. While less restrictive than red light policies, yellow light policies still prohibit or have an impermissible chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech.
  • Thirty-five institutions earned FIRE’s highest, green light rating for free speech in this year’s report. Since the report was written, two more universities have earned green light status, bringing the total to 37. Only eight institutions earned this rating in the 2009 report.

Still not sold this is a major crisis.

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #881 on: April 24, 2018, 09:33:42 PM »
I didn't expect you to be sold on it since your intent is to never believe it and try to dismiss it.


Show me some metrics!

oh, no not THOSE metrics

or those metrics

what metrics? the magical metrics that I didn't specify

and never will


Always a coward.


32% of colleges is no minor thing, unless you want to pretend the events that keep happening over and over are nothing.

Time to repost this:

http://nassimtaleb.org/2016/09/intellectual-yet-idiot/
« Last Edit: April 25, 2018, 11:13:14 AM by etiolate »

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #882 on: April 24, 2018, 09:43:09 PM »
32% of colleges is no minor thing, unless you want to pretend the events that keep happening over and over are nothing.

Nine years ago it was 74%. The source you picked shows the trend significantly and monotonically improving in the last decade.

:yeshrug

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #883 on: April 25, 2018, 12:16:53 AM »
BILL MAHER SHOWDOWN POST-MORTEM:


spoiler (click to show/hide)
:lol at Doocy whenever Peterson talks for longer than ten seconds "sure... right... sure... right... right..."
[close]

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #884 on: April 25, 2018, 12:23:08 AM »
:lol Did he think Peterson was going to give him Fox News hot takes?

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #885 on: April 25, 2018, 02:21:02 AM »
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-24/holding-up-a-mirror-to-the-intellectuals-of-the-left
Quote
This column is my corresponding warning to the left, like when somebody tells you your shirt is not properly tucked in.

Here is what I see:

More and more of the interesting discussions are going off-line and occurring in private groups, in part to escape the glare of social media and political correctness. Right now, it is especially hard to tell who will prove to be the important thinkers of our time. I’m struck by Scott Alexander, a blogger at Slate Star Codex and a thinker who is influential among other writers. He keeps his real name a secret.

Often my best conversations are with doers and practitioners, rather than intellectuals and writers. The politics of the doers are typically difficult to discern or to boil down to simple classifications. Even when they are registered Democrats, they often seem alienated from that party in intellectual terms.

I find that left-wing intellectuals complain more about the right wing than right-wing intellectuals complain about the left. This negative focus isn’t healthy for the viability of left-wing intellectual creativity.

...

Religion has been a major force in world history, and today is no exception. The popular intellectual who probably has made the biggest splash this year, Jordan Peterson, describes himself as a Christian. Right-wing intellectuals, overall, aren’t nearly as religious as is the broader right-wing electorate. Still, I find they are much better suited to understand the role of religion in life than are left-wing intellectuals. For intellectuals on the left, the primary emotional reaction to religion is to see it as a force standing in the way of social liberalism, feel awkward about how many Americans are still religious, and then prefer to change the topic.

I see the main victims of the political correctness movement as standing in the center or center-left. In fact, some intellectual superstars, such as Peterson or Steven Pinker, have thrived and received enormous attention by attacking political correctness. But if you don’t have a big public audience, you work in a university, and you wish to make a point about race or gender that isn’t entirely along “proper” lines, you will probably keep your mouth shut or suffer the consequences. Those intellectual victims are not mainly on the right, and it means the left has ended up somewhat blind on these issues. This underlying dysfunction is a big reason the left was so surprised by the election of President Donald Trump.

Every intellectual on the right is extremely familiar with the doctrines of the left and center-left, but the converse is somewhat less true. It is virtually impossible to imagine a conservative or libertarian analog of Krugman’s earlier claim that there are no conservative sites he reads regularly.

In short, the new world of ideas is a free-for-all, and it is hard to wrap your arms around it. But the overall picture is by no means as favorable to left-wing intellectuals as left-wing intellectuals might wish to tell you.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #886 on: April 25, 2018, 04:36:00 AM »


Fresh off the hot take express, noted Soviet Union expert, Jordan Peterson thinks the Stalin was a secular humanist and that atheists would murder everyone without God to stop them.

Can't believe this is the guy that stole our beloved Shosta's heart.  :doge

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #887 on: April 25, 2018, 04:52:20 AM »
timestamps for relevant points, not going to listen to this whole thing.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #888 on: April 25, 2018, 04:57:49 AM »
Stolen from reddit:



(11:33) - JP: "The celebrity atheists don't contend with the real issues". Lists a bunch of authors, no specific issues.

(13:09) - JP suggests experiences while getting high on shrooms are evidence of the supernatural.

(41:32) - JP: "All artists only think they're godless" [paraphrasing]. Later, says Matt acts like he believes in God. JP starts getting weirdly aggressive.

(47:13) - JP attempts a series of "gotchas" in an attempt to show that Matt's morality has fundamental axioms. Claims cutting off your own head is not necessarily bad for well being.

(50:55) - Matt calls out JP for "Cathy Newman"ing him for the last 10 minutes.

(55:50) - JP abandons the entire field of logic to attempt to undermine Matt. JP says his "smart engineer friend" told him machine learning uses no rules. (This is literally wrong, and at best a complete misunderstanding). JP misses irony of having a book with 12 rules.

Q+A

(1:04:58) - JP does his usual dodge of the "Is God real" question, complete with long silence.

(1:15:00) - JP: "The Soviet Union was a secular, humanist government" [para.]

