His popularity across not only his followers, but other media outlets.
He's not a sociologist, he's a clinical psychologist.
Any sociologist worth their salt would dismiss pretty much anything the lobster daddy would say.
The amount of thread he can generate.
This is literally the only thing that him so exceptional....that and his graphs, by god I've never seens graphs so bad.
I get that but let's not entertain that guy's delusions.What I mean is, he pretends to be many things, and he mainly dabbles in social issues and presents himself as a sociologist.
I get that but let's not entertain that guy's delusions.
He has made no peer reviewed articles, doesn't even have the credentials and his work is so shoddy that it would be like calling me a writer and if you've ever read my prose you know no one is ever going to pay for that.
As a psychologist, yes.You can disagree with his positions, but not his academic credentials.
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=wL1F22UAAAAJ&hl=en
He has over 200 academic papers published, with over 10,000 citations.
Can you clarify what you mean by "he has no credentials"? He got his PhD in Clinical Psychology from McGill, before becoming a tenured professor at Harvard and Toronto.
Era looks at and discusses matters from a different point of view than any other forum. Peterson is highly influential and relevent (even if the reasons might be wrong) so just covering your eyes and going "LALALALALA can't hear you" won't make him go away. Giving him a platform is an interesting point of debate but in Era that platform is one that exposes and mocks him. He's not corrupting anyone here.
So I think this thread has value in the deconstruction of his arguments (less in mocking him).But there is a difference between the raging zealots and the confused, persuadable kids. And at some point you need to be civil to the latter, to understand that their affinity for him runs deeper than the usual "This is the guy who's smacking down the SJWs!" posturing.
Peterson pairs his attacks with a positive message: "Here's why their way leads to ruin and my way will fix your life." If your counter to that is just relentless mockery and spite, or (in their eyes) endless scolding and browbeating, his way will always look better to them. If you want to win those people over -- and you do -- they have to be presented with a positive message from the other side.
True. It is best to condemn based on the words of others. Coming to your own conclusion is too much work.
You mocked me, but I'll again reiterate that the video I posted is well worth watching if you want to understand someone like Jordan Peterson.
You're confusing itI didn't expect such a good article from nymag or am I making the cardinal sin of confusing nymag with nypost?
I get it that nypost is still trash.
LolI get it that nypost is still trash.
I came reading the article as a diatribe against "the L.E.F.T" with some Peterson inside of it.
But then again I knew something was off with the person tweeting it and all.
But yeah again another must read.
As a psychologist, yes.
As a sociologist? no and with the quality of his social commentaries I doubt he would be able to find a jury who would let his shit fly.
The guy is as much a sociologist as he is a translator.
Where does he describe himself as a sociologist?
He's been pretty consistent in describing himself as clinical psychologist. Relentless, even.
Or is that your own assessment based on podcasts he goes on and debates he engages with?
By that logic, Leo DiCaprio is a climatologist.
When a clinical psychologist talks about social groups and their ideas, that's entering the realm of sociology.
This is where Peterson exposes himself as a know-it-all-know-nothing on anything in that arena. That's why all of his enemies are postmodern neomarxists.
What do you think he's more famous for, being an entry level self-help guru because of his psychological background or attacking spooky leftists while cozying up real good to many institutions supported by Koch money?
Nah, this is that thread for that "separate topic" since your other thread was closed :PI was replying to the assertion that "he has no credentials or peer reviewed articles". This is patently wrong.
He engages in a lot of debate outside of his field of academic expertise that I don't agree with; but that's a separate topic.
It's more effective to be specific when being critical rather than dogpilling everything into twitter conspiracies. That goes for all 'sides'.
Nah, this is that thread for that "separate topic" since your other thread was closed :P
That post was very obviously referring to the field of sociology.I was replying to the assertion that "he has no credentials or peer reviewed articles". This is patently wrong.
There is a 4 minute video where he tells a class of young men they are born at a 50% disadvantage vs. women, because women have been able to "pick their mates" throughout history. He uses specific words like "failure" when describing this, because insecure young men view their sexuality as a key part of their masculinity.
Obviously, there is an instant "this guy is an idiot" moment, considering he ignores literally all of human society and history with the idea that women have had agency in picking their mates for the last few thousand years.
Really all you need to know when it comes to him, straight from his own mouth.
