Any thoughts on this guy's ideas? I started watching some of his lectures on youtube and being the fedora that I am I find his theories about behavioural truth that appear in stories and myths as well as his arguments about alternate truths depending on your pre suppositions to be very interesting.
This is a very long one but I find this a good "summary" of his views: https://youtu.be/07Ys4tQPRis
This dude is weird to me in the sense that with practically everything he says -except on the topic on religion- I find him to be completely on point, but he likes to put things in sort of apocalyptic language and it's hard to not think of his views as unnecessarily hyperbolic to some degree.
>SJWs LITERALLY WANT TO DESTROY EVERYTHING WE VALUE
Well things never go from bad to worse without periods in between.
Do you think people just go from being nice one day to genocidal the next?
They don't. They are ideologized into it throughout a long period of time.
Yeah I got the same reaction. But I think that's sort of the point of what he talks about, is how we don't take things seriously until they're really really bad. So just like you I had the reaction of "well it's good you're being principled but is this really going to affect things the way you say" but he then goes on to describe "the crawl" of how things always start out as not so serious and kind of absurd and it's only once you're in the gutter that you understand how much those small encroachments meant. So you can only describe it in an apocalyptic manner really, and there's no real way to get it not to sound that way since the examples you can point to where it has gone wrong in the past are indeed apocalyptic.
He's a meme.
He is literally rehashing ideas that were in use 50-100 years ago from Tolstoy's Christian non-resistance to violence to game theory and ordinary language philosophy.
He's a hack.
Except he's not doing that.
He claims he's been "thinking about it for 40 years", "I've studied this for four decades" but all of the ideas he has expressed have been expressed multiple times primarily between 1850-1950 in a variety of philosophers from the psychoanalytics in terms of a "therapeutic process" to Ludwig Wittgenstein as a "way of life".
He's obviously intelligent and can express his ideas well, but he hasn't gotten quite up to date in his ideas.
Nevertheless, it is nice that people are finding merit to him and learning through him, but I would watch out, don't consider him to be monumental or the peak of modern day philosophy, you will soon find him to be another Sam Harris.
Ebin. But really though, this is an anonymous imageboard, you have no reason to fear backlash for posting voices you agree with that you know shitposters are going to disagree with, so please share.
What he says has been said many times before and I have already stated that he is a good teacher able to express himself well.
I am simply advising you not to fall too much for this guy, you may well soon be disappointed, you're always a master in a field as long as you are on step ahead of the rest...
>What he says has been said many times before
I don't think it has. Especially not the things he is articulating in the entirety of this video >>2099728
Also, I don't think he is immune to criticism. At all. In fact, I have some myself. But that doesn't mean he is a real step up from the average post-modernist, post-structuralist Marxist at École Normale Supérieure.
Apologies, when I said modern day, I didn't literally mean this century because philosophy hasn't really received anything monumental in some decades, the last thing I remember being important was Anscombe's Consequentialism and some other meme stuff like Nagel.
When I said modern day, I meant the 20th century.
Peterson has read many important seminal figures such as Tolstoy and Jung but he needs to update himself with the linguistic debate that went on with Ideal Language Philosophy and Ordinary Language Philosophy. Also the debate that went on with the philosophy of science with figures like Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend.
A lot of people will tell you to read Daniel Dennett but he is pure crap and reductive. God I hate that bastard.
Dennett is the kind of guy you end up with when someone refuses to become a scientist and becomes a philosopher instead, e.g someone who just sits around mumbling until they get news from the scientists.
I went to UofT an have taken both personality and maps of meaning with him. Maps of Meaning was one of the few textbooks that I read from cover to cover. He was an excellent professor, and if you enjoy his work I recommend you read it ($50)
He's using shitty arguments to capitalize on a disenfranchised portion of the online community to further his own personal financial interests.
Appealing to you dummies who are afraid of SJWs, college educated progressives, and a rise in anti-capitalistic sentiments is the fastest growing online market. They're all youtube verbal karate teachers helping you "defend yourself" against those mean nasty women with dyed hair. They're peddling their new verbal kung fu grip action against the scary black people protesting in the streets, the frightening "militant' lgbt mobs demanding equal rights. But it's going to be okay because these people have nice things to say about you and y our views.
You're frightened, and these hucksters will console you with stories about how those scary people are bad and evil and how you're so great and how you can support what they do- since their freedoms and yours are always under attack- by clicking a like button, sharing a video, buying a coffee mug or t-shirt, and coming to see their live shows.
Enjoy your manufactured products, fellow consumers.
Is this pasta?
Even in a world where everything you said is true that doesn't make it bad. Oh buhu they make money off of sharing their ideas. So? Isn't this the best form of capitalism? Notice how how you don't attack any of his arguments directly, instead trying to construct some conspiracy behind his motives. I couldn't care less about the person, it's what he says which is interesting.
The point is that no real change comes by being satisfied in watching YouTube videos giving the creator money and the ad companies money whilst you comfortable sit in your daily life doing nothing but feeling as though you have by watching videos and taking the moral highground over what is "corrupting" society.
