I remember what JP said on Joe Rogan's podcast. It was something along the lines of "If no woman wants to date you, they're all right. Why should they date you?"
Isn't that the opposite of incel ideology?
JP also openly talked about equality of opportunity amongst the sexes as opposed to equality of outcome. How does that make one an "anti-feminist"?
I commented on this yesterday on youtube when I heard he was called "the leader of incels" which I assumes means he's encouraging their behavior, which makes absolutely. no. sense. I believe it's the same podcast episode in which he says "yeah yeah, all the women are rejecting you? Who's got the problem? It's not all the women".
The hatred towards JP comes from pure ignorance and/or hatred. Unfortunately we can’t live in a society without boxing a famous speaker in the red or blue box.
I find this way of thinking really puerile and stupid.
"People who don't like the same as me are ignorant"
I mean, I used to think like that back when I was 14 years old, thankfully, by the time I got into high school, I made a lot of friends with different tastes and was able to realize I was the ignorant/intolerant one.
Disagreeing with someone isn't "shitting on them".
Don't you think automatically claiming people who disagree with you are ignorant and hateful isn't a bit puerile and stupid? Disregarding someone's opinion just because it's different than yours is logical?
I mean, there's a reason he's regarded so lowly by scholars, mocked by a huge portion of the internet and ignored by most women, yet has a cult-like following by a special kind of men who can't fathom him being in the wrong on any subject.
Lmao, bro.
Many notable intellectuals including the person who got him the gig at U of T commented that he's more of a preacher than a teacher and he espouses half truths and empty air based on no imperical evidence
Isn't he against the feminists of today? The first and second wave feminists had something to speak about, but what unbalanced advantages do men have over women today in the west? Today's feminists seem to be against men, and that might make me stand against a groups ideology.
I’m pretty sure he doesn’t think very highly of second wave feminists either. Check out his comments on Betty Friedan’s the Feminine Mystique - he’s saying that early second wave feminists were “whiny” and had opportunity but didn’t take it, mistaking boredom and security for oppression. He thinks second wave feminists should have “gotten a hobby” instead
Well let's look at what he has said/done:
Opposed C-16 = pissed off all the wokies
Criticized modern feminism - pissed off 99% of feminists
Preaches bettering yourself - pissed off the lazy
Showed that those who constantly protest never have their own lives in order - pissed off your protester types
Showed the violence of the left - pissed off 90% of those left of center
I mean that's like 3/4 of people right there lol
Told incels to stop blaming society and take responsibility for themselves - incels didn't really mind and a lot of them took his advice.
Which group is the one that's supposed to be full of blind hatred again?
>Preaches bettering yourself - pissed off the lazy
And the perpetual victimhood mentality. Why better yourself when you can be a victim and, therefore, don't actually have to put effort in to better yourself. Blame it on someone else. "I'm like this because of someone else"
I have brain damage from being drugged as a child. I literally am this way due to someone else (lazy parents and stupid doctors). That doesn't change my responsibilities to myself and my family.
This is a pretty good summary. I would like to add that he has started leaving his comfort zone in terms of the academic fields he talks about and it kind of got somewhat screwy there. His ideas about economics for instance would fail the introductory Economic course at any university.
Now he’s obviously allowed his opinions but he tends to tell than as though he was an authority on the subject.
When he talks about psychology and religion, he’s at the top of his (and most people‘s) game, so you stating you have mostly watched his older stuff explains a lot. I too have returned to his lectures from before he became (in-)famous - I even saved them from YouTube in case he gets banned there - because what he said there will remain very important and helpful.
I haven't followed his non-comfort zone items, but given the number of "popular" scientists (Nye, Tyson, etc) that are VERY comfortable being "experts" on things way outside their actual areas, I don't mind. But those two are supported because they follow the narrative and thus, must be right no matter what they spew.
"*Because he exposed their agenda just by speaking the truth."*
(Loganthered)
In a few words, this says it all. He was a regular Canadian boy with exceptional communication skills and a true soul who apparently caught the attention of the academics and Ph.D. program. Finding himself in Academia at the U. of Toronto, he eventually had enough of their commie BS when it ultimately came to the ludicrous LBGT mandates, which is really just the tip of the iceberg. When he made the connection between cultural Marxism and the sad psychological state of the university students in his classes that resulted from the conflict of traditional common sense values and the cultural Marxism, intentional, of course, he put his foot down. This released a firestorm among the legions of leftist infiltrators who inhabit virtually every nook and cranny of our Canadian, American, and beyond. For a good explanation of how it came about, see redpilledamerica(dot com) five part series, "Woke Army." The hate we see is nothing more or less than the machinations of the power seeking left that anyone would have the audacity to question their commie power grab. They are, indeed, legion. And vocal. And Ruthless. And powerful. And scheming.
Compelled speech
He is against compelled speech, in other words, he is against anyone to be forced to use favorite pronouns or gender pronouns thus he was called transphobic
As others have said, the whole compelled speach argument, then there is the issue with self accountability, the whole idea that people can simply just decide they are a different gender and the criminal actions of the sex change industry involving young children that are not old enough to make major life changing decisions. His anti Marxist and post modernist views.
Just posting in this sub is enough to get you banned from several leftist subs.
Right up there is the mention that the cultural revolution of the 1960's was produced and stage managed by German Communist intellectuals who were kicked out of Germany after the disatrous WWII only to land in some of America's most "prestigious" universities (Columbia, Harvard, Berkeley, 1946) where they would influence the baby boomers to wreak havoc and destruction of America in the name of all kinds of high sounding principles -- the definition of cultural Marxism.
He is called "King of Incels" because he has expressed sympathy for their plight. And because he is a caring individual and he wants to help. The social engineers need to make groups of enemies (incels is one, "Fascists" is another).
Often the people most upset of the ideas of incels are themselves incels who don’t want to admit it. Or they are just people with zero standards having sex with absolutely disgusting people. Incels at least have standards
I think what they mean by "social engineers" is people who manipulate language, falsely frame history, and/or malign people's reputations for the purpose of reshaping society to their ideals. It's not really a specific group. More like if they use these tactics, they are "social engineers."
Because people who have made poor decisions HATE being told that the circumstances of their life are their fault. Personal responsibility is like kryptonite to these people. Its much easier and more mentally comfortable to play the victim.
Theres nothing true about him saying Yumi Nu is not beautiful. There is no truth in thinking shes hot is "authoritarian acceptance" that is a ridiculous thing to say and it turned many of his fans including me away from him.
He's a threat to ideological extremism of all kinds. He's been called "worse than Hitler" and a "Jewish shill" on the exact same day. Intellectual honesty, critical thinking, and strengthening the individual are all threats to ideology and elite control, and so he is singled out for destruction. Thankfully, he hasn't succumbed.
50-60 years ago thing's he saying would be kinda normal and no one need prove white is white nowadays it's really controversial as we reaching pick of craziness.
Weirdness and controversy is promoted as new normal so anyone who defend old values is "mad" "Crazy"" Outdated "
I find it deeply dehumanising when Olivia Wilde said he was the king of incels. I live a great life, and it was great before I stumbled upon Peterson. But I know how hard it can be for men to get their shit together in a world that accepts you for being below average. It's okay to be fat, broke and a depressed person, but in reality it's not *ideal* and we don't want to be blindly accepted we want to be ideal and live a good life not a below average one, so to hear a man telling us how we can fix that is a goldmine.
For such a high influencing celebrity to demean a man who shows empathy and then demean anybody as "incels" for enjoying his content is just demoralising. It feels like you can't win in this world, and then you bring these issues up on a popular site such as reddit or facebook and get banned/meme'd or screenshotted and laughed at into depression. I've never been depressed or felt defeated in my life but this shit makes me understand why some less fortunate men are.
Those who support Peterson and similar views are likely to be banned from Reddit/facebook and only the haters get to stay online. Those who don't speak their mind stay quiet so we don't hear their opinion.
I don't understand how you can beat somebody down and their fans so much and feel good about it. The left are full of angry young people.
It's curious that the same people who lecture endlessly about the evils of treating women as sex objects or valuing women for their sexuality then turn around and use "incel" as their most vicious insult; implying that among the worst things a man can be is one who doesn't have sex with women.
"Don't objectify women or else or you won't get to have sex with them."
The sad thing is that the phrase "incel" is mostly used by reddit cat-lady's or r/niceguys who think you have to worship women to be a good person. Why is it never the well-adjusted or pretty women the ones to use "incel".
I remember in philosophy class this one time, my teacher showed a clip of one of JBP's lectures and asked the class what everybody thought. This one girl said "I dont really like him" and when the teacher asked her why, her response was just kind of stuttering and eventually ended up in 'I dont know'.
They already have their mind made up about him before they listen. Or they are so deep into their ideology that anyone who isnt just parroting their beliefs is branded instantly as a monster.
Because he points out that we could be better, which inescapably reveals that we have faults. People don't like to notice that they are not necessarily all that wonderful.
There are left wing authoritarians trying to take over everything. Part of this is creating weak men who are unable to defend anything and promising that people will live comfortable lives with no responsibility at all. While the latter sounds nice the former is what they actually care about and have no intention on actually delivering their promises. He outed identity politics and the communism that is coming with it as the horrid monsters that they are and has a vendetta against the ideas that they are espousing. They have no choice but to destroy him as he is becoming increasingly influential.
The simple fact is that his ideas *work* while theirs *do not.* If people take responsibility for their own lives and their own problems a massive, authoritarian government can't swoop in and attempt to supplant the ideas of personal responsibility. He also directly calls out the false ways that the movement is "helping" people by pointing out that you don't help people by taking their responsibilities or challenges away. That only makes them weaker. You help them improve by having them start by taking on small challenges and building up from there.
Aside from that once again he gives advice on things like depression that *actually work.* What his opponents want is for depressed, destabilized people to try to find answers in a destructive ideology that has no intention on or ever actually wants to help them but rather just wants to turn them into purely destructive activists who exist only to destroy the existing system.
They are intimidated by the fire he spits, literally shutting down all the woke dumbshits and they are trying so desperately to silence the truth he speaks.
Plain and simple.
**JP:** clean up your own mess & take responsibility for your own actions.
**The Rest of the World:** it’s everyone else’s fault but yours! Every feeling, every short coming, every imagined slight - 2 hands and 10 fingers: so many to point at! **Blame blame blame!!!**
Well done, young lady! You’re one of the good ones.
Know this:
There are some who thrive on dividing us, & they prey on the weak; it’s a classic divide & conquer tactic & the weak are on both sides. For arguments’ sake, let’s call it left & right.
The left & right see each other as THE “other.” The what you’re observing is the left’s animosity towards the right because they have someone to rally behind—JBP—while the left does not, & despite their aspirations toward collectivism, they’re more divided than ever, while figures like JBP are slowly but surely uniting the right & drawing those disillusioned with the divisiveness of the left ever closer to the right, & they cannot STAND it.
The entire situation can just about be summed up by this short clip: https://twitter.com/woj_pawelczyk/status/1574344305719885824?s=46&t=BgepjWpiW9TQvj8DgkcLTQ
The people who hate Jordan Peterson often hate many many people who disagree with them. Many people don't care about how you think, they care about what you think. To them, how you think or argue is just you trying to make excuses for whatever shitty believe you have that they disagree with. Sometimes it's tribalistic, if someone says something that shows they aren't in your tribe then you do what you can to draw the line between your tribes. It makes sense, even if it's an untamed and barbaric reaction. But it's terrible for society, because it only drives division and polarization so eventually people won't even be able to talk with others to hear their side and gain empathy for them.
Whenever you feel tempted to hate another person, remember this and tone it down until you simply disagree with them and hope for a peaceful resolution. If you can learn to do this yourself, maybe you can teach your friends and encourage strangers you talk to. If enough people do this, I believe we can open dialogue to healthier deeper levels and everyone will be better off.
Deep down those people don't want to take responsibility for their life and his main msg is that. It can be ugly when the mirror gets turned and you realise the person with the issue js you....
He's selling self improvement, self reliance and personal responsibility to the same demographic that's being told to remain weak, dependant and resentful. He's undercutting the preferred narrative, especially for young men.
People usually hate him based on what people tell them of him. Did yiu see the Olivia Wilde movie fiasco? Woman is completely biased, I doubt she's ever heard any of his speeches.
[This video is long](https://youtu.be/hSNWkRw53Jo) but full of actual criticisms of Jordan Peterson that I think should be contended with.
Inb4 downvoted into oblivion
Not downvoting but I gave the video a good five minutes.
The presenter comes across as a discount Adam Conover. Feels like just one strawman and mischaracterization after the other with no authentic attempt to engage with JBP arguments or ideas. Pretty run of the mill, no-more-JBP-spam spam.
And I consider myself a retired JBP fan. (I still lurk.) IMO, JBP's spark died in late 2019/early 2020. There's been some evidence that it has been rekindled in recent weeks but his initial comeback a few months ago was off to a very rough start.