He is an idiot who's entire concept of biological hierarchy is beyond laughable to anything who actually studies biology or society.
Nothing I wrote was "mocking" you, rofl
Holy shit are you dense or is it Peterson attacking your brain?Where does he describe himself as a sociologist?
He's been pretty consistent in describing himself as clinical psychologist. Relentless, even.
Or is that your own assessment based on podcasts he goes on and debates he engages with?
By that logic, Leo DiCaprio is a climatologist.
He's not a sociologist, he's a clinical psychologist.He is a sociologist, everything he talks about is in the context of society.
Any sociologist worth their salt would dismiss pretty much anything the lobster daddy would say.
The amount of thread he can generate.
This is literally the only thing that him so exceptional....that and his graphs, by god I've never seens graphs so bad.
You mean a man who views traditional hierarchies as key to society has disgusting and repulsive views on women?!That was the first time I've heard this dude speak after ignoring him this whole time. He's fucking creepy. This does not seem like a dude who interacts with women....like...at all. You know he calls women females lol
Oh look, now Peterson is posting climate denial videos from Prager U.
If you defend this guy, you are a fucking IDIOT.
This is a fantastic Twitter thread by Peter Coffin. If anyone hasn't read through it yet, you really should.To the surprise of no one peterson is linked to the koch brothers
https://mobile.twitter.com/petercoffin/status/1028063142570614784
(Whole thread is worth a read)
Oh look, now Peterson is posting climate denial videos from Prager U.
If you defend this guy, you are a fucking IDIOT.
Oh look, now Peterson is posting climate denial videos from Prager U.
If you defend this guy, you are a fucking IDIOT.
It's also added to the water supply by postmodernists.Going by the thumbnail, isn't fluoride the thing in toothpaste?
That was the first time I've heard this dude speak after ignoring him this whole time. He's fucking creepy. This does not seem like a dude who interacts with women....like...at all. You know he calls women females lol
Ugh, you guys really should mark ridicule. That was a waste of time.
It really is added to the water supply, at least where I live.Ugh, you guys really should mark ridicule. That was a waste of time.
Okay, doesn't change the video for me tho.It really is added to the water supply, at least where I live.
He is ridiculous, and why the comparison works. Why was that video in particular a waste of time?Ugh, you guys really should mark ridicule. That was a waste of time.
He is ridiculous, and why the comparison works. Why was that video in particular a waste of time?
So I think this thread has value in the deconstruction of his arguments (less in mocking him).
Guess it comes down to that.You can just say "is this video about mocking him or debunking his arguments?" and make it clear you are only interested in the debunking videos. So there is not miscommunication and you don't have to watch or respond to mocking videos.
You can just say "is this video about mocking him or debunking his arguments?" and make it clear you are only interested in the debunking videos. So there is not miscommunication and you don't have to watch or respond to mocking videos.Don't frame me as a JP apologist when I don't get something out of a mock video, thanks.
And I think separating "mocking him" and "deconstructing his arguments" are a false dichotomy. Drawing parallels to rhetoric mocked in the past, like the video did, does also deconstruct what he's presenting.You can just say "is this video about mocking him or debunking his arguments?" and make it clear you are only interested in the debunking videos. So there is not miscommunication and you don't have to watch or respond to mocking videos.
It is odd for sure, but some people are really particular.And I think separating "mocking him" and "deconstructing his arguments" are a false dichotomy. Drawing parallels to rhetoric mocked in the past, like the video did, does also deconstruct what he's presenting.
The one who only takes a joke for a joke and seriousness only seriously, have a bad understanding of both.
It's someone doing a parody on him. It's probably the best impression I've heard though, it's not surprising you were fooled.Welcome back, you've been missed.
Also whatever the fuck is he going on about?
Like Burger King is making a statement with its name or whatever?
And a King provides food? What the fuck? That's the work of peons to provide food even in the imagery of the idea of "Kings&Queens".
Kings provide protection and leadership and that's about it.
It makes as much sense as everything I've heard him say or everything I've read from him.It's someone doing a parody on him. It's probably the best impression I've heard though, it's not surprising you were fooled.
True, but I was referring to the intonation and such as well in the parody video.It makes as much sense as everything I've heard him say or everything I've read from him.
Like really if you told me that one chapter of his latest book was about Burger King I would believe you.