Well there's definitely a lack of overlap and the two sides are talking paast each other way too often and retreating to their echochambers. But it's a hell of a lot better than nothing to actually have opposing viewpoints readily availible. And if you're informed enough that you hear something which sounds like complete bullshit to you and you know you can tell them on the spot why what they're saying is wrong then you are more likely to do so where as if you're not informed you'll most likely never open your mouth or if you do you won't have any arguments that can change the other person's mind.
This nihilistic viewpoint of "It doesn't matter maan, they're all part of the system maan" is so lazy and simplistic.
Your opinion would also be more applicable to many other youtube personalities but this guy really only calls for people to improve themselves and always speak the truth. On top of that he of course states what his own opinions, but his core message is always for individuals to take a hard look at themselves and realize how little they know and how they should sort themselves out before trying to change something for real.
Feels like people are only talking about his political stuff, would really like to know what people think about his behavioural truth ideas with archetypal stories essentially being "true" and so on.
Like his whole thing about Osiris, Horus and Seth. and how their whole interplay.
not him but, the fact that some people are in fact NOT just sitting and watching youtube videos is enough. Which is why it's a strange criticism. All he needs to do is speak the truth and provide compelling ideas. That's sufficient. If he then supports his livelihood by making those videos at the same time and a big portion of people who watch his videos will only sit on youtube then so be it. It doesn't matter. Which is why as the other anon, you are merely projecting.
Yes, I'd like to understand it further and see other people poke hoels at it, because I'm sensing some sort of cure for my nihilism. Being able to embrace ancient stories and myths and the wisdom contained therein in a new profound way would be wonderful without needing to resort to the supernatural.
well...not in the traditional sense anyway. Is questioning presuppositions and arriving at a new non-scientific way of viewing things just semantics and actually a way to just communicate religious supernatural ideas? Maybe.
>Feels like people are only talking about his political stuff
Because our current intellectual environment heavily selects his type of commentary on certain subjects so strongly that anything else must take the backseat or ride in the trunk.
You need to evaluate and articulate clearly by what you mean by "supernatural".
Because Peterson's thesis is that religions and mythology aren't talking about physical reality at all, they are talking about Being, e.g lived experience and subjectivity.
How do you live a good life? That's the question, and it's not reducible to simple "This is metaphysical and supernatural therefore it is to be rejected a priori".
>and it's not reducible to simple "This is metaphysical and supernatural therefore it is to be rejected a priori"
I know he's not very popular here but this feels very similar to Sam Harris' the moral landscape, which is ironic since his stance is generally so anti-religious. But I'd love to see him and Jordan hash it out becasue I think they're converging on some similar ideas here.
I, unlike most of 4chan, actually like Harris.
It's actually quite funny to watch him try to furiously reconcile his experiences while meditating and on psychedelic drugs, with his extreme rationalism.
Thanks anon. Just finished the video
Havn't enjoyed a singular talking head documentary to that degree since The Fog of War
He almost lost me when he said sacrifices were one of the greatest human conceptions but he brought it around. Def gave me some new perspective on religious thoughts. Much appreciated.
Lmao and now my enemies are Chaos Monsters
>quite up to date in his ideas.
$$$$$$\ $$$$$$$$\ $$$$$$\
\_$$ _|\__$$ __|$$ __$$\
$$ | $$ | $$ / \__|
$$ | $$ | \$$$$$$\
$$ | $$ | \____$$\
$$ | $$ | $$\ $$ |
$$$$$$\ $$ | \$$$$$$ |
\______| \__| \______/
$$$$$$\ $$$$$$\ $$\ $$$$$$$\
$$ __$$\ $$$ __$$\ $$$$ | $$ ____|
\__/ $$ |$$$$\ $$ |\_$$ | $$ |
$$$$$$ |$$\$$\$$ | $$ | $$$$$$$\
$$ ____/ $$ \$$$$ | $$ | \_____$$\
$$ | $$ |\$$$ | $$ | $$\ $$ |
$$$$$$$$\ \$$$$$$ /$$$$$$\\$$$$$$ |
\________| \______/ \______|\______/
$$$$$$$\ $$$$$$$$\ $$$$$$\ $$$$$$$\ $$\ $$$$$$$$\
$$ __$$\ $$ _____|$$ __$$\ $$ __$$\ $$ | $$ _____|
$$ | $$ |$$ | $$ / $$ |$$ | $$ |$$ | $$ |
$$$$$$$ |$$$$$\ $$ | $$ |$$$$$$$ |$$ | $$$$$\
$$ ____/ $$ __| $$ | $$ |$$ ____/ $$ | $$ __|
$$ | $$ | $$ | $$ |$$ | $$ | $$ |
$$ | $$$$$$$$\ $$$$$$ |$$ | $$$$$$$$\ $$$$$$$$\
\__| \________| \______/ \__| \________|\________|