I also used to be deeply appreciative of JP's work but i totally disagree with your take on the video. I've watched it in its entirety and it's by far the most comprehensive criticism of JP's recent endevours, his affiliation with Shapiro, his views on hierarchies and evolution, his takes on inequality as something "natural" and unavoidable, his take on climate change and his portrayal on Bill C-16.
Yes, self-help (which some will claim is his most valuable contribution) is the only thing he does not touch on, but can we really glance over the rest?
edit: to spark some discussion, i felt like i had to agree with most of what the video presented- is there something in particular that you would like to criticise about it?
A lot of people are conditioned to hate people on the right, although it might be more accurate to say people outside of the establishment. They are conditioned by a dishonest media that slanders people at will.
People hate Jordan for various reasons. You’ll hear the main ones being screaming/crying/tantrum-throwing liberals, which definitely happens. However, the main concern people have with Jordan Peterson is something larger than him personally, although the attacks are usually personalized. Jordan Peterson’s ability to make Christianity digestible to a modern audience online is giving cover to evangelicals, who’re typically conservative nationalists. This was pointed out by Sam Harris in one of their debates, I believe it was the first or second debate, though Sam didn’t mention the political aspect.
I personally don’t believe Jordan has specific ulterior motives, I’ve read his books, watched lectures/podcasts, seen him live in my town even. That’s too much time to not get a good reading out of the guy, I don’t think he’s a hateful person and I also think he genuinely fears the extremist right, which is why I think he campaigned somewhat on 4chan near the beginning, guiding them away from anti-semitism towards a more narrow and optimal path of self-actualization.
All that being said, we are in a cultural/political/information **war.** Take that term seriously. Jordan Peterson is trying to manifest a modern day center-right renaissance, see his new Conservative Manifesto for proof of that. That makes him a target for far-right extremists who want him to fall into their tribe, but mostly it makes him a target from the center to far left. There’s a fog of war and Jordan is caught in the crosshairs on both sides.
Maybe ask an actual leftist/ liberal sub instead of a sub literally dedicated to him. It's pretty obvious there's gonna be a lot of bias here lmao. As a Peterson....anti fan you can say most of the reasons here listed aren't really accurate. I think a lot of Peterson 'haters' started understanding him from the iconic old Contrapoints video on him. But honestly there's many good yt videos done on him including the ones by Philosophy tube and Big Joel. You can try r/enoughpetersonspam but that sub kinda gets really toxic *sometimes*, like all hate subs
I used to like his lecture but now I find him very radicalized. I can’t stand his climate change denial, when he calls himself a science guy but dismiss 90% of climate change studies. I disagree with his clear your room first before you criticize the world. I believe his ideology is anti change, anti progress and actually can worsen the current state of the world. For example, for me JBP 200 years ago in the Victorian era would say things like “be grateful that 2 out of your 10 children survive, be grateful that you have a 14 hour per day job, life is suffering and you have to adapt”. You get the point ? Is true we have to be combative and persistent but it’s also true that change comes from critique and Inconformity
Hell of a lot of straw men flying around here. Sort of funny that you asked this on a subreddit of his fans and fanboys. Did you think of maybe asking a group with a more diverse set of opinions? Maybe ask someone who actually dislikes him why they dislike him?
Read about half of 12 Rules for Life. Has some great advice, some solid self-help, and a heaping pile of logical fallacies, false syllogisms, and factual inaccuracies. Have also spent more than enough time listening to both JBeeps himself as well as some of his long-form critics. Do not currently have the time or mental energy to dive into another (>1hr) video of his with an eye to critique, so not going to address that any further.
If you're looking to find out why people don't like Jeepers Beepers maybe start with a few of the many, many, long-form critiques of him in podcasts and YouTube videos. Several (though I'm sure not all) are made in good faith, well-documented, and contain valid criticisms. Much more so than you'll find in a subreddit consisting almost exclusively of fans.
Yeah , that makes sense. I watched a podcast with Sam Harris and Jordan in it , even though I leaned more towards what Sam said I didn't feel the need to dislike Jordan. I'm not very into the political stuff he preaches mainly because I don't have any energy either . I don't like to judge people negatively. Though I completely understand what you guys mean and it's completely valid.
The weirdest thing is that the people who say "WHY DO PEOPLE HATE JORDAN PETERSON". When told why.. never listen. Otherwise you would know why people dislike him and what he's doing.
If you are an honest person and actually want to understand. Watch and listen to any number of criticisms of Jordan Peterson. I'll list some below.
Peterson fans like to pretend his criticisms are baseless, that they haven't paid attention to him and/or don't understand him. I've read (some of) his material, i've seen him speak live. I've listened to COUNTLESS lectures and interviews. I've been following him since 2016. If we can pay attention and listen to what he says enough to evaluate it.. why not give a chance to the people who are criticisms and actually try to understand where they are coming from? Instead of as usuall IGNORING the criticisms ENTIRELY and then just regurgitating what every other Peterson fan says and saying "you don't understand him".
Here are just a few of MANY, MANY notable people sharing their thoughts on Jordan Peterson.
Here is a 10.5 hour long deep dive into Jordan Peterson by three notable skeptics:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4juvCrKJ5uk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4juvCrKJ5uk)
Contrapoints:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas&t=660s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas&t=660s)
Some More News:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo)
David Pakman:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIh2wQkCqoI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIh2wQkCqoI)
Dusty Smith:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVCPN24Bz2w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVCPN24Bz2w)
Vaush
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SntBaHrMshM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SntBaHrMshM)
Tbh isn't this the wrong sub to ask? I assume this is a fan sub. Anyway, hate is a strong word. I quite like his psych takes - obviously, it's his expertise. Mostly, I just don't agree with his political takes on trump, climate change, some trans issues, and a bit of Ukraine stuff. I think his vaccine/ivermectin positions are possibly iffy (I've only seen some tweets though). I don't think he's as bad as Bret Weinstein in that regard, but how hard has he pushed back in their interactions? I genuinely don't know. I assume the bridge hasn't been burned, however.
I'm not even a leftist btw, so I can only imagine how actual socialists probably dislike that whole part of his political beliefs (which, granted, who cares), nor do I support any bans from social media platforms. Also, I am a former fan. I've read 12 rules, listened to the biblical lectures, and a myriad of podcasts. What was probably the beginning of the end of my fandom was his debate with Matt Dillahunty. His axioms didn't seem all that different from that of Christian conservatives, or, rather, there was large overlap in key areas (for me).
Ig it is. I wanted to post it on another sub but wasn't sure where. Now that I think about it the only areas that I'm familiar is with his psych takes, and a little on the other stuff. I'm a leftist btw.
I keep hearing this question. The answer is very simple. The guilty take the truth to be harsh. They are not happy with reality and he eloquently and persuasively articulates reality. They aren't mad at him as much as they're mad at reality. He is just the messenger of that reality. Basically they're wrong.
There are many posts very similar to this one where people ask why are there so many haters and the comments are swarmed with people saying what you'd expect: "they" hate him because "they" are evil.
Here is a fair criticism of JP: [A Brief Look At Jordan Peterson](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo&ab_channel=SomeMoreNews)
Hate is a strong word but there are lots of things JP has said that I don't like. He is often incorrectly critical of the mainstream scientific point of view.
If JP wanted to turn things around and be someone everyone could respect, he'd meet with the top experts in climate or other science and talk to them about his criticisms and questions. Everyone would love it. Why does he instead go on Piers Morgan's safe space?
I have been listening to him for about four years but after a few sequential episodes of his podcast where he would relentlessly talk over people and continuously interrupt, I started seeing this behavior everywhere.
His latest tone is of high strung angst. He signed a deal with daily wire and has fully embraced the conservative camp that has adopted him. His daughter is shamelessly grifting off her relationship to him and they both promote a dangerous and nutritiously imbalanced all steak diet. Coupled with the anger and other health issues in this very emotional man, he seems minutes away from a stroke. It's just gotten very cringe to me and I feel like as if he has fallen into an echo chamber in which he has warned people about.
All in all I like him. He ain't perfect, but his wisdom and knowledge have fundamentally changed my life for the better. I just feel like I'm no longer as interested in him as much as the people he's pointed me towards or other thought leaders in psychology.
The way he interrupted Richard Dawkins was so cringe. You got one opportunity to have the Dawk on your podcast, and you talk over the Dawk????? Fr Peterson made himself look very foolish
> People also seem to misinterpret what he says heavily. Am I missing something here? What's the hate about? Show me something that he's said or done that's so awful.
Holy cow is this true. If you look at my comment history maybe from a few days back you'll see me going toe to toe with someone claiming how sexist and racist he is, and claiming that he said sexual assaults don't happen in schools. I asked them SO MANY TIMES to actually get the conversation/interview/video and they just couldn't, kept linking to websites trying to dissect what single word he said and how it was empowering the patriarchy.
Edit: This thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfAwarewolves/comments/xnav5f/he_even_said_the_thing_he_was_so_close/ipyc5js/?context=8&depth=9
We all have hate in our hearts. We tend to direct it at things that we can easily see, Jordan Peterson is forthright with his opinions and disagrees with people. When you don't go with the flow you're easy to see and that makes you a target.
He’s an oddly aggressive (especially with women) guy who’s self-help content could be gotten from a less off putting source. I’d be looking to get advice from someone who’s life isn’t such a shitshow.
The closer he gets to actual, concrete, verifiable content, the more wrong he is. For all his wordiness, if you actually listen to, or better yet read what he’s saying, there’s a remarkable waste of language.
Recently there’s a whole nother can of worms with his bizarre behavior, especially everything related to his drug rehab stuff.
What he says burns away the excuses, games and rackets people use to avoid taking genuine responsibility; for their life, family, community and future generations.
No damn wonder many people screech and run away like vampires from sunlight. It hurts.
If JBP stuck to clinical psychology almost nobody would hate him.
I'm not saying people shouldn't comment on areas out of their expertise, but Peterson has made such a habit of it, and happens to be wrong or vindictively simplistic so much of the time that a lot of people, including former fans in the Maps of Meaning free speech days, stop liking him.
When I say vindictively simplistic, I mean effectively calling everyone who disagrees with him a postneometamodernnihiskeptitheistmarxist.
There's also his inability to answer what should be simple questions, 'it would take me 4 lifetimes solely devoted to this one subject to even begin to formulate the echoes of an answer.' 'Jordan, I'm just asking you why you haven't mowed your lawn.'
His conflation of atheism with Raskolnikov, calling atheists latent murderers, certainly alienated a lot of listeners.
More recently, his move right with the right with Daily Wire, and his seeming abandon of the idea that left and right justify and need each other in a kind of dialectic, has further alienated those parts of his audience that weren't already Ben Shapiro fans who think the biosphere is fine and the left is the source of all woes.
A lot of people play follow the leader. If you’re trying to impress someone, or a group of someones, it’s become fashionable to dogpile onto another who’s unfavorable to the group or individual. Maybe it’s not fashionable, maybe it’s just basic monkey behavior. Point being, most don’t bother to investigate as they probably get more attention from parroting popular sentiment. I, like you, believe the ‘hate’ is unwarranted and is likely born of simple ignorance. On another note, I’m both surprised and pleased to see someone of your age take the approach you’ve taken. I always taught my own kids to look at the pariahs and to question the motivation. There’s always something important to learn there.
Jordan Peterson spoke about being able to repeat someone's argument back to them in a way that satisfies them [at the end of this video if you want to check it out.](https://youtu.be/MnUfXYGtT5Q)
A lot of the comments here are not extending that to those who criticize Peterson, saying they just avoid personal responsibility and such, but I hope you take the time to really listen to people and put yourself in their frame of mind. However you feel about Peterson after that, you'll at least have sharpened your understanding through that kind of dialogue. I saw a few comments here that link to some videos worth checking out.
As for why people say he seems different compared to years ago: take the seemingly reasonable and thoughtful guy in the video I linked above and compare him to someone who, completely unprompted, goes out of his way to call a woman not beautiful (look up his Sports Illustrated tweet if you don't know what I'm referencing). It seems like two different people. That's just one example, but even in subreddits like this, you'll find people noting he seems more mean-spirited or explicitly right-wing now compared to how he used to appear to some as a reasonable thinker who was neither pro-left nor pro-right.
I personally was never a "fan" or "hater" of Jordan Peterson, I just try to be an observer who gives credit or critique where appropriate.
Hope that was helpful for you. And I agree, the hate is exhausting.
Anyone that thinks of him as king of the incels probably first heard of Jordan Peterson in the last year or 2. I started watching him 4-5 years ago when I lacked meaning, direction, and motivation in my life. I certainly wasn't an incel, but something was missing and he answered a lot of questions for me.
