Society/Culture Jordan B Peterson

[Procrastinator35]

Exactly. Which is where postmodern philosophy falls down. It's all good and well to understand that there are limitless interpretations of everything and therefore no objective truth, but there aren't limitless useful or good interpretations. Postmodernism lacks any utility beyond thought exercises.

One of the keys to comprehending the post-modern perspective, lies in the 'subjective knowledge' prism.....The fact that all knowledge abides within & emanates from the 'subject' thereby renders all human knowledge as 'subjective'.....Not only in it's origins, but also in it's applications.....We can therefore, never prove anything as 'objective' as that would be to dismiss & ignore the source of it's origins to begin with.....The human perspective prism always interferes with ever knowing the 'thing in itself'.

 

[RegHickeyStand]

Cute.

Let me know if you want to have a discussion about this.

About what in particular?

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

About what in particular?

Nothing, clearly.

 

[ShanDog]

Nothing, clearly.

I have a simplified definition.

Postmodernists are the people who play D&D as Chaotic Neutral characters so they can justify their inner desires to be asshats on a whim.

I think you'll find that wraps it nice and neat.

 

[Showbags]

Do you have any examples of right wing PC police trying to shut down free speech? Perhaps a leftist speaker at a college campus who was unable to give their speech due to right wing rioting? I would suggest he doesn't address this topic because it doesn't exist.

Colin Kaepernick for one. Undergoing peaceful protest and was shouted down by the right wing jingoistic types who misrepresented his views as anti-american (the go-to argument from the right when wanting to dismiss arguments they dont like).

What about Trump constantly threatening to revoke the licence of media outlets he disagrees with. Not a peep from the right on this.

Ben Shapiro started his career by launching a petition to boycott Al Sharpton because he was "racist".

There was a petition recently calling for a uni professor Randa Jarrar to be fired over tweets about Barbara Bush's death (to be fair Shapiro defended her right to speak on this occasion).

What about Yassmin Abdel-Magied a year or two ago. She was basically chased out of the country by right wingers for a tweet.

Look at the constant smears and attacks on the kids in the Parkland shooting by right wing gun nuts recently.

Plenty of pro-palestinian speakers have been deplatformed as well.

You are a partisan right wing hack though so ofcourse you can't see both sides of an argument.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

If you listen to the lecture he discusses what he thinks has been the folly of traditional conservative messaging - all restriction and not engaging or uplifting enough (my interpretation).

To my mind conservatism, social conservatism anyway, is a static position and by its very nature defensive. In promoting a set ideal it seeks to lock that and only that 'way' into place and never diverge from the static position.

As soon as it moves from said position, if it engages with the prevailing mainstream and seeks to lift the restrictive bounds of that static position it becomes progressive. Even if by mere centimetres. It loses that previously-held position.

There will ALWAYS be a conservative platform however, always a line of thought that picks a particular moment of time to rust onto and stay with. If social progression is always a wheel rolling on and on, to see some jump off and want to stay put is sometimes understandable.

What we have to do is always be mindful of who is hurt and who becomes marginalised and excluded from the mainstream if social conservatism becomes the dominant ideology of the time.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I have a simplified definition.

Postmodernists are the people who play D&D as Chaotic Neutral characters so they can justify their inner desires to be asshats on a whim.

I think you'll find that wraps it nice and neat.

Chaotic Good FTMFW!!

 

[Frank Bunn]

Exactly. Which is where postmodern philosophy falls down. It's all good and well to understand that there are limitless interpretations of everything and therefore no objective truth, but there aren't limitless useful or good interpretations. Postmodernism lacks any utility beyond thought exercises.

Postmodernists are navel gazers.

 

[00Stinger]

 

[ShanDog]

To my mind conservatism, social conservatism anyway, is a static position and by its very nature defensive. In promoting a set ideal it seeks to lock that and only that 'way' into place and never diverge from the static position.

As soon as it moves from said position, if it engages with the prevailing mainstream and seeks to lift the restrictive bounds of that static position it becomes progressive. Even if by mere centimetres. It loses that previously-held position.

There will ALWAYS be a conservative platform however, always a line of thought that picks a particular moment of time to rust onto and stay with. If social progression is always a wheel rolling on and on, to see some jump off and want to stay put is sometimes understandable.

What we have to do is always be mindful of who is hurt and who becomes marginalised and excluded from the mainstream if social conservatism becomes the dominant ideology of the time.

There's nothing wrong with the traditionalism and cultural maintenance aspects of social conservatism IMO, but there's a tendency for people who are too rigid in those ideals for time to pass by them. Cultures and values are always changing. Always. Where the hard line conservatives will always fail is their inability to give a little. It's silly to think we are at some sort of cultural or social peak right now, though I am certain it's a view held by some since the dawn of the first civilisations.

