Jordan Peterson is Back: Incelsior!

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Jordan Peterson is Back: Incelsior!

Wark Say: Feb 22, 2013; by Fluffdaddy

It's because he's a fake-scholar. Like maybe at some point he was probably the real deal, but those days are long gone. He ain't that anymore. And like I get that some scholars have crappy media presences, but dude's been famous for close to half a loving decade and he's as mainstream as he's probably going to get: If you have the kind of money to burn that this fuckabout has, spend it on some media training to at least fake your way better.

# ? May 2, 2021 15:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 27, 2024 15:56

Wark Say: Feb 22, 2013; by Fluffdaddy

Like say what you want about Mara Wilson's extremely punchable cousin/JorP's fanboy Ben Shapiro, but it's clear that his dipshit dad realized his dipshit kid needed some good media training along the way and gave it to him.

(Again, never hand it to a hateful fuckface like Shapiro)

# ? May 2, 2021 15:23

Zulily Zoetrope: Jun 1, 2011; Muldoon

Again, he is (was?) a licensed therapist and it's not even clear that he understands that other people have inner lives that differ significantly from his own. He wrote a doctoral dissertation on addiction treatment and sought to treat his own with the ol' cold turkey-russian coma combo.

I'm assuming there is something at which he was competent enough to earn a tenured position, but I have no idea what it is. It's not like the University of Toronto is some no-name diploma mill, either.

E: Like, Ben Shapiro was obviously groomed to be a high school debate club champ, and he knows how to do a gish gallop. He can talk fast while enunciating clearly. It's an absolutely worthless skill set on its own, and he doesn't appear capable of doing anything else, but that's what you need to be a fascist talking head. His career path is super obvious. Jorp was actually someone before he slid into that role, and I have no idea who that someone was.

Zulily Zoetrope fucked around with this message at 15:31 on May 2, 2021

# ? May 2, 2021 15:26

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Zugzwang posted:

It is kinda weird though that he's obsessed with Marxism to the point that he has basically wallpapered his home with propaganda from Communist states, but he has never bothered to actually study it in any detail

oddly enough JP and Zizek both have the same picture of stalin above their bed. but JP explains he keeps the picture of stalin up side down to rob it of its symbolic power

# ? May 2, 2021 15:44

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

I'm assuming there is something at which he was competent enough to earn a tenured position, but I have no idea what it is. It's not like the University of Toronto is some no-name diploma mill, either.

presumably he is good at writing proposals for research grants, the skill universal to all tenured professors

# ? May 2, 2021 15:50

Zugzwang: Jan 2, 2005; You have a kind of sick desperation in your laugh.; Ramrod XTreme

Wark Say posted:

It's because he's a fake-scholar. Like maybe at some point he was probably the real deal, but those days are long gone. He ain't that anymore. And like I get that some scholars have crappy media presences, but dude's been famous for close to half a loving decade and he's as mainstream as he's probably going to get: If you have the kind of money to burn that this fuckabout has, spend it on some media training to at least fake your way better.

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

Again, he is (was?) a licensed therapist and it's not even clear that he understands that other people have inner lives that differ significantly from his own. He wrote a doctoral dissertation on addiction treatment and sought to treat his own with the ol' cold turkey-russian coma combo.

I'm assuming there is something at which he was competent enough to earn a tenured position, but I have no idea what it is. It's not like the University of Toronto is some no-name diploma mill, either.

E: Like, Ben Shapiro was obviously groomed to be a high school debate club champ, and he knows how to do a gish gallop. He can talk fast while enunciating clearly. It's an absolutely worthless skill set on its own, and he doesn't appear capable of doing anything else, but that's what you need to be a fascist talking head. His career path is super obvious. Jorp was actually someone before he slid into that role, and I have no idea who that someone was.

By all accounts, Jorp was a great lecturer and his students loved his classes, but that was before he got into this culture war stuff. He doesn't appear to have always been such an openly hateful jackass. Note the operative word "openly."

The fact that he's an addiction expert who took the route that he did to get off benzos is just bizarre. That poo poo could've killed him.

And didn't his daughter have something to do with getting him that treatment plan too? Tbh his interactions with his attractive, manipulative daughter remind me a lot of Turmpf and Ivanka.