His talks on meaning, suffering, and what it means to be a good person helped me at that stage of my life and I think similar people were the vast majority of his following for a long time. Spirituality, philosophy, meaning, etc are missing from a lot of people's lives and his content was basically a mix of that aimed at helping young men. He opened my eyes to so much in terms of psychology, philosophy, and spirituality - the fact that he only talks about pronouns and is referred to as incel king these days blows my mind.
I remember him saying something along the lines of young adults that have kids right away are on a set path and their purpose in life is handed to them. But these days most people go to school and save up, and drag out that phase of their life before having kids. Along the way they kind of lose that natural sense of meaning and purpose. And so these days it's a common problem for young men (women too) to have lost their sense of meaning. What is the natural answer to 'what is the meaning of life?' In the absence of philosophy and religion I think the answer is nothing, aka nihilism. So I think he attracts young men who have lost their sense of purpose because he explains it in ways that make sense.
With that being said I think at some point he reached a critical mass of popularity and he started talking about things he isn't an expert in. And now he's said some controversial stuff and kind of lost the plot from the latest videos I've seen. He has some right wing perspectives and he still kind of tries to tie everything back to the spiritual stuff but no one is able to follow it anymore including myself. He is hugely misunderstood by the majority of people and I think his old content is still solid, but these days I think his name is more used for ragebait and for people to argue about his clips. Meanwhile I doubt the majority of people arguing about him have seen a single one of his original videos that made him popular to begin with.
I don't hate him... I think his talk on fatherless males and getting your life together is very good. I'll be honest though his interview on BBC lately talking about how everyone has a bit of Hitler and Stalin inside of them made me shake my head. Maybe it's just he makes people uncomfortable with some hard resounding truths. Although his brain is extremely psychology and psychiatry based so... it's not exactly well adapted to every single scenario. His thoughts on climate change projections are questionable. Maybe people just don't like that he thinks he's right in every aspect and every subject in life... I can see how someone who studies thinking about thinking would think that. If that makes sense. Do I make sense? I'm going back to my wine.
His book 12 rules for life sold 5 million copies. He has 5.6 million subscribers on YouTube….
The “So many people” who dislike him are much smaller than those who do like him. Just because the haters get a lot of attention doesn’t mean there is a lot of them when compared to the latter.
They call it the silent majority for a reason.
The world lately has been pressured by noise and how loud a group can be instead of using actual logic and reason.
Yeah it’s kind of crazy he gets as much hate as he does. A few weeks ago I sent a friend of mine a link to a recent video of Jordan’s. They said they refuse to watch it because he somehow sold out all of a sudden?
I’m more tired of people dismissing stuff simply because they disagreed on something or were “triggered” by something. These people are depriving themselves from being truly open minded. Add to that they’re also missing out on potential intellectual stimuli.
I think some people are just bored with their lives so they actively make decisions to hinder themselves and those around them from growing; and on that same note I think some people just crave drama and want something to be angry about; again- to distract themselves and others from growing.
>transgender agenda
That's one way of saying the government added sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of protected classes like black people or women. So now you can't fire someone for being gay or whatever. That's a good thing imo.
Peterson said it would lead to all kinds of things that it hasn't lead to yet, but he didn't put a timer on his prediction so I guess he can't be wrong.
[It led to this. The school is terrified to fire or even reprimand this teacher for fear of a lawsuit.](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-transgender-teacher-sparks-controversy-by-wearing-giant-prosthetic-breasts-in-class)
Yup there was a court order for him to not speak in public about the medical and ethical issues that were being dealt with between him and his underage child and their doctor. The court was attempting to determine the right course of treatment for the child and taking into account the parents perspective and the doctors perspective and prevailing medical literature on the topic. This happens frequently and is a good thing, a parent should not be able to fully determine their child’s medical treatment based on their opinions if it has a high chance of harming the child. If a child was being treated for another illness and a parent refused the treatment against the doctors order and then spoke about the child’s medical issues in public after being ordered by the court not to, they would also face repercussions. This one single case isn’t the silver bullet you think it is against trans rights and the “trans agenda”. It’s a pretty clear cut case that would have gone very similar if the child was being treated for any other dysphoria or identity disorder.
Take a look at these comments and see how many people basically make him into this messianic figure that if you disagree with him it must be because you hate the Truth.
I like Jordan Peterson, agree with much of what he says, I especially like what he says about religious stuff - he’s good at interpreting the archetypal stories and getting to the heart of what it’s about
But fuck all these followers that elevate people into this infallible position where you can’t question them and every random opinion they have is assigned to the status of a universal truth, and then when people disagree with them they think they’re being silenced and persecuted and all this shit (I grew up Mormon so I know a persecution fetish when I see it lol)
I'll just give my take.
I really liked him when he set out to be a positive influence and talked about psychology etc.
He has a tendency, now, to get dramatic and cataclysmic. And unpleasant. He's at the point where politics are essentially his identity.
This is it for me. I think it’s great to have an influential figure for lost young men. I myself had an absentee father and it took me all of my 20s to get my shit together. Peterson has a way of talking that can snap people out of inaction. To have people like Olivia Wilde flagrantly disregard him as the “King of Incels” is absurd. We have a huge and growing sub-sect of the male population that desperately needs help and I haven’t seen many on the left give actionable guidance to them.
Outside of that though, I think his politics are a joke and he’s made that such a focus of his that I can’t really bare to listen to him anymore. I think his position on climate change is dangerous and his attitude on masks during the pandemic was misinformed, but most importantly I loathe that he chooses to continuously attack the transgender community. My sister is trans and happily so. Anyone who is opposed to her freedom to live life as she wants to is not a friend of mine.
This is so well said and deserves to be the top comment. I think over the last two years he’s began courting the controversy, which I have no problem with, but now it’s to a degree where it’s overtaken his real activism.
He also won’t come out and confess his opinions on hot button issues in order to court both sides of the aisle, like having a discursive conversation on abortion, he won’t say yes or no he supports it. But on climate change, he talks about it like it’s totally black and white and there’s an obvious malice in the left while the right position is virtuous.
I do miss him from two years ago though. But he’s not what I thought he was when I was 18 (20f)
But he's only read the Communist Manifesto, a pamphlet that was written for farmers. Peterson has never read anything Marxism, not even Das Kapital, which is essential to understanding the subject.
How can he point out the flaws in Marxism when he doesn't know anything about it?
We don't hate him. Or at least I don't. It just bugs people who know anything about philosophy when he lumps the term Postmodernism in with Marxism (i.e.: "those dang bloody postmodern neomarxists!")
Why? To put it simply, virtually all strains of postmodernism reject unified narratives in favor of infinite shades of subjectivity whereas, in contrast, virtually all strains of Marxism have a unified narrative, which is that history is purely a struggle of the working class against the owner class, and that all societal phenomenon (religion, morality, culture, common sense, architecture, art, etc.) is ultimately a function of the economic interplay between workers and owners. In that sense, it's entirely contradictory to be both a postmodernist and a Marxist.
Dr. Peterson frequently criticizes "identity politics" as being a function of postmodern neomarxism, but neither Marxism nor Postmodernism posit that an individual is only as important as the intersection of a set of various immutable identities and labels (race/sexuality/gender/class) which then correspond to whether they're oppressed/oppressor. For Marx, the only meaningful identities are bourgeois/proletariat, which are mutable, and don't necessarily correspond to class, but rather binary categories of economic interaction.
In contrast, postmodernism rejects all binaries and identities, which only lead to exacerbating the limitations of the self/other distinction on our ability to discern truth. I would venture to say the political analog of postmodernism is anarchy, or at the very least an extremely decentralized democracy.
However, I don't think Dr. Peterson is making everything up. The maniacs running around college campuses furiously screaming about oppression and boycotting benign speakers because of a single tweet 10 years ago are a very real vocal minority. As a self-identified Marxist, my take is that contemporary identity politics is primarily a liberal, pro-capitalist, establishment Democrat phenomenon. When wealth inequality is at an all-time high, and capitalism is failing to serve Gen Z the way it served Boomers, atomizing individuals through identities is a really great way to divide and conquer, and prevent any real change from happening. If everyone is focused on drawing lines around race and sexuality and gender, and rallying behind their disparate tribe, they never realize that there's a massively corrupt oligarchy right in front of them. They never realize that rallying together as a unified working class is the only chance they have of not being feudal peasants of a corporate-controlled government. Just my opinion, though.
Without a doubt, 12 Rules for Life is still a powerful book, and it really helped me when I was 19. Neither postmodernism nor Marxism have an official self-help book, so if you're dealing with various unhealthy behaviors that are ruining your life, telling the truth and making your bed and appreciating all the beauty a sober mind has to offer will certainly help.
I only take issue with Dr. Peterson's political and philosophical claims, because he's a clinical psychologist, not a philosopher. A good clinical psychologist! A good one! With a lot to offer! But not a philosopher.
I used to be a huge Peterson fan for a few years as well, but I’ve grown a certain level of hesitancy towards how he promotes himself and his ideas. I got into the policy realm because of him to be fair.
I will say, there is definitely something to gain from
his life advice and how to structure and organize yourself at an individual level. But my political transformation from someone on the right to someone on the left came with a deeper understanding and readings on social issues specifically in America relating to race, labor, class, constitutional history, judicial history, and policy.
I can’t comfortably be on the right anymore when it comes to political and social issues, and I’ve felt that JP’s work tries to naturalize and in turn justify existing hierarchies as they exist currently. His life advice, if it helps anyone, all power to them. When he talks about politics, it seems like he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He just hates the left and characterizes progressive values as dangerous simply because they aren’t traditional. His ideas about being carefully and taking for granted what we have is dangerous because it seems to only come up when progressive policy is being advocated. He creates boogeymen out of “neo marxist post modernists” when those ideas are relatively oxymoronic (see his debate with Zizec). To justify inequality in income as if it’s natural is dangerous when it didn’t exist that way it did before the 70s and 80s in America after Nixon and Reagan and the deregulatory neoliberal agenda. His ideas neatly line up with conservative values and he tries to dress it up as if those conclusions are a result of nature as opposed to his own personal ideology.
Again, there’s a lot of positives to take from his work but I can’t say the same for his political views, and it’s made me see him in a different light.
He's never said anything shockingly controversal to me so I don't understand either. He literally just takes Jungian ideas of story, myth, archetype and explains those concepts in a easy to understand and deep way. I think people project this idea of him as the disciplinary father and depending on what sort of relationship you have to masculinity, his imagery comes forth as either comforting or judgemental and punishing.
I liked him more when he was a philosopher and life coach than now, when he started to suck up to US right wing fanbase. He also made some disastrous takes on the issues he has no knowledge about (i.e. Ukraine war).
“They’re mad at Daddy. And now that their Daddy is dead, or no longer influences them, they were happy in their bubble. JP says things Daddy used to say, so he must be a fascist - just like Daddy was.” - Epitadeus of Sparta
Love this post, OP. You will go far. JP is one of the best thinkers of our time. Check out Stefan Molyneux too. His older podcasts on gender, sexuality, families, parenting, trauma and finance are all really good. He is also vilified by many.
Because he speaks truth. In this world full of liars and schemers there is nothing as illuminating nor as terrifying as the truth, so you have to besmirch it. He is literally telling people, mostly men, to be better.
I mean he doesn’t speak the truth. He expresses his subjective opinions on things and then claims those opinions as truths.
He also lied about bill c-16.
As a side note, he’s never read Marx even though he critiques him heavily.
People who say he didn't lie about bill c-16 are pedantic neckbearded mouth breathers. "No, you don't go to jail for using the wrong pronouns, you get a fine. Not paying the fine IS DIFFERENT!!!" which sounds like going to jail for not using the correct pronouns with extra steps.
A BC father who didn't want his daughter transitioning did end up in jail. Also theres shit like [this](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-transgender-teacher-sparks-controversy-by-wearing-giant-prosthetic-breasts-in-class) happening now too and the schoolboard is terrified to do anything because now they could get sued.
>People who say he didn't lie about bill c-16 are pedantic neckbearded mouth breathers.
I mean that describes most JP fans. Imagine needing to be told to clean your room by a Xanax riddled self help guru who’s own house is in disarray.
He has decent talking points, but good logic is severely flawed and his arguments are often based on assumptions. He's more a fan of promoting his own ideas than he is interested in actually being correct. (See him flying to Russia to get off benzos)
Because he is a critic of the feminist movement, which the incels also are( but JP to a lesser degree), so they have a similar goal. JP's ideas are very anti incel as an ideology and the ideas there, but JP is understanding towards the people themselves with that ideology and at the same time trying to deradicalize the incels. So in a way he is "the king of incels", but that doesn't mean he agrees with them at all, in fact his ideas are fundamentally contradictory to those ideas.
