Jordan Peterson vs Cathy Newman
Discussion
Dr Jekyll said:
So should there also be a targeted drive to encourage men to become flight attendants? Or is the fact that the majority of FAs are female simply because men in general are less interested in the role?
Just out of interest - this is a US study on gender split by job role. It's quite interesting looking down the list - seeing which roles are dominated by men and women - and which are close to 50:50https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/06/chart...
Moonhawk said:
Just out of interest - this is a US study on gender split by job role. It's quite interesting looking down the list - seeing which roles are dominated by men and women - and which are close to 50:50
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/06/chart...
That was really interesting, I wonder if its much different in the UKhttps://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/03/06/chart...
Goaty Bill 2 said:
V8mate said:
covmutley said:
Interesting. Thanks!Has anyone seen his clip on youtube ‘The problem with Atheists’?
He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
chrispmartha said:
Has anyone seen his clip on youtube ‘The problem with Atheists’?
He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
I do wonder how much of what you just wrote is tainted by your own particular beliefs, because his differ from yours. He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
I see he quite clearly challenges those who misconstrue rationality or irrationality with ethics or morals, those that think theism versus atheism is simply a matter of rationality, those that think the abstract concept of a higher being or a higher meaning hasn't in some way shaped our culture and our psyche in positive ways.
He's a very deep thinker, a very, very clever man. I cannot say I agree with everything he says but, if you are of a mind to consider a good discussion as a way of learning more about opposing or different propositions (as he says he is), then I certainly think he's worth listening to.
chrispmartha said:
Has anyone seen his clip on youtube ‘The problem with Atheists’?
He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
"The Problem with Atheism"He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
A perfectly coherent and absolutely crystal clear argument.
Nietzsche said "God is dead, and we have killed him, and there will not be enough water to wash away the rivers of blood."
Dostoevsky is good for your soul, even if you don't believe that you have a soul.
"For all their indisputable intelligence, men take this farce as something serious, and that is their tragedy.
They suffer, of course... but then they live, they live a real life, not a fantastic one, for suffering is life.
Without suffering what would be the pleasure of it? It would be turned into and endless church service; it would be holy, but tedious."
- The Brothers Karamazov
Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Wednesday 24th January 23:12
Goaty Bill 2 said:
chrispmartha said:
Has anyone seen his clip on youtube ‘The problem with Atheists’?
He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
"The Problem with Atheism"He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
A perfectly coherent and absolutely crystal clear argument.
Nietzsche said "God is dead, and we have killed him, and there will not be enough water to wash away the rivers of blood."
Dostoevsky is good for your soul, even if you don't believe that you have a soul.
"For all their indisputable intelligence, men take this farce as something serious, and that is their tragedy.
They suffer, of course... but then they live, they live a real life, not a fantastic one, for suffering is life.
Without suffering what would be the pleasure of it? It would be turned into and endless church service; it would be holy, but tedious."
Edited by EddieSteadyGo on Wednesday 24th January 23:20
Thats not a strange definition of truth, it is a very real, very finite definition of truth. It is philosophical Darwenism.
A large part of the problem for Peterson here is that he is actually very old fashioned. Its almost refreshing to see/hear actually! His work is nothing new, nothing revelatory, but is based entirely and squarely on a very very large library of existing western philosophical thought. From Homer, Sophocles through Milton, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Kant, Jung et al. This chap is basing his positions on the absolute bedrock of Western political and social philosophy through the ages. He is as classical based as it gets.
Which of course means absolutely sod all to most ppl reading or trying to understand his position because they have never read his source baseline material.
Truth to Peterson stems from his exposition of "the hero" challenging and succeeding against his own darkest forces. By forcing "the hero" to confront and overcome his worst aspects, the hero grows and becomes "stronger". Or a better person. Extrapolate this to wider society and voila you have a society that gets stronger by being more honest with itself.
Why yes, well noticed - you can indeed see the Star Wars/luke and his Daddy issues! Well done! Nooo, of course George Lucas didnt steal any ideas from ancient Greek myths or philosophies involving labyrinths and nasty creatures at their centre...