Rutibex posted:

oddly enough JP and Zizek both have the same picture of stalin above their bed. but JP explains he keeps the picture of stalin up side down to rob it of its symbolic power

It's so Stalin can give Jorp the Spiderman kiss

# ? May 2, 2021 15:53

Zulily Zoetrope: Jun 1, 2011; Muldoon

Zugzwang posted:

By all accounts, Jorp was a great lecturer and his students loved his classes, but that was before he got into this culture war stuff. He doesn't appear to have always been such an openly hateful jackass. Note the operative word "openly."

That's a fair point. I'm not a fan of his rhetorical style, but obviously there are people who love hearing him talk. That is an actual skill.

Zugzwang posted:

And didn't his daughter have something to do with getting him that treatment plan too? Tbh his interactions with his attractive, manipulative daughter remind me a lot of Turmpf and Ivanka.

I'm not sure on the specific timeline, but she definitely took over the circus at some point. There was that one post-coma interview where he started acknowledging that he did see the irony in being an addiction treatment expert who bungled his own treatment so badly, and she barged in, spouted some babble about him having a medical condition that wasn't addiction, and ended the interview.

# ? May 2, 2021 16:01

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

Despite being a licensed therapist I don't think he's ever spoken about any part of the profession, from the patients to the methods to the colleagues, with anything other than utter contempt.

# ? May 2, 2021 16:01

Rupert Buttermilk: Apr 15, 2007; 🚣RowboatMan: ❄️Freezing time🕰️ is an old P.I. 🥧trick...

Wait, Mara Wilson and Ben Shapiro are related?

That's extremely unfortunate for her :negative:

# ? May 2, 2021 16:34

Ghost Leviathan: Mar 2, 2017; Exploration is ill-advised.

Right-wing intellectuals are used to debate club and beating up on liberals with gish gallops, which is basically easy mode, and a microcosm of wider politics where liberals basically are trained wrong, on purpose, as a joke. They genuinely have no idea how to deal with actual leftists.

# ? May 2, 2021 17:20

Tarkus: Aug 27, 2000

Ghost Leviathan posted:

Right-wing intellectuals are used to debate club and beating up on liberals with gish gallops, which is basically easy mode, and a microcosm of wider politics where liberals basically are trained wrong, on purpose, as a joke. They genuinely have no idea how to deal with actual leftists.

I've posted it before but my favorite debate is between David Pakman and Jesse Lee Peterson. Jesse is really good at forcing an answer from unprepared people, he is completely unable to get under David's skin at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs0KuwInuxM

# ? May 2, 2021 17:25

Wark Say: Feb 22, 2013; by Fluffdaddy

Rupert Buttermilk posted:

Wait, Mara Wilson and Ben Shapiro are related?

That's extremely unfortunate for her

Yes. They're cousins. She also has made it extremely clear that people like him or Stephen Miller should go gently caress themselves.

Here's a good tidbit:

From Mathilda herself posted:

I just think I have a lot of compassion for people, regardless of their political beliefs or where they�re from, and really just want justice and dignity and a future for the world. And I think Nazis should gently caress off. I guess that makes me a leftist Jew.

# ? May 2, 2021 17:33

Poohs Packin: Jan 13, 2019

Ghost Leviathan posted:

Right-wing intellectuals are used to debate club and beating up on liberals with gish gallops, which is basically easy mode, and a microcosm of wider politics where liberals basically are trained wrong, on purpose, as a joke. They genuinely have no idea how to deal with actual leftists.

Excellent Wimp Lo reference.

# ? May 2, 2021 18:44

Dongsturm: Feb 17, 2012

Tarkus posted:

I've posted it before but my favorite debate is between David Pakman and Jesse Lee Peterson. Jesse is really good at forcing an answer from unprepared people, he is completely unable to get under David's skin at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs0KuwInuxM

"
Do you beat your wife?

- I'm not married.

Well wait until you have a wife!
"

:magical:

that's an amazing opener for an interview. it can only get better from here

edit: it didn't

Dongsturm fucked around with this message at 18:52 on May 2, 2021

# ? May 2, 2021 18:47

ben shapino: Nov 22, 2020

Wark Say posted:

I saw the Peterson-Zizek debate and my honest takeaway was "Holy poo poo, this guy can't even be arsed to do the most bare-rear end research properly".

he is a clinical psychologist who claims to have had no idea that benzos were so addictive

so yeah i think it's safe to say jordumb peepeeson does almost no research even on things that directly affect him

# ? May 2, 2021 18:49

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Rupert Buttermilk posted:

Wait, Mara Wilson and Ben Shapiro are related?

