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

[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.

[shosta]

They're really, seriously not even worth mentioning. I don't remember if I brought this up here or on Resetera with ol' sphagnumi and memeballs the last time it came up but I've had several conversations with Curtis Yarvin and while he's pretty well read he just suffers from so many logical shortcomings that I can't take him seriously at all. Both his political views and his personal software projects have the same kind of obvious failings that a normal person would have seen as reason to abandon both immediately.

[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.

[Stro]

That's weird I heard Peterson say problematic about 30 times on JRE

[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?

[Stro]

So do Rogan and Peterson use it because of their ideological drives or

[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.

[shosta]

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

[Stro]

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.

Ya but you didn't answer my question

[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".

[Stro]

So...Peterson doesn't use it in the way you assume everyone else uses it is what you're saying.


Lol at your reaction to Peterson using the word being...immediately talking about Rogan using the word and then trying to change the subject.

[shosta]

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

[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'

[Stro]

etoilet is very problematic

[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.

[Stro]

etoilet is very problematic

I do present a problem to bullshitters like yourself.

What is it that you think I'm bullshitting about

[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.

[Stro]

Oh is that not allowed here anymore

[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...

[Stro]

Bro I've had enough of your bullshittery

[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.

[shosta]

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

[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)

[shosta]

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.

[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?

[shosta]

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.

[etiolate]

You should listen to it.

[shosta]

2:18:22
 

[Stro]

Now who's being problematic, bitch

[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.

[curly]

if you're a detractor or fan(I'm neither)

  :jerkingyourselfoff

Yeah breh you're a totally neutral arbiter unlike us silly Americans with our partisanship

[Momo]

if you're a detractor or fan(I'm neither)

  :jerkingyourselfoff

Yeah breh you're a totally neutral arbiter unlike us silly Americans with our partisanship

You're the kind of moron I dont bother talking seriously to 

[curly]

we're all eating from the trash can of ideology, and if you think you aren't you're lying to yourself

[Momo]

I'm pretty happy to argue about trash like youtube videos of girls sticking their legs into actual trash cans, so i'm not above anything on this earth, but when someone tells me that i'm the very thing that I just said i'm not without knowing me well, I'm going to take it as a signal to talk shit 

[curly]

I know you're a little bitch

[Stro]

[Mandark]

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.

Harris is defending Charles Murray, right?

Cause Murray certainly has some ideas that go along with his "data."

[Momo]

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.

Harris is defending Charles Murray, right?

Cause Murray certainly has some ideas that go along with his "data."

No he's not, he says many times he's not defending the conclusions Murray comes to and in fact him and Klein seem to agree outcome wise. He very much tries hard to get Klein to separate the data from Murray's conclusions also, but the Klein refused to change.

[Momo]

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.

Harris is defending Charles Murray, right?

Cause Murray certainly has some ideas that go along with his "data."

No he's not, he says many times he's not defending the conclusions Murray comes to and in fact him and Klein seem to agree outcome wise. He very much tries hard to get Klein to separate the data from Murray's conclusions also, but the Klein refused to change.