Its basically just another advocate of "truth makes you stronger". Which has pretty much been a central tenet of western philosophical thought since...well all the above lot I just mentioned.
I DID warn you that studying political theory at Uni was A:f
king dull and B: that anyone who got through all this crap and still had enthusiasm to actually inflict their own political thoughts on mankind was pathologically unsuited to the job!
A large part of the problem for Peterson here is that he is actually very old fashioned. Its almost refreshing to see/hear actually! His work is nothing new, nothing revelatory, but is based entirely and squarely on a very very large library of existing western philosophical thought. From Homer, Sophocles through Milton, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Kant, Jung et al. This chap is basing his positions on the absolute bedrock of Western political and social philosophy through the ages. He is as classical based as it gets.
Which of course means absolutely sod all to most ppl reading or trying to understand his position because they have never read his source baseline material.
Truth to Peterson stems from his exposition of "the hero" challenging and succeeding against his own darkest forces. By forcing "the hero" to confront and overcome his worst aspects, the hero grows and becomes "stronger". Or a better person. Extrapolate this to wider society and voila you have a society that gets stronger by being more honest with itself.
Why yes, well noticed - you can indeed see the Star Wars/luke and his Daddy issues! Well done! Nooo, of course George Lucas didnt steal any ideas from ancient Greek myths or philosophies involving labyrinths and nasty creatures at their centre...
Its basically just another advocate of "truth makes you stronger". Which has pretty much been a central tenet of western philosophical thought since...well all the above lot I just mentioned.
I DID warn you that studying political theory at Uni was A:f
king dull and B: that anyone who got through all this crap and still had enthusiasm to actually inflict their own political thoughts on mankind was pathologically unsuited to the job!EddieSteadyGo said:
Goaty Bill 2 said:
chrispmartha said:
Has anyone seen his clip on youtube ‘The problem with Atheists’?
He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
"The Problem with Atheism"He may have made mince meat of the interviewer on Channel 4 but that video on youtube shows him bumbling to make a point about morality and atheists which is such a simple point to disprove, he doesn’t come across great on that video imho.
A perfectly coherent and absolutely crystal clear argument.
Nietzsche said "God is dead, and we have killed him, and there will not be enough water to wash away the rivers of blood."
Dostoevsky is good for your soul, even if you don't believe that you have a soul.
"For all their indisputable intelligence, men take this farce as something serious, and that is their tragedy.
They suffer, of course... but then they live, they live a real life, not a fantastic one, for suffering is life.
Without suffering what would be the pleasure of it? It would be turned into and endless church service; it would be holy, but tedious."
I would say that he is informing his students not just of his beliefs/ideas and conclusions, but the journey of how he got there.
Most university students arrive, especially in Canada (and probably the US) with little to no knowledge of the works of the likes of Nietzsche, Jung or Dostoevsky.
Personally, I had only heard of Dostoevsky when I finished high school and knew nothing real/useful of Plato or Socrates. Nietzsche and Jung were complete unknowns, even by name.
Many university students have a lot of catching up to do.
ETA
I recall one lecture (and again there is a shortened clip that would be easier to locate), where Peterson asks his new class "how many of you have heard of George Orwell?" He is genuinely surprised by the fact of a few hands being raised. He clearly expected very few to none.
In fact it prompted me to ask my own children (I was a weekend dad, so missed a lot obviously). They each now have 'Animal Farm' and '1984' as a start - "Merry Christmas!"; "wot no socks?" FFS, what do our schools teach these days?
Edited by Goaty Bill 2 on Thursday 25th January 09:38
DeejRC said:
Thats not a strange definition of truth, it is a very real, very finite definition of truth. It is philosophical Darwenism.