Not everything 'progressive' is good, there's no doubt about that. But sometimes it is. The platform for conservatism that JBP was suggesting seems a little more likely to accept the good that comes along while still maintaining an eye on the underlying value structures that keep our society running. It might not be perfect, but the idea is right IMO.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

There's nothing wrong with the traditionalism and cultural maintenance aspects of social conservatism IMO, but there's a tendency for people who are too rigid in those ideals for time to pass by them. Cultures and values are always changing. Always. Where the hard line conservatives will always fail is their inability to give a little. It's silly to think we are at some sort of cultural or social peak right now, though I am certain it's a view held by some since the dawn of the first civilisations.

Not everything 'progressive' is good, there's no doubt about that. But sometimes it is. The platform for conservatism that JBP was suggesting seems a little more likely to accept the good that comes along while still maintaining an eye on the underlying value structures that keep our society running. It might not be perfect, but the idea is right IMO.

That's my position on things too, as it goes. And nah, as long as there IS a human society I don't think said society will ever 'peak'. Only leave thoughts/ideals/people behind.

 

[AM]

JBP makes me think of a charismatic Trump, one who thinks through every argument and ensures that they are bullet proof before launching them. Trump is the entertainer, Peterson is the intellectual. Both serve the same movement, but one can can have holes pointed out through their arguments... The other is invincible.

I guess one persons invincible intellectual is another persons smooth talking pseudo psychologist.

https://bit.ly/2BK8QNU

 

[The Passenger]

Colin Kaepernick for one. Undergoing peaceful protest and was shouted down by the right wing jingoistic types who misrepresented his views as anti-american (the go-to argument from the right when wanting to dismiss arguments they dont like).

What about Trump constantly threatening to revoke the licence of media outlets he disagrees with. Not a peep from the right on this.

Ben Shapiro started his career by launching a petition to boycott Al Sharpton because he was "racist".

There was a petition recently calling for a uni professor Randa Jarrar to be fired over tweets about Barbara Bush's death (to be fair Shapiro defended her right to speak on this occasion).

What about Yassmin Abdel-Magied a year or two ago. She was basically chased out of the country by right wingers for a tweet.

Look at the constant smears and attacks on the kids in the Parkland shooting by right wing gun nuts recently.

Plenty of pro-palestinian speakers have been deplatformed as well.

You are a partisan right wing hack though so ofcourse you can't see both sides of an argument.

Most free speech warriors are not actually for absolute free speech.

They draw arbitrary lines where it suits them.

 

[ShanDog]

I guess one persons invincible intellectual is another persons smooth talking pseudo psychologist.

https://bit.ly/2BK8QNU

Geez. I really hope you have swallowed the crap that article is selling.

 

[Lethality]

Most free speech warriors are not actually for absolute free speech.

They draw arbitrary lines where it suits them.

Nah, it was probably just the loud minority (trumpists) who were raving about Kaepernick. Before that, not many people cared. The reaction against Trump wanting to shut the protesting down was also from both left and right people in the NFL, although of course, some of them were self-serving.

 

[Lethality]

He's on a misleading ad for 60 minutes which portrays him as not wanting equal pay under any circumstances, rather than just arguing against forced equity.

 

[Brick Loosener]

I have a simplified definition.

Postmodernists are the people who play D&D as Chaotic Neutral characters so they can justify their inner desires to be asshats on a whim.

I think you'll find that wraps it nice and neat.

Don't open that can of worms.

 

[Procrastinator35]

Postmodernists are navel gazers.

So the Buddha was a post-modernist?....Huh.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Postmodernists are the people who play D&D as Chaotic Neutral characters so they can justify their inner desires to be asshats on a whim.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Sure: Certainty & objective truth are no longer valid.....Not only that, they never even existed to begin with, as they are mere burgeoise patriarchal constructs designed to thwart & exploit the masses holus bolus.

If you took out, "Certainty & objective truth" and just replaced it with "objectivity", then you would have a fairly good explanation.

All there is, is opinions, points of views & perspectives.....And any perspective is just as worthy of consideration & valid as any other.....Equal time.

This is where many "new left/SJW's/Postmodernists" undermine their own purported philosophy. They don't allow equal time for anything. They immediately revert to bullying, shaming and cheap intellectual stunts such as virtue signalling in order to create a power stance which undermines post modernism. Where is the "equal time" in that?

Post modernism is an inherently flawed concept.

 

[11sjw]

Colin Kaepernick for one. Undergoing peaceful protest and was shouted down by the right wing jingoistic types who misrepresented his views as anti-american (the go-to argument from the right when wanting to dismiss arguments they dont like).

He also had those supporting him yelling them down. Isn't that how discussion goes? His problem was his potential employers are a part of the biggest boys club around. Once seen as a distraction he had limited chance of getting back in.