That's extremely unfortunate for her

It makes more sense when you remember that his parents are involved in Hollywood and he originally wanted to be a screenwriter. I think he was involved in drama club at his private high school also.

# ? May 2, 2021 18:54

Wark Say: Feb 22, 2013; by Fluffdaddy

ben shapino posted:

he is a clinical psychologist who claims to have had no idea that benzos were so addictive

so yeah i think it's safe to say jordumb peepeeson does almost no research even on things that directly affect him

That makes no loving sense! This is not me being angry at you or anything, but do you realize how dumb that reads? "he is a clinical psychologist who claims to have had no idea that benzos were so addictive". It's like I'm reading gibberish.

Like I understand "Fake it 'til you make it" works for a number of things but if someone this loving ignorant/incurious was in charge of any sort of medical treatment for a third person and it was up to me, I would throw that person on their rear end out the door in 10 seconds and forget about them in the next 5. Like it shouldn't loving work for someone who's had a number of people's mental health placed squarely in their hands. Like crap-- doesn't it make you feel like you're going crazy? Like a particularly surreal/absurd episode of "It's Always Sunny..." somehow feels more realistic than this quack still being liquid/raking in the dough.

For example this...

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

Again, he is (was?) a licensed therapist and it's not even clear that he understands that other people have inner lives that differ significantly from his own. He wrote a doctoral dissertation on addiction treatment and sought to treat his own with the ol' cold turkey-russian coma combo.

Like I know that "Doctors make the worst patients" old chestnut might feel like a relic from a bygone time given what I've observed (doctors can and often are definitely loving morons outside their area of expertise, but at least they know when to treat themselves properly a lot of the time) but given what we've observed about the saga it makes me wonder: how is this idiot even alive?

# ? May 2, 2021 19:14

Palpek: Dec 27, 2008; Do you feel it, Zach?
My coffee warned me about it.

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

I'm assuming there is something at which he was competent enough to earn a tenured position, but I have no idea what it is. It's not like the University of Toronto is some no-name diploma mill, either.

For anybody curious about how Jorp got his tenure and how he was received by students and colleagues there's a piece from his former good friend who got him the job at the university titled I was Jordan Peterson�s strongest supporter. Now I think he�s dangerous

It's behind a paywall now so here is the full version:

quote:

OPINION
I was Jordan Peterson�s strongest supporter. Now I think he�s dangerous

By Bernard Schiff

Article was updated Feb. 21, 2019

Several years ago, Jordan Peterson told me he wanted to buy a church. This was long before he became known as �the most influential public intellectual in the Western world,� as he was described in the pages of the New York Times a few months ago. It was before he was fancied to be a truth-telling sage who inspired legions, and the author of one of the bestselling books in the world this year. He was just my colleague and friend.

I assumed that it was for a new home � there was a trend in Toronto of converting religious spaces, vacant because of their dwindling congregations, into stylish lofts � but he corrected me. He wanted to establish a church, he said, in which he would deliver sermons every Sunday.

�(He) spread his influence across the country and around the world through a combination of religious conviction, commanding stage presence and shrewd use of radio, television and advanced communication technologies.�

This could have been written about Jordan Peterson. The language echoes the tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of words, that have been devoted to the man � ranging from fawning adoration to critical dismissals � since his rise to public prominence starting in 2016 when he declared he would not comply with a proposed amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act which was, coincidentally, about the power of words. But that quote is taken from Billy Graham�s obituary that appeared in the Times after the American pastor died in February.

Jordan found his pulpit on YouTube and his congregation on social media. His followers have a Bible � 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos � which has sold more than one million copies around the world since it was published in January. He lectures to sold-out crowds, at home and abroad, more like a rock star than a middle-aged academic.

I thought long and hard before writing about Jordan, and I do not do this lightly. He has one of the most agile and creative minds I�ve ever known. He is a powerful orator. He is smart, passionate, engaging and compelling and can be thoughtful and kind.

I was once his strongest supporter.

That all changed with his rise to celebrity. I am alarmed by his now-questionable relationship to truth, intellectual integrity and common decency, which I had not seen before. His output is voluminous and filled with oversimplifications which obscure or misrepresent complex matters in the service of a message which is difficult to pin down. He can be very persuasive, and toys with facts and with people�s emotions. I believe he is a man with a mission. It is less clear what that mission is.

