-
If you have been following the news, you should be aware that the people of Lebanon have been under a violent bombardment that has recently escalated. Please consider donating to help them if you can or trying to spread word of the fundraiser.
-
Asheville and Western North Carolina at large are in crisis after Helene, please consider contributing to these local organizations and helping the people whose lives have been destroyed.
Jordan Peterson - The "Intellectual" We Deserve
- Thread starter Deleted member 25709
- Start date
- Status
Taking a random user from a gaming board above an actual lawyer would not be sound when it comes to legal matters.
Interpretation? Is this by a judge or the writers of the law? There are activist judges and legislators, you know who interpret things or claim to interpret things, in any way they see fit. We would have to see what the law ACTUALLY states to know what the law ACTUALLY claims. Unless you said most or all tribunals with side with this particular interpretation.
Ok, if you've read the law carefully and have adequate educational background to understand the legalesse, and this is the general consensus amongst lawyers and judges. Then that would settle it.
We already have one example of one lawyer opposing Peterson that disagrees though, we don't know if that's a lone rare example.
You can't actually wrote that out with words?
Clearly Petersen acolytes are on a superior plane of existence, communication by third party videos.
"Darmok et Tanagra"
"When the walls fell", David.
Basically the title is self explanatory. It's a speech about why you should tell the truth. He says you should tell the truth or, at least, not lie. Telling the truth might have negative consequences, you might be singled out, but not saying it also has consequences. We have seen it in the 20th century. You shouldn't be afraid of telling the truth, whatever happens is better that not saying it and maybe be complicit in the lies of others.
It's a good speech, you should watch it.
Why do I need Peterson to tell me that? Why do I have to suffer through one of his videos to reach such a conclusion?
Edit: and more importantly, why do your values and come from a single source?
Edit: and more importantly, why do your values and come from a single source?
Last edited:
shhhh, don't think
just let it
wash over you
dammit
stop thinking!!!!
You know what... How can someone find this inspirational? It's pseudo-intellectual blah blah coming from a guy whose only success is talking to right-wing people and telling them what they want to hear.
Any fucking Rocky movie is more inspirational and motivating than this crap.
Any fucking Rocky movie is more inspirational and motivating than this crap.
By saying it. If you are wrong, others will point it to you.
3 people criticizing the content of a 7 minute video they haven't watched. You see how you deauthorize yourselves?
But what if the others are wrong and don't even realize it?
i mean if the content of the video is him telling me to tell the truth why dont i just go back in kindergarten as they told me that as well.
I'm not criticizing the video as I haven't watched it. Im asking why I should watch it. Your summary doesn't sell me on it. So, what I'm really doing is criticizing you, much like you are criticizing me.
That's the TRUTH.
Maybe he's actually a kindergarten teacher and his acolytes are in kindergarten
Saying that watching that video would make you suffer isn't critizicing it? Also you have baselessly accused me of having only one source for my values. I have a family. That commentary didn't offend me because I know you made it to mess with me but it's potentially offensive.
I don't know that this is true. People having been telling you why you're wrong for over a week now, yet you're still on your bullshit.
So why should I watch the video other than pre school morals that you highlighted?
PS: I thought the TRUTH being offensive was Buckos shtick. And I was just asking questions.
Too bad this type of argument doesn't resonate with you this time.
Last edited:
Watching it would help you understand how Peterson thinks, why I am still here defending what I believe and it would allow you to critizice it knowing what you are talking about.
The trick is you don't have to watch it. You can stil critizice me, Peterson and the video without watching it.
Always tell the truth, unless it is about a law about gender pronouns you don't like or climate change or whatever the hell cultural marxism is, and then go hog wild. But, remember to be precise in your speech, except if you are just asking questions and being generally vague in attempts to hide your very conservative viewpoints. Also, precision only applies to speech and not reading comprehension. Oh, and keep your room clean.
Everybody loves mr. Peterson on Youtube comments, seems like they love the message he speaks of individual blame or something, and no white privilege because a 'not very bright' gay black woman shares the same responsibility as average white guy, he tells it like it is.