A large part of the problem for Peterson here is that he is actually very old fashioned. Its almost refreshing to see/hear actually! His work is nothing new, nothing revelatory, but is based entirely and squarely on a very very large library of existing western philosophical thought. From Homer, Sophocles through Milton, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Kant, Jung et al. This chap is basing his positions on the absolute bedrock of Western political and social philosophy through the ages. He is as classical based as it gets.
Which of course means absolutely sod all to most ppl reading or trying to understand his position because they have never read his source baseline material.
Truth to Peterson stems from his exposition of "the hero" challenging and succeeding against his own darkest forces. By forcing "the hero" to confront and overcome his worst aspects, the hero grows and becomes "stronger". Or a better person. Extrapolate this to wider society and voila you have a society that gets stronger by being more honest with itself.
Why yes, well noticed - you can indeed see the Star Wars/luke and his Daddy issues! Well done! Nooo, of course George Lucas didnt steal any ideas from ancient Greek myths or philosophies involving labyrinths and nasty creatures at their centre...
Its basically just another advocate of "truth makes you stronger". Which has pretty much been a central tenet of western philosophical thought since...well all the above lot I just mentioned.
I DID warn you that studying political theory at Uni was A:fking dull and B: that anyone who got through all this crap and still had enthusiasm to actually inflict their own political thoughts on mankind was pathologically unsuited to the job!
Agreed absolutely right up to the point of point 'B'. Not entirely sure I got your meaning/intention with that last.A large part of the problem for Peterson here is that he is actually very old fashioned. Its almost refreshing to see/hear actually! His work is nothing new, nothing revelatory, but is based entirely and squarely on a very very large library of existing western philosophical thought. From Homer, Sophocles through Milton, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Kant, Jung et al. This chap is basing his positions on the absolute bedrock of Western political and social philosophy through the ages. He is as classical based as it gets.
Which of course means absolutely sod all to most ppl reading or trying to understand his position because they have never read his source baseline material.
Truth to Peterson stems from his exposition of "the hero" challenging and succeeding against his own darkest forces. By forcing "the hero" to confront and overcome his worst aspects, the hero grows and becomes "stronger". Or a better person. Extrapolate this to wider society and voila you have a society that gets stronger by being more honest with itself.
Why yes, well noticed - you can indeed see the Star Wars/luke and his Daddy issues! Well done! Nooo, of course George Lucas didnt steal any ideas from ancient Greek myths or philosophies involving labyrinths and nasty creatures at their centre...
Its basically just another advocate of "truth makes you stronger". Which has pretty much been a central tenet of western philosophical thought since...well all the above lot I just mentioned.
I DID warn you that studying political theory at Uni was A:f
king dull and B: that anyone who got through all this crap and still had enthusiasm to actually inflict their own political thoughts on mankind was pathologically unsuited to the job!The concept of truth based on Darwinism is exactly right and made instant and perfect sense to me as I watched the discussion with Sam.
Frankly, I was surprised he [Sam] couldn't get to it. I started to see their technical differences near the end, but I was still left wondering if he wasn't to some degree being dogmatic about his own definition of 'truth'.
Sorry if that's not entirely clear. I watched those two discussions immediately as they came out and I think that was some months ago.
DeejRC said:
Thats not a strange definition of truth, it is a very real, very finite definition of truth. It is philosophical Darwenism.
A large part of the problem for Peterson here is that he is actually very old fashioned. Its almost refreshing to see/hear actually! His work is nothing new, nothing revelatory, but is based entirely and squarely on a very very large library of existing western philosophical thought. From Homer, Sophocles through Milton, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Kant, Jung et al. This chap is basing his positions on the absolute bedrock of Western political and social philosophy through the ages. He is as classical based as it gets.
Which of course means absolutely sod all to most ppl reading or trying to understand his position because they have never read his source baseline material.
Truth to Peterson stems from his exposition of "the hero" challenging and succeeding against his own darkest forces. By forcing "the hero" to confront and overcome his worst aspects, the hero grows and becomes "stronger". Or a better person. Extrapolate this to wider society and voila you have a society that gets stronger by being more honest with itself.