(1:28:21) - JP claims a "genuine" atheist is like Raskolnikov from Crime and Punishment, proving he did read the book.

(1:35:02) - Matt points out JP simply redefines "atheists" to avoid acknowledging conflicts in his worldview.

(1:39:29) - JP walks back his claim that shroom trips are evidence for God.

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #889 on: April 25, 2018, 05:18:22 AM »
okay sounds interesting enough thank you, i'll give it a complete listen later, rn i'd rather listen to FF

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #890 on: April 25, 2018, 05:19:32 AM »
Aw man, I had a flippant comment about how Peterson thinks that everyone would turn into a bunch of Raskolnikovs without a "real" system of morality (ie existing outside of human creation) but the man himself beat me to it.

jorma

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #891 on: April 25, 2018, 08:02:32 AM »
JP is such a goof and continues to make unforced error after unforced error for those who don't like him (for whatever reason any individual has to dislike him, there are a few). He should probably scale back his appearances as, like most people, the more he speaks the more chances he gives himself to look like a dummy.

Reading this thread i'm starting to think he's just expanding his audience. His fans are only interested in watching clips where he slays, while his anti fans will only listen to clips where he is a bit of a clueless wanker.

jorma

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #892 on: April 25, 2018, 09:06:09 AM »
But he knows from personal experience that he has far more of a reach on any given number of podcasts he regularly goes on than a few minutes on Fox News. Going on the worst pundit shows on Fox News undermines his position on anything, imo. He can go on JRE basically whenever and be on a show with 5m+ downloads on one platform alone and talk for 3 hours about all of his points, or he can go on Tucker for 7 minutes for half as many people and talk about those dang libs. It makes him come off as an ideologue and, dare I say it, dog whistler.

It's almost..idk...intellectually dishonest. Cowardly, perhaps.

I just based it on the comments here, some users post videos to show how awesome he is, others post different videos to show how awful he is.
But it's not like i care enough to actually watch any of them. (trumpshrug)

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #893 on: April 25, 2018, 11:24:32 AM »
32% of colleges is no minor thing, unless you want to pretend the events that keep happening over and over are nothing.

Nine years ago it was 74%. The source you picked shows the trend significantly and monotonically improving in the last decade.

:yeshrug

FIRE wins its cases, which improves the rating for the college they win against. It reflects trends in the court, but not for certain trends in the college mentality or the youth there.

Weinstein got a very nice going away present from Evergreen but that doesn't mean Evergreen admits guilt or will change. It doesn't seem that way at all.

The issue of Title IX cases going to real actual courts is costing the colleges money, but it is not a certainty that this means that colleges will stop running kangaroo courts or change their vague guilt-assuming practices as long as TItle IX exists in the same way or if the lobbying and activist forces that created the kangaroo courts still exist in DC and in the campus itself. 


It would be better if you knew how to be honest Mandark, but I don't think you do know how to be honest. If you did have honesty then I probably wouldn't have to explain this rather obvious bit of nuance.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #894 on: April 25, 2018, 02:07:42 PM »
FIRE wins its cases, which improves the rating for the college they win against. It reflects trends in the court, but not for certain trends in the college mentality or the youth there.

So most or all of the changes in FIRE's ratings reflect policy changes forced by verdicts in court cases?

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #895 on: April 25, 2018, 11:32:00 PM »
Just anecdotally, many colleges I know of have scaled back their policies as part of a standard review and a whole "woah, we don't want that mess, it sounds like paperwork, and not the good kind of paperwork" mentality with practically zero actual events occurring beforehand. That's not to say a free speech extremist like myself doesn't consider aspects of them to be problematic, and I'm sure that's part of why FIRE doesn't hand out green ratings easily, but on the whole you aren't going to be pulled before any kind of tribunal and mostly because the administration doesn't want to deal with it. Campus forces actively desiring it are too small and easily distracted to where I strongly suspect* the administration was behind some pro-Trump chalk writing that "suddenly appeared" on the sidewalks and caused a tizzy until it rained.

Evergreen is such a tiny and insignificant college that is so out of line with colleges in general (it doesn't issue grades, it only has a "single" undergraduate degree in Liberal Arts, its motto is latin for "let it all hang out", it has 4000 students, etc.) that it's absurd to consider it comparable or any kind of trend with universities or colleges writ large. Wellesey is a million times as relevant and it's a parody college in pop culture.

*:doge

naff

  • someday you feed on a tree frog
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #896 on: April 25, 2018, 11:56:48 PM »
Etoiletries still up in here trying to manufacture outrage.

Quote
It would be better if you knew how to be honest Mandark, but I don't think you do know how to be honest. If you did have honesty then I probably wouldn't have to explain this rather obvious bit of nuance.

 :lol
◕‿◕

Momo

  • Nebuchadnezzar
  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #897 on: April 26, 2018, 12:33:59 AM »
I still havent watched the Jordan Peterson video, got busy yesterday :/

etiolate

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #898 on: April 26, 2018, 12:08:18 PM »
Almost through the Peterson/Dillahunt debate. I think they get a little testy toward the end. I find that the discussion reveals how strongly their experiences influence their view, be it southern baptist churches for Dillahunt or the clinical work of Peterson and the troubled people he's tried to help. I think this showed a lot in the Doestevsky story. Peterson was talking about human rationalizing and then the actuality of living with the reasoning. Dillahunt took this as real atheists are murderers.

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Re: The Intellectual Dank Wad [ ot ] Hour Long Youtubes unf unf
« Reply #899 on: April 26, 2018, 01:46:54 PM »
You would think Peterson himself would spend a few seconds to trying to clarify that at some point throughout the debate, if that were the case.