That doesnt answer his question and only leads to the question of why would he want to understand what peterson thinks when given the synopsis of the video he has found its thesis to be common knowledge
David Ricardo's motivation is bloviating endlessly and circuitously and never to apologize because that's what Peterson says. Peterson thinks that you should tell your truth and others will tell you if it is dumb or right or whatever and after five years, you'll be able to articulate yourself... but you can still be wrong. Peterson told his truth in regards to C-16, was told his truth was dumb, and he still thinks the same way.
Funnily enough, he keeps saying "your" truth, but he doesn't like post-modernism.
Funnily enough, he keeps saying "your" truth, but he doesn't like post-modernism.
And they didn't go to school to have teachers reiterate it as well?
Are there that many people raised by fucking wolves?
(as opposed to regular wolves who would discipline their young if they pulled that shit)
For real.
What do same-sex marriage, climate change, abortion, and the existence of God have in common? They're all topics that Dr Professor Jordan B Peterson PhD has been asked about extensively and has refused to give his position on.
Mr be-precise-in-your-speech, Mr stand up tall and speak your broken truths. If he's asked about his own personal stance on any even remotely controversial issue, what does he do? He prevaricates, he dissembles, he talks shit and filibusters until his interlocutor gives up and moves on to the next question.
The dude is a fraud. He's not a serious person, or a valuable intellectual, or even an interesting troll. He's just a mean old man who's a lot less intelligent and interesting than he thinks he is.
You wanna know why Peterson is so against humanities and social science education? It's because those are the disciplines where people learn to think critically about the kind of rambling bullshit that makes up his body of work.
Didn't Peterson once defined the truth as it doesn't even need to be fact to be truth
There's no way a guy who doesn't believe in post-modernism defined truth like that. I simply refuse to believe that.
People pointed out that Peterson was wrong about C-16 but that didn't really affect him.
The dude thinks postmodernism is when a bunch of (((French academics))) took the class struggle concept from Marxism and reapplied it to systems of social oppression and hierarchy
No lie, I don't think my man has ever used the term "metanarrative" or talked about "high and low art" or "deconstruction" or any of that stuff. His entire understanding of postmodernism is based on some Cold Warrior bullshit book by Stephen Hicks where it is basically positioned as "new Marxism."
Again, Jordan Peterson really is quite a dumb and uninformed man and there's a reason no one outside of right wing culture warrior media figures takes him seriously.
Yes. He has a video where he says something along the lines of "if something isn't true, but acting like it was true gives the expected results, then it's true." I was tired when I watched it and didn't understand why he said it. I think it has something to do with the bible, but I still don't know what his reasoning was exactly.
I know that you will use this to attack him, but it was him who said to say the truth and whatever happens is because it had to happen. So there it is.
There is a 2 hour video of him and sam harris titled: "what is truth? Darwinism and pragmatism." It must be there. I'll watch it and probably tomorrow tell you what I find.
Maybe I missed the details, the link doesn't go to the actual law but parliament website, but without defining what constitutes hate propaganda or offenses, the summary at least does not tell me what can or cannot be punished nor the extent of punishment.
We do know that internet posts or comments and distasteful joke videos are now subject to severe penalties in other countries.
Did you not read the rest of it which is the actual law? Because you wanted the actual law. That is what was amended to the Canadian Human Rights law so here's a link to that
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/h-6/
Here's some of what it considers discriminatory practices:
Give it a read
The man teaches at a goddamned university, it wouldn't be hard for him to pick up a fucking book about the subject. Most of this stuff is Soc 101 level.
https://www.cba.org/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=be34d5a4-8850-40a0-beea-432eeb762d7f
Here is the Canadian Bar Associations position on the matter. It's an organization that is literally filled to the brim with Lawyers and Judges of high esteem.
Peterson can't handle sociology 101 because its been "infiltrated"; he wanted it banned from universities lol.
Anything outside the reactionary narrative is part of the conspiracy; so they will never learn anything that conflicts with their views.
This is like Green Eggs & Ham - if he'd only try it he'd discover structural functionalism and love it!
this is literally post modernism
norms, values, deconstructions of said norms and values, geneology all ties in to this.
The post-modernism was coming from inside the Peterson!
OP
OP
Peterson would go into shock if he steps into a SOC101 lecture in Convocation Hall at University of Toronto. He wouldn't be able to take the 1500 students being "indoctrinated" at a given time.
- Status