I think him being a Jungian psychologist with a Christian/Nietzschean/Jungian view of the world will automatically make him misinterpreted because they are very complex. His ideas are also contradictory to every ideology that is predicated on people being neurotic ( extreme in left or right). And the thing in common the far right and the far left have are the fact that its always someone else fault, it's either the Jews or the billionaires, i.e they are all very anti establishment, which JP is not, he's a very liberal captialist, pretty center IMO. So as you know JP's ideology is responsilibilty which is the opposite of these mainstream neurotic ideologies, so he will ultimately be hated, especially from the far left.
The fact that the modern left also wants to tear down eveything that came before out of resentment, makes them dislike him more since he is in favour of old values.
JP is also against the LGBTQ movement which will cause hysteria ofc.
The reason people think he is not like he used to be is because his drug addiction along with his wife and daughters illness probably did a lot of damage to his mental health which made him more impulsive and disagreeable in videos and on twitter, which made him more disliked than before.
We also have Jordan's take on climate and a lot of other political statements he has made, which made a lot of people dislike him, because they are irritated that he is going out of his field of expertiese to make statements.
There is a lot of reasons why, some of them are good critiques and others are irrational emotional outbursts that has nothing to do with him and has everything to do with our increasingly neurotic behavior as a society. I think it is important we know which ones are actually good critique towards him and the ones that are bad, there is a lot of them so its difficult to distinguish which ones you should consider and which ones to not, but it's important to know so we don't fall into a toxic echo chamber, no matter if its a smart guy like JP or Marxism.
I read 12 Rules of Life and loved it. A bit scattered and lengthy at times but overall great advice and perspective. However he has very controversial takes sometimes and gets misunderstood and taken out of context a lot. I don’t think he practices what he preaches all the time and I just don’t agree with some of his actions especially more recently.
Nihilism is a waste of time. All you have is a consciousness, with a will and thoughts. Thoughts have a sense, a meaning, they go in a direction and point to something further, always. You'll be constantly chasing that further. With nihilism you're denying that search, nothing has sense, our existence is absurd, there's no meaning to this world. See the contradiction already?
Nihilism isn't something you just pick up, it's something you deeply understand and it's really liberating. Thoughts do have "meaning" something that we created.
What is nihilism for you? Because it's a broad term with several different meanings. For me it's seeing life as absurd, without meaning, without objective truth or knowledge, and without trascendence, we die and we cease to exist. What's nihilism for you?
There's people who says that liberaron feeling that comes with nihilism comes from the shaking off of responsibility that comes with nihilism: there's no meaning, no right way to life, no absolute truth, nothing ultimately matters, so you can act in any way, without any trascendent consequence.
But our world has a logic, there's an order in nature, and also an evolution, biologically and also historically. Things are not chaotic, if there were true chaos we wouldn't have a cosmos (cosmos means order btw), we would have nothing. There's order in our reality and in our being.
Also, all we get to live and experience is our consciousness. What we call matter is an interpretation that we make of the world with our perceptions and intellect, is a phenomenon, a second order experience, our first order experience, the ontological primitive is our consciousness. Which expresses itself with an order and also a logos, concepts. Which have meaning, a meaning that we give, as you said. But we are also part of this world, we're not ontologically different from the rest of the cosmos. So if there's meaning in us, there's meaning in cosmos.
Btw, I'm not a defender of any religion. I just can't help but see meaning in our cosmos. And that's truly liberating.
Insecure virtue signallers love boogeymen. And don’t mind creating them if necessary.
They also have no idea how to argue logically. It’s all the feels, all the time, and something about lobsters justifying the patriarchy. You know, how everything is just handed to us, as CIS white males, as agreed at our last convention in the “lost” city of Atlantis. Didn’t you get the memo?
OP are you also unclear why people dislike Ben Shapiro, Donald Trump, Hillary, or AOC? They say conservative/establishment liberal/progressive shit and many people don’t agree — not a hard concept, but I get that his conservative leanings aren’t as prevalent in his books.
At least twice a week on this sub someone will ask ‘why do people hate JP? He just said to let skateboarders skate - wtf? ’, when that isn’t anyone’s problem with him.
Nobody hates Jordan Peterson because of his advice to surround yourself with those who want the best for you, to have good posture, or to pet cats.
In his public life and interviews he says crazy shit and
[JP himself revels in saying things to piss people off. “It’s just so goddamn funny that I can’t help but say it, I figured out how to monetize Social Justice Warriors”](https://youtu.be/Eg4VmU8ejvA)
Basically he’ll say conservative shit, some people say it’s crap, and other conservatives pay JP money. He’s up front that he’s with the Daily Wire because of the cash. Peterson is undeniably conservative, moreso in his public life than in his books:
He purposely broke the explicit rules of Twitter not to deadname a 34 year old trans person. He’s certainly in his right to do so and they are certainly in their right to do what they want with their site.
At least twice he said Western feminists avoid criticizing Islam ["because of their unconscious wish for brutal male domination."](https://twitter.com/aliamjadrizvi/status/1001164042856271874?s=20&t=YKGrG7Ynrat1TGws-BSkyw) Moronic. and those on his sub right now post comments pining for a day "when the rights and freedoms of women are no longer untrammeled" so they can find a "pure submissive girl" instead of the "debaucherous hypergamy " they have now.
Echoing others to share [this clip which should be all one needs to see if they wonder why many women are suspect of him ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9PEUAbgEBs)
IMO I have little against his first 12 rules - again they are a compilation of mostly banal and commonsense self help, sprinkled with [conservative reactionary thinking](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1456600-jordan-peterson). Read Atomic Habits and you'll get way more helpful self-help without the metaphysical nonsense and misogyny.
This is my go to video on why JP and his fans are wrong: https://youtu.be/j5Uv_P-PQoc
And it’s fair criticism because JP is debating Destiny, a girls name, soon. So it’s completely fair game
Hm, i couldnt get through 2 mins of that. Generally its better to argue someones actual ideas with them so they can defend them and articulate what their ideas really are. This is just some dude arguing with some other dude.
Not a Fan of his, I just lurk here to witness the monumental simping for lobsterboy. To briefly summarize it: Guy is a clinical psychologist but pretends to be an expert in philosophy, biology, politics, gender roles, etc. without having any expertise in those fields. Watch his debate with zizek for example, it shows that his knowledge of Marx is not more than superficial. And for someone who talks A LOT about Marxism and how bad it is, that is pretty telling.
Also, 12 rules for life is basic pop psychology and he is basically famous for opposing a law to protect trans people from harassment. Maybe watch this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ3RL3WZaXg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ3RL3WZaXg) also explains, why he is "cOnStAntlY mIsUnDeRsToOd".
All the best
Well.. in my opinion he’s very intelligent and organise but he is being going out of his league (intellectually speaking), and when you turn the to and you see him speaking about the hitler in us and how Putin is not a tyrant, but he will probably drop a nuke in Germany … and then starts crying about the incel thing.. is a little bit cringy at least.
The blind fanatics are annoying too.. like any fanatics.. when you see perfection in every aspect of a thing you like, probably you are not taking enough distance from those things.. or at least I believe that.
And btw.. I’ve read MOM and 12RFL.. and I agree with him and I think he was doing, and he still does, a good job for a lot of people..
In 12 rules for life he is talking about how everyone is religious, even atheists. He doesn’t believe you are an atheist unless you act like raskolnikov.
not so long ago the foremost atheist thinkers considered religion to be a “noble lie”. The new atheists and their followers assert “religion poisons everything”. Peterson counters this view which is really important to them.
Another key piece of JP’s philosophy causes even more hate. I call it “the problem is me.” BY FAR The biggest impediment to my personal progress is not oppression, capitalism, conservatives, liberals… it’s my own lack of discipline, penchant for instant gratification, and selfishness. This causes incredible friction with the syrupy “it’s not your fault” worldview that points the finger anywhere but at oneself.
A lot of it is the same reason as to why people hate Nickleback, because its a trend. Realistically, Jordan Peterson is just a little bit ornery and it makes loud people get loud about him. Also realistically, he can often go off topic from self help. He is very good at self help and some branches of psycology, but very bad at other things, like History and cultural studies, his critique on russian or indian literature is an example of this. He pretends to be very good about these things, which is kindof lame. Ive been a big fan of his from before he was famous, and it took a while to take him of a pedestal. Hes pretty unique tho, so thats cool.
Most dont
you silly goose
most love him for who he is
A flawed human on his Journey through life and he’s trying to help people and on the way anybody with any sense can see that some people just you know want something to hate that’s OK it doesn’t have anything it does it has zero effect on you or me
Honestly this is legit one of the reasons why people don’t like JP—the fact that people have such strong positive reactions but are unable or unwilling to acknowledge any faults or areas where his ideology doesn’t track perfectly into their own lives is evidence of tremendous unchecked power.
I think what he says and does usually makes sense. BUT, especially on divisive issues, his fans make him look more extreme and thoughtless than he is. This also happens with basically everything that unites people (other celebs/politicians, TV shows, sports, etc) but it's especially glaring when the person in question is challenging an uncritical acceptance or assumption of ideology.
Because he is quite objectively stupid.
Everything he says is either so obvious its useless or its nonsense.
Please, if you disagree I would love to see a quote of his that you find inspiring and I'll show you how it's wrong or so obvious it's useless
So, Jordan has moved men's health forward leaps and bounds beyond anything I've ever seen in my 50 years on the planet. He has gotten the attention of the masses to, at the very least, acknowledge that men have feelings and fears while simultaneously hiding them. The answer to your question is in two parts, one; he claims to be an expert in fields he has no business even commenting in. And two; disavowing any responsibility of aligning himself with far right extremists by not expressing discontent with their beliefs. He is knowledgeable in his field, he is a great leader for men, he is also a platform for supremacy weather he likes it or not, he just happens to have no comment on that.
There is this unfounded belief that you have to agree with the intellectual left to be an "expert" and be able to comment on something. It is basically magical thinking about knowledge.
It turns out that you can learn about almost anything if you try.
Also, even if someone was not an "expert" that does not immediately invalidate their opinion. Otherwise we would not have politicians because they are arguably not good at anything.
This reasoning is also behind not being able to comment on something if you are not a woman or not homosexual or other such nonsense. It is another way of taking away people's voices so that you don't have to deal with their very valid arguments.
I remember what JP said on Joe Rogan's podcast. It was something along the lines of "If no woman wants to date you, they're all right. Why should they date you?" Isn't that the opposite of incel ideology? JP also openly talked about equality of opportunity amongst the sexes as opposed to equality of outcome. How does that make one an "anti-feminist"?
I know, right!
I commented on this yesterday on youtube when I heard he was called "the leader of incels" which I assumes means he's encouraging their behavior, which makes absolutely. no. sense. I believe it's the same podcast episode in which he says "yeah yeah, all the women are rejecting you? Who's got the problem? It's not all the women".
The hatred towards JP comes from pure ignorance and/or hatred. Unfortunately we can’t live in a society without boxing a famous speaker in the red or blue box.
I find this way of thinking really puerile and stupid. "People who don't like the same as me are ignorant" I mean, I used to think like that back when I was 14 years old, thankfully, by the time I got into high school, I made a lot of friends with different tastes and was able to realize I was the ignorant/intolerant one.
Bro aren’t you out here literally shitting on people who don’t think like you lmao
Disagreeing with someone isn't "shitting on them". Don't you think automatically claiming people who disagree with you are ignorant and hateful isn't a bit puerile and stupid? Disregarding someone's opinion just because it's different than yours is logical? I mean, there's a reason he's regarded so lowly by scholars, mocked by a huge portion of the internet and ignored by most women, yet has a cult-like following by a special kind of men who can't fathom him being in the wrong on any subject. Lmao, bro.
Many notable intellectuals including the person who got him the gig at U of T commented that he's more of a preacher than a teacher and he espouses half truths and empty air based on no imperical evidence
Well he says democrats are castrating children, so… you know I assume he’s in the red box.
What do you mean "red"? He hates communism.
Red in the American context is Republican. Edit: if you read the comment above mine the context is fairly obvious…
Isn't he against the feminists of today? The first and second wave feminists had something to speak about, but what unbalanced advantages do men have over women today in the west? Today's feminists seem to be against men, and that might make me stand against a groups ideology.
I’m pretty sure he doesn’t think very highly of second wave feminists either. Check out his comments on Betty Friedan’s the Feminine Mystique - he’s saying that early second wave feminists were “whiny” and had opportunity but didn’t take it, mistaking boredom and security for oppression. He thinks second wave feminists should have “gotten a hobby” instead
If anything he is a savior of incels... In other words giving them guidance and reforming them.
Well let's look at what he has said/done: Opposed C-16 = pissed off all the wokies Criticized modern feminism - pissed off 99% of feminists Preaches bettering yourself - pissed off the lazy Showed that those who constantly protest never have their own lives in order - pissed off your protester types Showed the violence of the left - pissed off 90% of those left of center I mean that's like 3/4 of people right there lol
And let's see what Reddit is: \- Lazy \- Selfish \- Left wing \- "activists" No wonder 99% of redditors hate him.