Why yes, well noticed - you can indeed see the Star Wars/luke and his Daddy issues! Well done! Nooo, of course George Lucas didnt steal any ideas from ancient Greek myths or philosophies involving labyrinths and nasty creatures at their centre...
Its basically just another advocate of "truth makes you stronger". Which has pretty much been a central tenet of western philosophical thought since...well all the above lot I just mentioned.
I DID warn you that studying political theory at Uni was A:fking dull and B: that anyone who got through all this crap and still had enthusiasm to actually inflict their own political thoughts on mankind was pathologically unsuited to the job!
You're sitting in the corner of the room, banging your 'he's not saying anything new' drum, but making yourself look foolish.A large part of the problem for Peterson here is that he is actually very old fashioned. Its almost refreshing to see/hear actually! His work is nothing new, nothing revelatory, but is based entirely and squarely on a very very large library of existing western philosophical thought. From Homer, Sophocles through Milton, Hobbes, Nietzsche, Kant, Jung et al. This chap is basing his positions on the absolute bedrock of Western political and social philosophy through the ages. He is as classical based as it gets.
Which of course means absolutely sod all to most ppl reading or trying to understand his position because they have never read his source baseline material.
Truth to Peterson stems from his exposition of "the hero" challenging and succeeding against his own darkest forces. By forcing "the hero" to confront and overcome his worst aspects, the hero grows and becomes "stronger". Or a better person. Extrapolate this to wider society and voila you have a society that gets stronger by being more honest with itself.
Why yes, well noticed - you can indeed see the Star Wars/luke and his Daddy issues! Well done! Nooo, of course George Lucas didnt steal any ideas from ancient Greek myths or philosophies involving labyrinths and nasty creatures at their centre...
Its basically just another advocate of "truth makes you stronger". Which has pretty much been a central tenet of western philosophical thought since...well all the above lot I just mentioned.
I DID warn you that studying political theory at Uni was A:f
king dull and B: that anyone who got through all this crap and still had enthusiasm to actually inflict their own political thoughts on mankind was pathologically unsuited to the job!And the slight you are casting on everyone else in this thread isn't helping either. (though you have long-standing form on PH for donning a Walter Mitty cloak)
If Peterson was some self-styled cod philosopher, I might have some sympathy with your argument. But he's not; he's a clinical psychologist. So the value he is adding, is taking established themes, some from hundreds of years ago, and demonstrating their fitness for purpose in a modern age by application of contemporary data and analysis.
That, is what makes him exciting and interesting and pertinent and useful. That he isn't relying on 100% novel treatises couldn't be more irrelevant.
V8mate said:
DeejRC said:
<previously quoted stuff>
You're sitting in the corner of the room, banging your 'he's not saying anything new' drum, but making yourself look foolish.And the slight you are casting on everyone else in this thread isn't helping either. (though you have long-standing form on PH for donning a Walter Mitty cloak)
If Peterson was some self-styled cod philosopher, I might have some sympathy with your argument. But he's not; he's a clinical psychologist. So the value he is adding, is taking established themes, some from hundreds of years ago, and demonstrating their fitness for purpose in a modern age by application of contemporary data and analysis.
That, is what makes him exciting and interesting and pertinent and useful. That he isn't relying on 100% novel treatises couldn't be more irrelevant.
For those who did not study philosophy or political sciences at university, I would suggest that Peterson's distillation of many of the classic philosophers and writers into his narratives are very informative.
As I said previously, he gives extensive explanations, and numerous references in order to provide background as well as a roadmap for his students by providing the names of authors and books that have influenced his course teaching.
Peterson grew up in Alberta during the 60s and 70s. I visited that part of the world often with my parents. It was very frontier like, towns with a single school and playground, gravel roads everywhere except maybe Main Street, and a few side roads, even wood boarded sidewalks! endless farms and cattle ranches. Even Calgary was just one big 'hick town'. One would hardly have been at all surprised to see a herd of cattle being driven to market through the city (I am not aware of that actually happening, it was just an impression at the time).