What about Trump constantly threatening to revoke the licence of media outlets he disagrees with. Not a peep from the right on this.

What about the anti Trump media saying "Impeachment" from day 1? The media's behaviour in this, though not the only cause, can't be ignored either.

Ben Shapiro started his career by launching a petition to boycott Al Sharpton because he was "racist".

Sought a profile and obtained it. Never has a left leaning identity tried some trick to obtain a profile, right?

There was a petition recently calling for a uni professor Randa Jarrar to be fired over tweets about Barbara Bush's death (to be fair Shapiro defended her right to speak on this occasion).

Speaking ill of the recently departed was the issue here. Is that wrong?

What about Yassmin Abdel-Magied a year or two ago. She was basically chased out of the country by right wingers for a tweet.

Yeah, not sure misappropriating the ANZAC message for her own agenda will many friends.

Look at the constant smears and attacks on the kids in the Parkland shooting by right wing gun nuts recently.

I'm not a gun advocate by any stretch but you've done exactly the same thing here in your description of those that legally own guns. The fact that these kids choose to tell the world the NRA are a terrorist organisation and are directly responsible for that and other mass shootings when most mass killers aren't NRA members means you could "drive a truck" through their argument.

Plenty of pro-palestinian speakers have been deplatformed as well.

Here or the USA?

You are a partisan right wing hack though so ofcourse you can't see both sides of an argument.

It's usually partisan types that make that type of statement.

 

[AM]

Geez. I really hope you have swallowed the crap that article is selling.

Thanks for the rigorous critique of the piece and attendant links. Appears to have hit a nerve.

Of far greater interest than your dismissive opinion is that of a character who has decided to monetise his pseudo science and pop psychology and peddle it to the gullible.

 

[ShanDog]

Thanks for the rigorous critique of the piece and attendant links. Appears to have hit a nerve.

Of far greater interest than your dismissive opinion is that of a character who has decided to monetise his pseudo science and pop psychology and peddle it to the gullible.

I put as much effort into that critique as the writer of it did getting their info right.

What is it about Peterson's messages that hits a nerve with you?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Has Peterson sold out to the corporations?

Last I heard he was a professor in the none too friendly corporate environment of a Canadian university.

 

[Procrastinator35]

1. If you took out, "Certainty & objective truth" and just replaced it with "objectivity", then you would have a fairly good explanation.

2. This is where many "new left/SJW's/Postmodernists" undermine their own purported philosophy. They don't allow equal time for anything. They immediately revert to bullying, shaming and cheap intellectual stunts such as virtue signalling in order to create a power stance which undermines post modernism. Where is the "equal time" in that?

3. Post modernism is an inherently flawed concept.

1. Sure, that's fair enough.....Though I reckon the loss of certainty is more accurate, given that it also pertains to morality & pretty well every other field of human endeavour, where the notion of 'objectivity' hasn't traditionally applied.....We can also see it in science for example, where Heisenbeg's Uncertainty principle applies, or in the perpetual self-checking mechanism at work there.....What ties post-modernism to the open-ended scientific method, is a radical scepticism, whereby the truth is always up for debate & is always fluid & never fixed.....We can have theories about it, but we can never really grasp it.

2. That can be said to be true of any intellectual 'movement' that believes itself to be the harbinger's of 'truth', rightfulness & a new perception encompassing the farthest reaches of the human capacity.....The post-modernist movement is a many-headed Hydra.

3. There's probably room for a new thread topic on which to debate that very point.....I'm not saying that I'm an advocate of post-modernism....All I'm doing is attempting to articulate & adumbrate it's philosophical armature from as strong an epistemological & metaphysical basis as possible.....We ought to try & elaborate the theory & it's architecture as much as possible, so as to give it it's fair due.

Those dismissing post-modern theory - without giving it's merits & intellectual sophistication their full due - are merely guilty of missing the point of it's current 'in- vogueness' to begin with.

It's founder in Nietzsche was an intellectual giant, who cannot be so easily dismissed nor trifled with.....This was a man whose left-over notes - in what is termed his 'Nachlass' - entails enough original thought to constitute over 100 PhD theses alone.

It's the radical scepticism at the root of the post-modern sub-strata which must be wrestled with, in order to thoroughly de-bunk it.....and it is in no way as easy to dismiss, as some here would have you believe.....Nietzsche's proposition for the death of God goes all the way to the root & branch of the Western philosophical & theoretical tradition.....The Death of God leads onto the loss of certainty in all things.....The centre of the Western traditional canon can no longer hold, as Nietzsche has penetrated it's atomic structure & deconstructed it's underlying assumptions & foundations entirely.

One could argue that N's philosophy is the intellectual equivalent of quantum physics.....Both fly in the face of common-sense & convention.