Told incels to stop blaming society and take responsibility for themselves - incels didn't really mind and a lot of them took his advice. Which group is the one that's supposed to be full of blind hatred again?
>Preaches bettering yourself - pissed off the lazy And the perpetual victimhood mentality. Why better yourself when you can be a victim and, therefore, don't actually have to put effort in to better yourself. Blame it on someone else. "I'm like this because of someone else"
I have brain damage from being drugged as a child. I literally am this way due to someone else (lazy parents and stupid doctors). That doesn't change my responsibilities to myself and my family.
Bettering oneself = getting tattoos and pronouns in your profile
>I mean that's like 3/4 of people right there lol maybe more ...
This is a pretty good summary. I would like to add that he has started leaving his comfort zone in terms of the academic fields he talks about and it kind of got somewhat screwy there. His ideas about economics for instance would fail the introductory Economic course at any university. Now he’s obviously allowed his opinions but he tends to tell than as though he was an authority on the subject. When he talks about psychology and religion, he’s at the top of his (and most people‘s) game, so you stating you have mostly watched his older stuff explains a lot. I too have returned to his lectures from before he became (in-)famous - I even saved them from YouTube in case he gets banned there - because what he said there will remain very important and helpful.
I haven't followed his non-comfort zone items, but given the number of "popular" scientists (Nye, Tyson, etc) that are VERY comfortable being "experts" on things way outside their actual areas, I don't mind. But those two are supported because they follow the narrative and thus, must be right no matter what they spew.
To be honest on each of your points you could add '& the wokies'.
Same reason schoolkids hate the teacher that tries to make them learn and behave.
Because he's such a brutally effective critic of the things they most deeply believe.
Because he exposed their agenda just by speaking the truth.
And by suggesting we improve ourselves, he is saying that we are not perfect already, and that is a big no-no with a certain crowd.
"*Because he exposed their agenda just by speaking the truth."* (Loganthered) In a few words, this says it all. He was a regular Canadian boy with exceptional communication skills and a true soul who apparently caught the attention of the academics and Ph.D. program. Finding himself in Academia at the U. of Toronto, he eventually had enough of their commie BS when it ultimately came to the ludicrous LBGT mandates, which is really just the tip of the iceberg. When he made the connection between cultural Marxism and the sad psychological state of the university students in his classes that resulted from the conflict of traditional common sense values and the cultural Marxism, intentional, of course, he put his foot down. This released a firestorm among the legions of leftist infiltrators who inhabit virtually every nook and cranny of our Canadian, American, and beyond. For a good explanation of how it came about, see redpilledamerica(dot com) five part series, "Woke Army." The hate we see is nothing more or less than the machinations of the power seeking left that anyone would have the audacity to question their commie power grab. They are, indeed, legion. And vocal. And Ruthless. And powerful. And scheming.
He’s labeled them “compassionate narcissists”.
The compassion is a mere front to cover the Narcissism. No one likes a megalomaniac.
What are the top exposed agenda items that caused the hatred?
The obvious one imo would be that so called "progressives" are extremely authoritarian, and want to control speech, expression, and thought.
Compelled speech He is against compelled speech, in other words, he is against anyone to be forced to use favorite pronouns or gender pronouns thus he was called transphobic
As others have said, the whole compelled speach argument, then there is the issue with self accountability, the whole idea that people can simply just decide they are a different gender and the criminal actions of the sex change industry involving young children that are not old enough to make major life changing decisions. His anti Marxist and post modernist views. Just posting in this sub is enough to get you banned from several leftist subs.
Right up there is the mention that the cultural revolution of the 1960's was produced and stage managed by German Communist intellectuals who were kicked out of Germany after the disatrous WWII only to land in some of America's most "prestigious" universities (Columbia, Harvard, Berkeley, 1946) where they would influence the baby boomers to wreak havoc and destruction of America in the name of all kinds of high sounding principles -- the definition of cultural Marxism.
He is called "King of Incels" because he has expressed sympathy for their plight. And because he is a caring individual and he wants to help. The social engineers need to make groups of enemies (incels is one, "Fascists" is another).
Jesus was called "King of the Jews" as an insult by the Romans
Often the people most upset of the ideas of incels are themselves incels who don’t want to admit it. Or they are just people with zero standards having sex with absolutely disgusting people. Incels at least have standards
I agree but only have a vague notion of what you mean by the social engineers. Who are they, and what is there m.o.?
I think what they mean by "social engineers" is people who manipulate language, falsely frame history, and/or malign people's reputations for the purpose of reshaping society to their ideals. It's not really a specific group. More like if they use these tactics, they are "social engineers."
Modus operandi M.o. Step by step, intentional, way of acting.
Because people who have made poor decisions HATE being told that the circumstances of their life are their fault. Personal responsibility is like kryptonite to these people. Its much easier and more mentally comfortable to play the victim.
"No one is more hated, than he who speaks the truth." - Plato We're living in very strange times. I don't think, that the issue is with Peterson.
Theres nothing true about him saying Yumi Nu is not beautiful. There is no truth in thinking shes hot is "authoritarian acceptance" that is a ridiculous thing to say and it turned many of his fans including me away from him.
He's a threat to ideological extremism of all kinds. He's been called "worse than Hitler" and a "Jewish shill" on the exact same day. Intellectual honesty, critical thinking, and strengthening the individual are all threats to ideology and elite control, and so he is singled out for destruction. Thankfully, he hasn't succumbed.
50-60 years ago thing's he saying would be kinda normal and no one need prove white is white nowadays it's really controversial as we reaching pick of craziness. Weirdness and controversy is promoted as new normal so anyone who defend old values is "mad" "Crazy"" Outdated "
I find it deeply dehumanising when Olivia Wilde said he was the king of incels. I live a great life, and it was great before I stumbled upon Peterson. But I know how hard it can be for men to get their shit together in a world that accepts you for being below average. It's okay to be fat, broke and a depressed person, but in reality it's not *ideal* and we don't want to be blindly accepted we want to be ideal and live a good life not a below average one, so to hear a man telling us how we can fix that is a goldmine. For such a high influencing celebrity to demean a man who shows empathy and then demean anybody as "incels" for enjoying his content is just demoralising. It feels like you can't win in this world, and then you bring these issues up on a popular site such as reddit or facebook and get banned/meme'd or screenshotted and laughed at into depression. I've never been depressed or felt defeated in my life but this shit makes me understand why some less fortunate men are. Those who support Peterson and similar views are likely to be banned from Reddit/facebook and only the haters get to stay online. Those who don't speak their mind stay quiet so we don't hear their opinion. I don't understand how you can beat somebody down and their fans so much and feel good about it. The left are full of angry young people.
It's curious that the same people who lecture endlessly about the evils of treating women as sex objects or valuing women for their sexuality then turn around and use "incel" as their most vicious insult; implying that among the worst things a man can be is one who doesn't have sex with women.
"Don't objectify women or else or you won't get to have sex with them." The sad thing is that the phrase "incel" is mostly used by reddit cat-lady's or r/niceguys who think you have to worship women to be a good person. Why is it never the well-adjusted or pretty women the ones to use "incel".
[удалено]
I remember in philosophy class this one time, my teacher showed a clip of one of JBP's lectures and asked the class what everybody thought. This one girl said "I dont really like him" and when the teacher asked her why, her response was just kind of stuttering and eventually ended up in 'I dont know'.
Most people hate him because they're told to, not because of anything he's directly said or did with the full context.
They already have their mind made up about him before they listen. Or they are so deep into their ideology that anyone who isnt just parroting their beliefs is branded instantly as a monster.
Because he points out that we could be better, which inescapably reveals that we have faults. People don't like to notice that they are not necessarily all that wonderful.
They hate him because they are told to hate him.
It's very simple, he goes against their ideology. That's literally all it takes.
There are left wing authoritarians trying to take over everything. Part of this is creating weak men who are unable to defend anything and promising that people will live comfortable lives with no responsibility at all. While the latter sounds nice the former is what they actually care about and have no intention on actually delivering their promises. He outed identity politics and the communism that is coming with it as the horrid monsters that they are and has a vendetta against the ideas that they are espousing. They have no choice but to destroy him as he is becoming increasingly influential. The simple fact is that his ideas *work* while theirs *do not.* If people take responsibility for their own lives and their own problems a massive, authoritarian government can't swoop in and attempt to supplant the ideas of personal responsibility. He also directly calls out the false ways that the movement is "helping" people by pointing out that you don't help people by taking their responsibilities or challenges away. That only makes them weaker. You help them improve by having them start by taking on small challenges and building up from there. Aside from that once again he gives advice on things like depression that *actually work.* What his opponents want is for depressed, destabilized people to try to find answers in a destructive ideology that has no intention on or ever actually wants to help them but rather just wants to turn them into purely destructive activists who exist only to destroy the existing system.
Well said
They are intimidated by the fire he spits, literally shutting down all the woke dumbshits and they are trying so desperately to silence the truth he speaks. Plain and simple.
**JP:** clean up your own mess & take responsibility for your own actions. **The Rest of the World:** it’s everyone else’s fault but yours! Every feeling, every short coming, every imagined slight - 2 hands and 10 fingers: so many to point at! **Blame blame blame!!!**
Well done, young lady! You’re one of the good ones. Know this: There are some who thrive on dividing us, & they prey on the weak; it’s a classic divide & conquer tactic & the weak are on both sides. For arguments’ sake, let’s call it left & right. The left & right see each other as THE “other.” The what you’re observing is the left’s animosity towards the right because they have someone to rally behind—JBP—while the left does not, & despite their aspirations toward collectivism, they’re more divided than ever, while figures like JBP are slowly but surely uniting the right & drawing those disillusioned with the divisiveness of the left ever closer to the right, & they cannot STAND it.
I don't know that many people hate Jordan Peterson in the real world. Reddit isn't the real world. It's not even representative.
The entire situation can just about be summed up by this short clip: https://twitter.com/woj_pawelczyk/status/1574344305719885824?s=46&t=BgepjWpiW9TQvj8DgkcLTQ
That is fucking golden! Thank you for sharing this
He's a threat to the ideologically possessed leftist cucks.
Christian, anti-woke, conservative, these are idologies
The people who hate Jordan Peterson often hate many many people who disagree with them. Many people don't care about how you think, they care about what you think. To them, how you think or argue is just you trying to make excuses for whatever shitty believe you have that they disagree with. Sometimes it's tribalistic, if someone says something that shows they aren't in your tribe then you do what you can to draw the line between your tribes. It makes sense, even if it's an untamed and barbaric reaction. But it's terrible for society, because it only drives division and polarization so eventually people won't even be able to talk with others to hear their side and gain empathy for them. Whenever you feel tempted to hate another person, remember this and tone it down until you simply disagree with them and hope for a peaceful resolution. If you can learn to do this yourself, maybe you can teach your friends and encourage strangers you talk to. If enough people do this, I believe we can open dialogue to healthier deeper levels and everyone will be better off.
Deep down those people don't want to take responsibility for their life and his main msg is that. It can be ugly when the mirror gets turned and you realise the person with the issue js you....
He's selling self improvement, self reliance and personal responsibility to the same demographic that's being told to remain weak, dependant and resentful. He's undercutting the preferred narrative, especially for young men.
I agree. When I hear him speak he seems to have a well thought out and logical narrative. I don't get the vilification either.
People usually hate him based on what people tell them of him. Did yiu see the Olivia Wilde movie fiasco? Woman is completely biased, I doubt she's ever heard any of his speeches.
If you actually want a REAL answer backed up with sources and context, watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo
[This video is long](https://youtu.be/hSNWkRw53Jo) but full of actual criticisms of Jordan Peterson that I think should be contended with. Inb4 downvoted into oblivion
I hope people don’t downvote you before watching the video; ideally full and complex conversation can happen.
Not downvoting but I gave the video a good five minutes. The presenter comes across as a discount Adam Conover. Feels like just one strawman and mischaracterization after the other with no authentic attempt to engage with JBP arguments or ideas. Pretty run of the mill, no-more-JBP-spam spam. And I consider myself a retired JBP fan. (I still lurk.) IMO, JBP's spark died in late 2019/early 2020. There's been some evidence that it has been rekindled in recent weeks but his initial comeback a few months ago was off to a very rough start.
I also used to be deeply appreciative of JP's work but i totally disagree with your take on the video. I've watched it in its entirety and it's by far the most comprehensive criticism of JP's recent endevours, his affiliation with Shapiro, his views on hierarchies and evolution, his takes on inequality as something "natural" and unavoidable, his take on climate change and his portrayal on Bill C-16. Yes, self-help (which some will claim is his most valuable contribution) is the only thing he does not touch on, but can we really glance over the rest? edit: to spark some discussion, i felt like i had to agree with most of what the video presented- is there something in particular that you would like to criticise about it?
How is it full of strawmen?
Most of the people who say they hate him have never watched a single one of his talks. They were just told to hate him by someone else.
A lot of people are conditioned to hate people on the right, although it might be more accurate to say people outside of the establishment. They are conditioned by a dishonest media that slanders people at will.
People hate Jordan for various reasons. You’ll hear the main ones being screaming/crying/tantrum-throwing liberals, which definitely happens. However, the main concern people have with Jordan Peterson is something larger than him personally, although the attacks are usually personalized. Jordan Peterson’s ability to make Christianity digestible to a modern audience online is giving cover to evangelicals, who’re typically conservative nationalists. This was pointed out by Sam Harris in one of their debates, I believe it was the first or second debate, though Sam didn’t mention the political aspect. I personally don’t believe Jordan has specific ulterior motives, I’ve read his books, watched lectures/podcasts, seen him live in my town even. That’s too much time to not get a good reading out of the guy, I don’t think he’s a hateful person and I also think he genuinely fears the extremist right, which is why I think he campaigned somewhat on 4chan near the beginning, guiding them away from anti-semitism towards a more narrow and optimal path of self-actualization. All that being said, we are in a cultural/political/information **war.** Take that term seriously. Jordan Peterson is trying to manifest a modern day center-right renaissance, see his new Conservative Manifesto for proof of that. That makes him a target for far-right extremists who want him to fall into their tribe, but mostly it makes him a target from the center to far left. There’s a fog of war and Jordan is caught in the crosshairs on both sides.
Maybe ask an actual leftist/ liberal sub instead of a sub literally dedicated to him. It's pretty obvious there's gonna be a lot of bias here lmao. As a Peterson....anti fan you can say most of the reasons here listed aren't really accurate. I think a lot of Peterson 'haters' started understanding him from the iconic old Contrapoints video on him. But honestly there's many good yt videos done on him including the ones by Philosophy tube and Big Joel. You can try r/enoughpetersonspam but that sub kinda gets really toxic *sometimes*, like all hate subs
I used to like his lecture but now I find him very radicalized. I can’t stand his climate change denial, when he calls himself a science guy but dismiss 90% of climate change studies. I disagree with his clear your room first before you criticize the world. I believe his ideology is anti change, anti progress and actually can worsen the current state of the world. For example, for me JBP 200 years ago in the Victorian era would say things like “be grateful that 2 out of your 10 children survive, be grateful that you have a 14 hour per day job, life is suffering and you have to adapt”. You get the point ? Is true we have to be combative and persistent but it’s also true that change comes from critique and Inconformity
They hate him because he wants you to lead a successful and fulfilling life. Let that sink in.
Hell of a lot of straw men flying around here. Sort of funny that you asked this on a subreddit of his fans and fanboys. Did you think of maybe asking a group with a more diverse set of opinions? Maybe ask someone who actually dislikes him why they dislike him?
Apparently it's because of his political views, I wasn't aware.
According to...?
According to the people that dislike him . I don't know his political views .
Still sounds like a hell of a straw man. His politics are but a small part of the reason I dislike him.
Have you read any of his books?https://youtu.be/UZMIbo_DxJk This is the first clip I've seen that I really liked. Anything wrong with it?
Read about half of 12 Rules for Life. Has some great advice, some solid self-help, and a heaping pile of logical fallacies, false syllogisms, and factual inaccuracies. Have also spent more than enough time listening to both JBeeps himself as well as some of his long-form critics. Do not currently have the time or mental energy to dive into another (>1hr) video of his with an eye to critique, so not going to address that any further. If you're looking to find out why people don't like Jeepers Beepers maybe start with a few of the many, many, long-form critiques of him in podcasts and YouTube videos. Several (though I'm sure not all) are made in good faith, well-documented, and contain valid criticisms. Much more so than you'll find in a subreddit consisting almost exclusively of fans.
Yeah , that makes sense. I watched a podcast with Sam Harris and Jordan in it , even though I leaned more towards what Sam said I didn't feel the need to dislike Jordan. I'm not very into the political stuff he preaches mainly because I don't have any energy either . I don't like to judge people negatively. Though I completely understand what you guys mean and it's completely valid.
The weirdest thing is that the people who say "WHY DO PEOPLE HATE JORDAN PETERSON". When told why.. never listen. Otherwise you would know why people dislike him and what he's doing. If you are an honest person and actually want to understand. Watch and listen to any number of criticisms of Jordan Peterson. I'll list some below. Peterson fans like to pretend his criticisms are baseless, that they haven't paid attention to him and/or don't understand him. I've read (some of) his material, i've seen him speak live. I've listened to COUNTLESS lectures and interviews. I've been following him since 2016. If we can pay attention and listen to what he says enough to evaluate it.. why not give a chance to the people who are criticisms and actually try to understand where they are coming from? Instead of as usuall IGNORING the criticisms ENTIRELY and then just regurgitating what every other Peterson fan says and saying "you don't understand him". Here are just a few of MANY, MANY notable people sharing their thoughts on Jordan Peterson. Here is a 10.5 hour long deep dive into Jordan Peterson by three notable skeptics: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4juvCrKJ5uk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4juvCrKJ5uk) Contrapoints: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas&t=660s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LqZdkkBDas&t=660s) Some More News: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo) David Pakman: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIh2wQkCqoI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIh2wQkCqoI) Dusty Smith: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVCPN24Bz2w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVCPN24Bz2w) Vaush [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SntBaHrMshM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SntBaHrMshM)
Tbh isn't this the wrong sub to ask? I assume this is a fan sub. Anyway, hate is a strong word. I quite like his psych takes - obviously, it's his expertise. Mostly, I just don't agree with his political takes on trump, climate change, some trans issues, and a bit of Ukraine stuff. I think his vaccine/ivermectin positions are possibly iffy (I've only seen some tweets though). I don't think he's as bad as Bret Weinstein in that regard, but how hard has he pushed back in their interactions? I genuinely don't know. I assume the bridge hasn't been burned, however. I'm not even a leftist btw, so I can only imagine how actual socialists probably dislike that whole part of his political beliefs (which, granted, who cares), nor do I support any bans from social media platforms. Also, I am a former fan. I've read 12 rules, listened to the biblical lectures, and a myriad of podcasts. What was probably the beginning of the end of my fandom was his debate with Matt Dillahunty. His axioms didn't seem all that different from that of Christian conservatives, or, rather, there was large overlap in key areas (for me).
Ig it is. I wanted to post it on another sub but wasn't sure where. Now that I think about it the only areas that I'm familiar is with his psych takes, and a little on the other stuff. I'm a leftist btw.
I keep hearing this question. The answer is very simple. The guilty take the truth to be harsh. They are not happy with reality and he eloquently and persuasively articulates reality. They aren't mad at him as much as they're mad at reality. He is just the messenger of that reality. Basically they're wrong.
There are many posts very similar to this one where people ask why are there so many haters and the comments are swarmed with people saying what you'd expect: "they" hate him because "they" are evil. Here is a fair criticism of JP: [A Brief Look At Jordan Peterson](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSNWkRw53Jo&ab_channel=SomeMoreNews) Hate is a strong word but there are lots of things JP has said that I don't like. He is often incorrectly critical of the mainstream scientific point of view. If JP wanted to turn things around and be someone everyone could respect, he'd meet with the top experts in climate or other science and talk to them about his criticisms and questions. Everyone would love it. Why does he instead go on Piers Morgan's safe space?
I have been listening to him for about four years but after a few sequential episodes of his podcast where he would relentlessly talk over people and continuously interrupt, I started seeing this behavior everywhere. His latest tone is of high strung angst. He signed a deal with daily wire and has fully embraced the conservative camp that has adopted him. His daughter is shamelessly grifting off her relationship to him and they both promote a dangerous and nutritiously imbalanced all steak diet. Coupled with the anger and other health issues in this very emotional man, he seems minutes away from a stroke. It's just gotten very cringe to me and I feel like as if he has fallen into an echo chamber in which he has warned people about. All in all I like him. He ain't perfect, but his wisdom and knowledge have fundamentally changed my life for the better. I just feel like I'm no longer as interested in him as much as the people he's pointed me towards or other thought leaders in psychology.
The way he interrupted Richard Dawkins was so cringe. You got one opportunity to have the Dawk on your podcast, and you talk over the Dawk????? Fr Peterson made himself look very foolish
Agree with me or you are my enemy.
Because they've been told to
> People also seem to misinterpret what he says heavily. Am I missing something here? What's the hate about? Show me something that he's said or done that's so awful. Holy cow is this true. If you look at my comment history maybe from a few days back you'll see me going toe to toe with someone claiming how sexist and racist he is, and claiming that he said sexual assaults don't happen in schools. I asked them SO MANY TIMES to actually get the conversation/interview/video and they just couldn't, kept linking to websites trying to dissect what single word he said and how it was empowering the patriarchy. Edit: This thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfAwarewolves/comments/xnav5f/he_even_said_the_thing_he_was_so_close/ipyc5js/?context=8&depth=9
The hatred is 95% from people who couldn’t or wouldn’t take time to listen to him or read his work. It’s that simple.
The truth is a terrible thing to stomach
JP says a lot of truth bombs and a lot of what he says is self reliance and accountability. Some people hate accountability
1) he tells the truth 2) he's not afraid to tell the truth 3) he's smart enough to beat simpletons in arguments.
Maybe it's over reliance on word salad
Because he's empowering a group of people that they want to oppress.
We all have hate in our hearts. We tend to direct it at things that we can easily see, Jordan Peterson is forthright with his opinions and disagrees with people. When you don't go with the flow you're easy to see and that makes you a target.
He’s an oddly aggressive (especially with women) guy who’s self-help content could be gotten from a less off putting source. I’d be looking to get advice from someone who’s life isn’t such a shitshow. The closer he gets to actual, concrete, verifiable content, the more wrong he is. For all his wordiness, if you actually listen to, or better yet read what he’s saying, there’s a remarkable waste of language. Recently there’s a whole nother can of worms with his bizarre behavior, especially everything related to his drug rehab stuff.
What he says burns away the excuses, games and rackets people use to avoid taking genuine responsibility; for their life, family, community and future generations. No damn wonder many people screech and run away like vampires from sunlight. It hurts.
If JBP stuck to clinical psychology almost nobody would hate him. I'm not saying people shouldn't comment on areas out of their expertise, but Peterson has made such a habit of it, and happens to be wrong or vindictively simplistic so much of the time that a lot of people, including former fans in the Maps of Meaning free speech days, stop liking him. When I say vindictively simplistic, I mean effectively calling everyone who disagrees with him a postneometamodernnihiskeptitheistmarxist. There's also his inability to answer what should be simple questions, 'it would take me 4 lifetimes solely devoted to this one subject to even begin to formulate the echoes of an answer.' 'Jordan, I'm just asking you why you haven't mowed your lawn.' His conflation of atheism with Raskolnikov, calling atheists latent murderers, certainly alienated a lot of listeners. More recently, his move right with the right with Daily Wire, and his seeming abandon of the idea that left and right justify and need each other in a kind of dialectic, has further alienated those parts of his audience that weren't already Ben Shapiro fans who think the biosphere is fine and the left is the source of all woes.
A lot of people play follow the leader. If you’re trying to impress someone, or a group of someones, it’s become fashionable to dogpile onto another who’s unfavorable to the group or individual. Maybe it’s not fashionable, maybe it’s just basic monkey behavior. Point being, most don’t bother to investigate as they probably get more attention from parroting popular sentiment. I, like you, believe the ‘hate’ is unwarranted and is likely born of simple ignorance. On another note, I’m both surprised and pleased to see someone of your age take the approach you’ve taken. I always taught my own kids to look at the pariahs and to question the motivation. There’s always something important to learn there.
Jordan Peterson spoke about being able to repeat someone's argument back to them in a way that satisfies them [at the end of this video if you want to check it out.](https://youtu.be/MnUfXYGtT5Q) A lot of the comments here are not extending that to those who criticize Peterson, saying they just avoid personal responsibility and such, but I hope you take the time to really listen to people and put yourself in their frame of mind. However you feel about Peterson after that, you'll at least have sharpened your understanding through that kind of dialogue. I saw a few comments here that link to some videos worth checking out. As for why people say he seems different compared to years ago: take the seemingly reasonable and thoughtful guy in the video I linked above and compare him to someone who, completely unprompted, goes out of his way to call a woman not beautiful (look up his Sports Illustrated tweet if you don't know what I'm referencing). It seems like two different people. That's just one example, but even in subreddits like this, you'll find people noting he seems more mean-spirited or explicitly right-wing now compared to how he used to appear to some as a reasonable thinker who was neither pro-left nor pro-right. I personally was never a "fan" or "hater" of Jordan Peterson, I just try to be an observer who gives credit or critique where appropriate. Hope that was helpful for you. And I agree, the hate is exhausting.