I should imagine that anyone who grew up in those parts would be very aware that most people get nowhere near higher education and the rarefied world of academia. When they did, most opted for STEM subjects and the odd history degree.
In combination with the apparent reduction in the number of young men attending higher education, and so having little or no foundation in philosophy, history or literature, it is exactly what makes him accessible.
That some arrogant people label him "The stupid man's smart person" is childish pejorative.
Ignorance is not stupidity.
I know one university professor who devours his work (read his book in December and loved it) and apparently so do her colleagues.
oilbethere said:
Not-The-Messiah said:
oilbethere said:
This is a prime example of why they get paid less.
But she be wont will she, she will be earning far more than your academic like Peterson in their academic carriers. 
Undoubtedly has hurt the value of the Channel 4 Brand.V8mate said:
You're sitting in the corner of the room, banging your 'he's not saying anything new' drum, but making yourself look foolish.
And the slight you are casting on everyone else in this thread isn't helping either. (though you have long-standing form on PH for donning a Walter Mitty cloak)
If Peterson was some self-styled cod philosopher, I might have some sympathy with your argument. But he's not; he's a clinical psychologist. So the value he is adding, is taking established themes, some from hundreds of years ago, and demonstrating their fitness for purpose in a modern age by application of contemporary data and analysis.
That, is what makes him exciting and interesting and pertinent and useful. That he isn't relying on 100% novel treatises couldn't be more irrelevant.
I have long standing walter Mitty whatsits?And the slight you are casting on everyone else in this thread isn't helping either. (though you have long-standing form on PH for donning a Walter Mitty cloak)
If Peterson was some self-styled cod philosopher, I might have some sympathy with your argument. But he's not; he's a clinical psychologist. So the value he is adding, is taking established themes, some from hundreds of years ago, and demonstrating their fitness for purpose in a modern age by application of contemporary data and analysis.
That, is what makes him exciting and interesting and pertinent and useful. That he isn't relying on 100% novel treatises couldn't be more irrelevant.
My long standing’ness in here is usually only complete and utter withering contempt of the usual crap spoken and to poke fun at most drivel. Very rarely do I actually bother posting properly because - well it’s dull. And it makes you sound like Eric or Derek and frankly I’d rather somebody just shot me instead of that.
Peterson is saying nothing new. If I were to be a cod philosopher summing up for Channel 4 I’d say he was taking Hobbes The Lethiathon adding Greekness and Jung from his own professional speciality.
You find this interesting. Yay. Go you. Now I know where Peterson is coming from quite frankly my interest ends. The last post I wrote was the most academic thing or even vaguely related to my degree in 20yrs and it was done off the top of my head remembering back 20yrs. I have no interest in revisiting that stuff.
Note - I have explicitly made no mention of whether I agree or disagree with Peterson. It was only to work out where he was coming from, now I do and job jobbed for me. I’ll get back on with life and leave you to it.
Russian Troll Bot said:
It's amazing how out of her depth Newman clearly was in this encounter. She started off trying to be aggressive and just completely collapsed early on when she realised she couldn't mis-quote and misconstrue Peterson into a corner. By the end she was completely lost, her credibility had been erased. The bit about the lobsters or the "So you're saying left-wing transgender activists will kill millions of people?" were just completely ridiculous.
I watched the interview, I'm not a fan of Ms Newman, you can see/feel the angst oozing out of her so determined is she to find a "right on" angle to any story. On this occasion she was completely outmatched but weirdly for someone who is clearly very bright she just wouldn't stop digging.
I wonder if she went home that night and reflected on her performance and the bias that drove her to make such a fool of herself, I doubt it.
I wonder if she went home that night and reflected on her performance and the bias that drove her to make such a fool of herself, I doubt it.
Wills2 said:
she just wouldn't stop digging.
One sees it so often on here, sometimes to bizarre lengths and linguistic athletics to never admit they are wrong.I've read a bit of Jung, I think the bloke may have been correct on the animas thing. The trump thread has great examples of it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff