I find that Jordan Peterson himself is not annoying, but his fans. Even when you give positive feedback that Peterson is actually pretty good as psychologist, as soon as you criticise his sophistry and his intentionally erroneous take on philosophy, his fans will immediately come at you like a horde of zombies. That’s what Peterson’s fans are: unthinking horde. It is unfortunate that his fans tend to be lonely individuals who feel lost, and Peterson is only too happy to lap it up for his own grift.
Oh Peterson is extremely annoying. His preferred style of discussion is essentially an upgraded version of the Shapiro method:
Throw out an argument
When this argument is attacked, immediately derail the discussion to talk about definitions
Whenever it seems like your opponent tries to define something by using a different word, interrupt them by questioning the definition of that word.
It’s the idea of platonic ideals but perverted, so that you cannot ever describe things, because to describe you have to use other things to compare them to. Critically, he never uses this argument against himself. His definitions, however circular they are, are unassailable and end up so distorted that he essentially creates his own language.
Take the word “believe”. To Peterson, this is defined as “willing to give up your life before renouncing a thing”. Who TF uses this word that way?
In the early days I checked out a couple of his lectures too because I knew he was problematic but couldn’t articulate why. What i realized when trying to decipher these lectures is just how much time he spends approaching making a point but literally never gets there.
This man operates on plausible deniability. He litters in truisms that dumb people latch onto (like that cleaning your room will make you feel better – no shit everyone knows that) and then goes into these half-baked diatribes like how women are agents of chaos, but never fully explains why, and then moves onto a new point, and everyone acts like he’s a genius because they draw their own conclusions based on those half-baked points.
Then when his fans start saying horrible shit to women, he takes no responsibility, because he never explicitly concluded on his point, leaving him with plausible deniability.
The man is a pseudointellectual at best, and is absolutely a charlatan.
hes crucial into drawing incel men into conservative politics voter base, also being funded by russia is one of the reasons. ive only ever see meatheads/gymbros find him inspiring, and yes they are all magats.
I find that Jordan Peterson himself is not annoying, but his fans. Even when you give positive feedback that Peterson is actually pretty good as psychologist, as soon as you criticise his sophistry and his intentionally erroneous take on philosophy, his fans will immediately come at you like a horde of zombies. That’s what Peterson’s fans are: unthinking horde. It is unfortunate that his fans tend to be lonely individuals who feel lost, and Peterson is only too happy to lap it up for his own grift.
Oh Peterson is extremely annoying. His preferred style of discussion is essentially an upgraded version of the Shapiro method:
It’s the idea of platonic ideals but perverted, so that you cannot ever describe things, because to describe you have to use other things to compare them to. Critically, he never uses this argument against himself. His definitions, however circular they are, are unassailable and end up so distorted that he essentially creates his own language.
Take the word “believe”. To Peterson, this is defined as “willing to give up your life before renouncing a thing”. Who TF uses this word that way?
In the early days I checked out a couple of his lectures too because I knew he was problematic but couldn’t articulate why. What i realized when trying to decipher these lectures is just how much time he spends approaching making a point but literally never gets there.
This man operates on plausible deniability. He litters in truisms that dumb people latch onto (like that cleaning your room will make you feel better – no shit everyone knows that) and then goes into these half-baked diatribes like how women are agents of chaos, but never fully explains why, and then moves onto a new point, and everyone acts like he’s a genius because they draw their own conclusions based on those half-baked points.
Then when his fans start saying horrible shit to women, he takes no responsibility, because he never explicitly concluded on his point, leaving him with plausible deniability.
The man is a pseudointellectual at best, and is absolutely a charlatan.
You’ve described like 70% of conservative media right here.
hes crucial into drawing incel men into conservative politics voter base, also being funded by russia is one of the reasons. ive only ever see meatheads/gymbros find him inspiring, and yes they are all magats.
He’s also doing a lot of argument by definition.
For example, he argued that God exists because morals exist. This follows from his own definition, which states that morals can only come from God.
hes what you call a pseudointellectual, they also tend to be incel men too.
hes also well funded by the russians, as he have relations with them in the past.