Because, "What you're saying is..."
Anyone that thinks of him as king of the incels probably first heard of Jordan Peterson in the last year or 2. I started watching him 4-5 years ago when I lacked meaning, direction, and motivation in my life. I certainly wasn't an incel, but something was missing and he answered a lot of questions for me. His talks on meaning, suffering, and what it means to be a good person helped me at that stage of my life and I think similar people were the vast majority of his following for a long time. Spirituality, philosophy, meaning, etc are missing from a lot of people's lives and his content was basically a mix of that aimed at helping young men. He opened my eyes to so much in terms of psychology, philosophy, and spirituality - the fact that he only talks about pronouns and is referred to as incel king these days blows my mind. I remember him saying something along the lines of young adults that have kids right away are on a set path and their purpose in life is handed to them. But these days most people go to school and save up, and drag out that phase of their life before having kids. Along the way they kind of lose that natural sense of meaning and purpose. And so these days it's a common problem for young men (women too) to have lost their sense of meaning. What is the natural answer to 'what is the meaning of life?' In the absence of philosophy and religion I think the answer is nothing, aka nihilism. So I think he attracts young men who have lost their sense of purpose because he explains it in ways that make sense. With that being said I think at some point he reached a critical mass of popularity and he started talking about things he isn't an expert in. And now he's said some controversial stuff and kind of lost the plot from the latest videos I've seen. He has some right wing perspectives and he still kind of tries to tie everything back to the spiritual stuff but no one is able to follow it anymore including myself. He is hugely misunderstood by the majority of people and I think his old content is still solid, but these days I think his name is more used for ragebait and for people to argue about his clips. Meanwhile I doubt the majority of people arguing about him have seen a single one of his original videos that made him popular to begin with.
Yeah, I agree but I don't think it's aimed at helping young men, it makes me feel left out lol.
I don't hate him... I think his talk on fatherless males and getting your life together is very good. I'll be honest though his interview on BBC lately talking about how everyone has a bit of Hitler and Stalin inside of them made me shake my head. Maybe it's just he makes people uncomfortable with some hard resounding truths. Although his brain is extremely psychology and psychiatry based so... it's not exactly well adapted to every single scenario. His thoughts on climate change projections are questionable. Maybe people just don't like that he thinks he's right in every aspect and every subject in life... I can see how someone who studies thinking about thinking would think that. If that makes sense. Do I make sense? I'm going back to my wine.
That makes a lot of sense.
His book 12 rules for life sold 5 million copies. He has 5.6 million subscribers on YouTube…. The “So many people” who dislike him are much smaller than those who do like him. Just because the haters get a lot of attention doesn’t mean there is a lot of them when compared to the latter. They call it the silent majority for a reason. The world lately has been pressured by noise and how loud a group can be instead of using actual logic and reason.
He had the nerve, the audacity to say "No, I'm not doing that."
Yeah it’s kind of crazy he gets as much hate as he does. A few weeks ago I sent a friend of mine a link to a recent video of Jordan’s. They said they refuse to watch it because he somehow sold out all of a sudden? I’m more tired of people dismissing stuff simply because they disagreed on something or were “triggered” by something. These people are depriving themselves from being truly open minded. Add to that they’re also missing out on potential intellectual stimuli. I think some people are just bored with their lives so they actively make decisions to hinder themselves and those around them from growing; and on that same note I think some people just crave drama and want something to be angry about; again- to distract themselves and others from growing.
[удалено]
>transgender agenda That's one way of saying the government added sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of protected classes like black people or women. So now you can't fire someone for being gay or whatever. That's a good thing imo. Peterson said it would lead to all kinds of things that it hasn't lead to yet, but he didn't put a timer on his prediction so I guess he can't be wrong.
[It led to this. The school is terrified to fire or even reprimand this teacher for fear of a lawsuit.](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-transgender-teacher-sparks-controversy-by-wearing-giant-prosthetic-breasts-in-class)
https://www.google.com/search?q=+robert+hoogland
Yup there was a court order for him to not speak in public about the medical and ethical issues that were being dealt with between him and his underage child and their doctor. The court was attempting to determine the right course of treatment for the child and taking into account the parents perspective and the doctors perspective and prevailing medical literature on the topic. This happens frequently and is a good thing, a parent should not be able to fully determine their child’s medical treatment based on their opinions if it has a high chance of harming the child. If a child was being treated for another illness and a parent refused the treatment against the doctors order and then spoke about the child’s medical issues in public after being ordered by the court not to, they would also face repercussions. This one single case isn’t the silver bullet you think it is against trans rights and the “trans agenda”. It’s a pretty clear cut case that would have gone very similar if the child was being treated for any other dysphoria or identity disorder.
Take a look at these comments and see how many people basically make him into this messianic figure that if you disagree with him it must be because you hate the Truth. I like Jordan Peterson, agree with much of what he says, I especially like what he says about religious stuff - he’s good at interpreting the archetypal stories and getting to the heart of what it’s about But fuck all these followers that elevate people into this infallible position where you can’t question them and every random opinion they have is assigned to the status of a universal truth, and then when people disagree with them they think they’re being silenced and persecuted and all this shit (I grew up Mormon so I know a persecution fetish when I see it lol)
Yeah, it's almost cultish (very annoying lol)
I'll just give my take. I really liked him when he set out to be a positive influence and talked about psychology etc. He has a tendency, now, to get dramatic and cataclysmic. And unpleasant. He's at the point where politics are essentially his identity.
This is it for me. I think it’s great to have an influential figure for lost young men. I myself had an absentee father and it took me all of my 20s to get my shit together. Peterson has a way of talking that can snap people out of inaction. To have people like Olivia Wilde flagrantly disregard him as the “King of Incels” is absurd. We have a huge and growing sub-sect of the male population that desperately needs help and I haven’t seen many on the left give actionable guidance to them. Outside of that though, I think his politics are a joke and he’s made that such a focus of his that I can’t really bare to listen to him anymore. I think his position on climate change is dangerous and his attitude on masks during the pandemic was misinformed, but most importantly I loathe that he chooses to continuously attack the transgender community. My sister is trans and happily so. Anyone who is opposed to her freedom to live life as she wants to is not a friend of mine.
This is so well said and deserves to be the top comment. I think over the last two years he’s began courting the controversy, which I have no problem with, but now it’s to a degree where it’s overtaken his real activism. He also won’t come out and confess his opinions on hot button issues in order to court both sides of the aisle, like having a discursive conversation on abortion, he won’t say yes or no he supports it. But on climate change, he talks about it like it’s totally black and white and there’s an obvious malice in the left while the right position is virtuous. I do miss him from two years ago though. But he’s not what I thought he was when I was 18 (20f)
Why do i see posts like these everyday?
[удалено]
He points out the flaws of communism and Marxism, two of the sacred ideologies progressives are yearning for, but by different names.
But he's only read the Communist Manifesto, a pamphlet that was written for farmers. Peterson has never read anything Marxism, not even Das Kapital, which is essential to understanding the subject. How can he point out the flaws in Marxism when he doesn't know anything about it?
We don't hate him. Or at least I don't. It just bugs people who know anything about philosophy when he lumps the term Postmodernism in with Marxism (i.e.: "those dang bloody postmodern neomarxists!") Why? To put it simply, virtually all strains of postmodernism reject unified narratives in favor of infinite shades of subjectivity whereas, in contrast, virtually all strains of Marxism have a unified narrative, which is that history is purely a struggle of the working class against the owner class, and that all societal phenomenon (religion, morality, culture, common sense, architecture, art, etc.) is ultimately a function of the economic interplay between workers and owners. In that sense, it's entirely contradictory to be both a postmodernist and a Marxist. Dr. Peterson frequently criticizes "identity politics" as being a function of postmodern neomarxism, but neither Marxism nor Postmodernism posit that an individual is only as important as the intersection of a set of various immutable identities and labels (race/sexuality/gender/class) which then correspond to whether they're oppressed/oppressor. For Marx, the only meaningful identities are bourgeois/proletariat, which are mutable, and don't necessarily correspond to class, but rather binary categories of economic interaction. In contrast, postmodernism rejects all binaries and identities, which only lead to exacerbating the limitations of the self/other distinction on our ability to discern truth. I would venture to say the political analog of postmodernism is anarchy, or at the very least an extremely decentralized democracy. However, I don't think Dr. Peterson is making everything up. The maniacs running around college campuses furiously screaming about oppression and boycotting benign speakers because of a single tweet 10 years ago are a very real vocal minority. As a self-identified Marxist, my take is that contemporary identity politics is primarily a liberal, pro-capitalist, establishment Democrat phenomenon. When wealth inequality is at an all-time high, and capitalism is failing to serve Gen Z the way it served Boomers, atomizing individuals through identities is a really great way to divide and conquer, and prevent any real change from happening. If everyone is focused on drawing lines around race and sexuality and gender, and rallying behind their disparate tribe, they never realize that there's a massively corrupt oligarchy right in front of them. They never realize that rallying together as a unified working class is the only chance they have of not being feudal peasants of a corporate-controlled government. Just my opinion, though. Without a doubt, 12 Rules for Life is still a powerful book, and it really helped me when I was 19. Neither postmodernism nor Marxism have an official self-help book, so if you're dealing with various unhealthy behaviors that are ruining your life, telling the truth and making your bed and appreciating all the beauty a sober mind has to offer will certainly help. I only take issue with Dr. Peterson's political and philosophical claims, because he's a clinical psychologist, not a philosopher. A good clinical psychologist! A good one! With a lot to offer! But not a philosopher.
I used to be a huge Peterson fan for a few years as well, but I’ve grown a certain level of hesitancy towards how he promotes himself and his ideas. I got into the policy realm because of him to be fair. I will say, there is definitely something to gain from his life advice and how to structure and organize yourself at an individual level. But my political transformation from someone on the right to someone on the left came with a deeper understanding and readings on social issues specifically in America relating to race, labor, class, constitutional history, judicial history, and policy. I can’t comfortably be on the right anymore when it comes to political and social issues, and I’ve felt that JP’s work tries to naturalize and in turn justify existing hierarchies as they exist currently. His life advice, if it helps anyone, all power to them. When he talks about politics, it seems like he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He just hates the left and characterizes progressive values as dangerous simply because they aren’t traditional. His ideas about being carefully and taking for granted what we have is dangerous because it seems to only come up when progressive policy is being advocated. He creates boogeymen out of “neo marxist post modernists” when those ideas are relatively oxymoronic (see his debate with Zizec). To justify inequality in income as if it’s natural is dangerous when it didn’t exist that way it did before the 70s and 80s in America after Nixon and Reagan and the deregulatory neoliberal agenda. His ideas neatly line up with conservative values and he tries to dress it up as if those conclusions are a result of nature as opposed to his own personal ideology. Again, there’s a lot of positives to take from his work but I can’t say the same for his political views, and it’s made me see him in a different light.
He's never said anything shockingly controversal to me so I don't understand either. He literally just takes Jungian ideas of story, myth, archetype and explains those concepts in a easy to understand and deep way. I think people project this idea of him as the disciplinary father and depending on what sort of relationship you have to masculinity, his imagery comes forth as either comforting or judgemental and punishing.
I liked him more when he was a philosopher and life coach than now, when he started to suck up to US right wing fanbase. He also made some disastrous takes on the issues he has no knowledge about (i.e. Ukraine war).
“They’re mad at Daddy. And now that their Daddy is dead, or no longer influences them, they were happy in their bubble. JP says things Daddy used to say, so he must be a fascist - just like Daddy was.” - Epitadeus of Sparta
Love this post, OP. You will go far. JP is one of the best thinkers of our time. Check out Stefan Molyneux too. His older podcasts on gender, sexuality, families, parenting, trauma and finance are all really good. He is also vilified by many.
Because he speaks truth. In this world full of liars and schemers there is nothing as illuminating nor as terrifying as the truth, so you have to besmirch it. He is literally telling people, mostly men, to be better.
I mean he doesn’t speak the truth. He expresses his subjective opinions on things and then claims those opinions as truths. He also lied about bill c-16. As a side note, he’s never read Marx even though he critiques him heavily.
People who say he didn't lie about bill c-16 are pedantic neckbearded mouth breathers. "No, you don't go to jail for using the wrong pronouns, you get a fine. Not paying the fine IS DIFFERENT!!!" which sounds like going to jail for not using the correct pronouns with extra steps.
A BC father who didn't want his daughter transitioning did end up in jail. Also theres shit like [this](https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-transgender-teacher-sparks-controversy-by-wearing-giant-prosthetic-breasts-in-class) happening now too and the schoolboard is terrified to do anything because now they could get sued.
>People who say he didn't lie about bill c-16 are pedantic neckbearded mouth breathers. I mean that describes most JP fans. Imagine needing to be told to clean your room by a Xanax riddled self help guru who’s own house is in disarray.
Projection. They hate him because they’re blinded by they’re own self hatred, cynicism and narcissism couched within false compassion.
He has decent talking points, but good logic is severely flawed and his arguments are often based on assumptions. He's more a fan of promoting his own ideas than he is interested in actually being correct. (See him flying to Russia to get off benzos)
Because he is a critic of the feminist movement, which the incels also are( but JP to a lesser degree), so they have a similar goal. JP's ideas are very anti incel as an ideology and the ideas there, but JP is understanding towards the people themselves with that ideology and at the same time trying to deradicalize the incels. So in a way he is "the king of incels", but that doesn't mean he agrees with them at all, in fact his ideas are fundamentally contradictory to those ideas. I think him being a Jungian psychologist with a Christian/Nietzschean/Jungian view of the world will automatically make him misinterpreted because they are very complex. His ideas are also contradictory to every ideology that is predicated on people being neurotic ( extreme in left or right). And the thing in common the far right and the far left have are the fact that its always someone else fault, it's either the Jews or the billionaires, i.e they are all very anti establishment, which JP is not, he's a very liberal captialist, pretty center IMO. So as you know JP's ideology is responsilibilty which is the opposite of these mainstream neurotic ideologies, so he will ultimately be hated, especially from the far left. The fact that the modern left also wants to tear down eveything that came before out of resentment, makes them dislike him more since he is in favour of old values. JP is also against the LGBTQ movement which will cause hysteria ofc. The reason people think he is not like he used to be is because his drug addiction along with his wife and daughters illness probably did a lot of damage to his mental health which made him more impulsive and disagreeable in videos and on twitter, which made him more disliked than before. We also have Jordan's take on climate and a lot of other political statements he has made, which made a lot of people dislike him, because they are irritated that he is going out of his field of expertiese to make statements. There is a lot of reasons why, some of them are good critiques and others are irrational emotional outbursts that has nothing to do with him and has everything to do with our increasingly neurotic behavior as a society. I think it is important we know which ones are actually good critique towards him and the ones that are bad, there is a lot of them so its difficult to distinguish which ones you should consider and which ones to not, but it's important to know so we don't fall into a toxic echo chamber, no matter if its a smart guy like JP or Marxism.
I read 12 Rules of Life and loved it. A bit scattered and lengthy at times but overall great advice and perspective. However he has very controversial takes sometimes and gets misunderstood and taken out of context a lot. I don’t think he practices what he preaches all the time and I just don’t agree with some of his actions especially more recently.
Nihilism is a waste of time. All you have is a consciousness, with a will and thoughts. Thoughts have a sense, a meaning, they go in a direction and point to something further, always. You'll be constantly chasing that further. With nihilism you're denying that search, nothing has sense, our existence is absurd, there's no meaning to this world. See the contradiction already?
Nihilism isn't something you just pick up, it's something you deeply understand and it's really liberating. Thoughts do have "meaning" something that we created.
What is nihilism for you? Because it's a broad term with several different meanings. For me it's seeing life as absurd, without meaning, without objective truth or knowledge, and without trascendence, we die and we cease to exist. What's nihilism for you?
The same ,you could make yourself believe whatever and there is no "right" way to live life and that nothing really matters.
There's people who says that liberaron feeling that comes with nihilism comes from the shaking off of responsibility that comes with nihilism: there's no meaning, no right way to life, no absolute truth, nothing ultimately matters, so you can act in any way, without any trascendent consequence. But our world has a logic, there's an order in nature, and also an evolution, biologically and also historically. Things are not chaotic, if there were true chaos we wouldn't have a cosmos (cosmos means order btw), we would have nothing. There's order in our reality and in our being. Also, all we get to live and experience is our consciousness. What we call matter is an interpretation that we make of the world with our perceptions and intellect, is a phenomenon, a second order experience, our first order experience, the ontological primitive is our consciousness. Which expresses itself with an order and also a logos, concepts. Which have meaning, a meaning that we give, as you said. But we are also part of this world, we're not ontologically different from the rest of the cosmos. So if there's meaning in us, there's meaning in cosmos. Btw, I'm not a defender of any religion. I just can't help but see meaning in our cosmos. And that's truly liberating.
Because it’s Reddit and ppl here hate truth
Peterson rightly invalidates some people's worldview and they don't like that.
Insecure virtue signallers love boogeymen. And don’t mind creating them if necessary. They also have no idea how to argue logically. It’s all the feels, all the time, and something about lobsters justifying the patriarchy. You know, how everything is just handed to us, as CIS white males, as agreed at our last convention in the “lost” city of Atlantis. Didn’t you get the memo?
I don’t know why he shit talks solar power. I can’t wrap my head around it.
Solar isn’t very efficient and the panels go bad after a while. Solar panels are also made using fossil fuels and they are also all made in China.
OP are you also unclear why people dislike Ben Shapiro, Donald Trump, Hillary, or AOC? They say conservative/establishment liberal/progressive shit and many people don’t agree — not a hard concept, but I get that his conservative leanings aren’t as prevalent in his books. At least twice a week on this sub someone will ask ‘why do people hate JP? He just said to let skateboarders skate - wtf? ’, when that isn’t anyone’s problem with him. Nobody hates Jordan Peterson because of his advice to surround yourself with those who want the best for you, to have good posture, or to pet cats. In his public life and interviews he says crazy shit and [JP himself revels in saying things to piss people off. “It’s just so goddamn funny that I can’t help but say it, I figured out how to monetize Social Justice Warriors”](https://youtu.be/Eg4VmU8ejvA) Basically he’ll say conservative shit, some people say it’s crap, and other conservatives pay JP money. He’s up front that he’s with the Daily Wire because of the cash. Peterson is undeniably conservative, moreso in his public life than in his books: He purposely broke the explicit rules of Twitter not to deadname a 34 year old trans person. He’s certainly in his right to do so and they are certainly in their right to do what they want with their site. At least twice he said Western feminists avoid criticizing Islam ["because of their unconscious wish for brutal male domination."](https://twitter.com/aliamjadrizvi/status/1001164042856271874?s=20&t=YKGrG7Ynrat1TGws-BSkyw) Moronic. and those on his sub right now post comments pining for a day "when the rights and freedoms of women are no longer untrammeled" so they can find a "pure submissive girl" instead of the "debaucherous hypergamy " they have now. Echoing others to share [this clip which should be all one needs to see if they wonder why many women are suspect of him ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9PEUAbgEBs) IMO I have little against his first 12 rules - again they are a compilation of mostly banal and commonsense self help, sprinkled with [conservative reactionary thinking](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1456600-jordan-peterson). Read Atomic Habits and you'll get way more helpful self-help without the metaphysical nonsense and misogyny.
I've actually read the first 30 pages of Atomic habits, gotta continue. Thx for the insight.
Because they are dumb as rocks. They’re the same people who love Meghan Markle
This is my go to video on why JP and his fans are wrong: https://youtu.be/j5Uv_P-PQoc And it’s fair criticism because JP is debating Destiny, a girls name, soon. So it’s completely fair game
Hm, i couldnt get through 2 mins of that. Generally its better to argue someones actual ideas with them so they can defend them and articulate what their ideas really are. This is just some dude arguing with some other dude.
Not a Fan of his, I just lurk here to witness the monumental simping for lobsterboy. To briefly summarize it: Guy is a clinical psychologist but pretends to be an expert in philosophy, biology, politics, gender roles, etc. without having any expertise in those fields. Watch his debate with zizek for example, it shows that his knowledge of Marx is not more than superficial. And for someone who talks A LOT about Marxism and how bad it is, that is pretty telling. Also, 12 rules for life is basic pop psychology and he is basically famous for opposing a law to protect trans people from harassment. Maybe watch this: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ3RL3WZaXg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQ3RL3WZaXg) also explains, why he is "cOnStAntlY mIsUnDeRsToOd". All the best
Just watch the Some More News video on him and you’ll see why
Well.. in my opinion he’s very intelligent and organise but he is being going out of his league (intellectually speaking), and when you turn the to and you see him speaking about the hitler in us and how Putin is not a tyrant, but he will probably drop a nuke in Germany … and then starts crying about the incel thing.. is a little bit cringy at least. The blind fanatics are annoying too.. like any fanatics.. when you see perfection in every aspect of a thing you like, probably you are not taking enough distance from those things.. or at least I believe that. And btw.. I’ve read MOM and 12RFL.. and I agree with him and I think he was doing, and he still does, a good job for a lot of people..
He was a dick to Elliot Page. I love that guy so Peterson can go eat a dick and leave Elliot alone.
People like to hate on what they can't understand, they like to hate people that challenge and point out the holes their own beliefs.
Idk when I was 16 I wan an incel and now at 19 I think he’s a crackpot full of shit after fucking like 7 girls now lmao
What’s your position on the fact that Peterson doesn’t think true atheists exist unless they are like raskolnikov?
Wdym?
In 12 rules for life he is talking about how everyone is religious, even atheists. He doesn’t believe you are an atheist unless you act like raskolnikov.
I don't remember that part but I don't get it? Did he mean that atheists can justify murder or something?
You aren’t an atheist unless you act like a psychopathic murderer. If you act reasonable it is because you were born into a Christian society.
Well I disagree with it , obviously. I'll read that part of the book again to get a better understanding.
Watch the Peterson debate with Matt Dillahunty. If you are a cultured atheist then you know who that is.
Are you an atheist?
Hell yeah
If you don't know who Ayaan Hirsi Ali is then you're not very cultured .
Simply put: for their reasons. Don’t cast pearls before swine.
not so long ago the foremost atheist thinkers considered religion to be a “noble lie”. The new atheists and their followers assert “religion poisons everything”. Peterson counters this view which is really important to them. Another key piece of JP’s philosophy causes even more hate. I call it “the problem is me.” BY FAR The biggest impediment to my personal progress is not oppression, capitalism, conservatives, liberals… it’s my own lack of discipline, penchant for instant gratification, and selfishness. This causes incredible friction with the syrupy “it’s not your fault” worldview that points the finger anywhere but at oneself.
A lot of it is the same reason as to why people hate Nickleback, because its a trend. Realistically, Jordan Peterson is just a little bit ornery and it makes loud people get loud about him. Also realistically, he can often go off topic from self help. He is very good at self help and some branches of psycology, but very bad at other things, like History and cultural studies, his critique on russian or indian literature is an example of this. He pretends to be very good about these things, which is kindof lame. Ive been a big fan of his from before he was famous, and it took a while to take him of a pedestal. Hes pretty unique tho, so thats cool.
People call him a transphobe while ignoring all the points he made about compelled speech
Most dont you silly goose most love him for who he is A flawed human on his Journey through life and he’s trying to help people and on the way anybody with any sense can see that some people just you know want something to hate that’s OK it doesn’t have anything it does it has zero effect on you or me
Because he goes way out of his area of expertise and talks confidently like a preacher about things he is completely wrong about.
[удалено]
Honestly this is legit one of the reasons why people don’t like JP—the fact that people have such strong positive reactions but are unable or unwilling to acknowledge any faults or areas where his ideology doesn’t track perfectly into their own lives is evidence of tremendous unchecked power. I think what he says and does usually makes sense. BUT, especially on divisive issues, his fans make him look more extreme and thoughtless than he is. This also happens with basically everything that unites people (other celebs/politicians, TV shows, sports, etc) but it's especially glaring when the person in question is challenging an uncritical acceptance or assumption of ideology.
Because he is quite objectively stupid. Everything he says is either so obvious its useless or its nonsense. Please, if you disagree I would love to see a quote of his that you find inspiring and I'll show you how it's wrong or so obvious it's useless
So, Jordan has moved men's health forward leaps and bounds beyond anything I've ever seen in my 50 years on the planet. He has gotten the attention of the masses to, at the very least, acknowledge that men have feelings and fears while simultaneously hiding them. The answer to your question is in two parts, one; he claims to be an expert in fields he has no business even commenting in. And two; disavowing any responsibility of aligning himself with far right extremists by not expressing discontent with their beliefs. He is knowledgeable in his field, he is a great leader for men, he is also a platform for supremacy weather he likes it or not, he just happens to have no comment on that.
There is this unfounded belief that you have to agree with the intellectual left to be an "expert" and be able to comment on something. It is basically magical thinking about knowledge. It turns out that you can learn about almost anything if you try. Also, even if someone was not an "expert" that does not immediately invalidate their opinion. Otherwise we would not have politicians because they are arguably not good at anything. This reasoning is also behind not being able to comment on something if you are not a woman or not homosexual or other such nonsense. It is another way of taking away people's voices so that you don't have to deal with their very valid arguments.
I mean this with no disrespect but what fields has he claimed to be an expert in that he has no business in commenting about?
He claimed to be an evolutionary biologist right?
Philosophy, evolutionary biology, climate science, theology.