In the end, I am writing this because of his extraordinary rise in visibility, the nature of his growing following and a concern that his ambitions might venture from stardom back to his long-standing interest in politics. I am writing this from a place of sadness and from a sense of responsibility to the public good to tell what I know about who Jordan is, having seen him up close, as a colleague and friend, and having examined up close his political actions at the University of Toronto, allegedly in defence of free speech. When he soared into the stratosphere he became peculiarly unknowable. There is something about the dazzle of the limelight that makes it hard to see him clearly. But people continue to be who they are even in the blinding overexposure of success. I have known Jordan Peterson for 20 years, and people had better know more about who he is.

There is reason to be concerned.

I met Jordan Peterson when he came to the University of Toronto to be interviewed for an assistant professorship in the department of psychology. His CV was impeccable, with terrific references and a pedigree that included a PhD from McGill and a five-year stint at Harvard as an assistant professor.

We did not share research interests but it was clear that his work was solid. My colleagues on the search committee were skeptical � they felt he was too eccentric � but somehow I prevailed. (Several committee members now remind me that they agreed to hire him because they were �tired of hearing me shout over them.�) I pushed for him because he was a divergent thinker, self-educated in the humanities, intellectually flamboyant, bold, energetic and confident, bordering on arrogant. I thought he would bring a new excitement, along with new ideas, to our department.

He joined us in the summer of 1998. Because I liked him, and also because I had put myself on the line for him, I took him under my wing. I made sure he went up for promotion to associate professor the following year, as the hiring committee had promised, and I went to the dean to get him a raise when the department chairperson would not.

When he was renovating his house I invited his family to live with mine. For five months, they occupied the third floor of our large house. We had meals together in the evening and long, colourful conversations. There, away from campus, I saw a man who was devoted to his wife and his children, who were lovely and gentle and for whom I still feel affection. He was attentive and thoughtful, stern and kind, playful and warm. His wife, Tammy, appeared to be the keel, the ballast and the rudder, and Jordan ran the ship. I could not imagine him without her, and indeed I see that she is now with him wherever in the world he goes.

On campus, he was as interesting as I had expected him to be. His research on alcoholism, and then personality, was solid, but his consuming intellectual interests lay elsewhere. He had been an undergraduate in political science in Edmonton, where he had become obsessed with the Cold War. He switched to psychology in order to understand why some people would, as he once told me, destroy everything � their past, their present and their future � because of strong beliefs. That was the subject of his first book, Maps of Meaning, published in 1999, and the topic of his most popular undergraduate course.

He was, however, more eccentric than I had expected. He was a maverick. Even though there was nothing contentious about his research, he objected in principle to having it reviewed by the university research ethics committee, whose purpose is to protect the safety and well-being of experiment subjects.

He requested a meeting with the committee. I was not present but was told that he had questioned the authority and expertise of the committee members, had insisted that he alone was in a position to judge whether his research was ethical and that, in any case, he was fully capable of making such decisions himself. He was impervious to the fact that subjects in psychological research had been, on occasion, subjected to bad experiences, and also to the fact that both the Canadian and United States governments had made these reviews mandatory. What was he doing! I managed to make light of this to myself by attributing it to his unbridled energy and fierce independence, which were, in many other ways, virtues. That was a mistake.

Another thing to which I did not give sufficient concern was his teaching. As the undergraduate chair, I read all teaching reviews. His were, for the most part, excellent and included eyebrow-raising comments such as �This course has changed my life.� One student, however, hated the course because he did not like �delivered truths.� Curious, I attended many of Jordan�s lectures to see for myself.

Remarkably, the 50 students always showed up at 9 a.m. and were held in rapt attention for an hour. Jordan was a captivating lecturer � electric and eclectic � cherry-picking from neuroscience, mythology, psychology, philosophy, the Bible and popular culture. The class loved him. But, as reported by that one astute student, Jordan presented conjecture as statement of fact. I expressed my concern to him about this a number of times, and each time Jordan agreed. He acknowledged the danger of such practices, but then continued to do it again and again, as if he could not control himself.

He was a preacher more than a teacher.

Eccentricities notwithstanding, I didn�t regret having worked to secure his position. His students were exposed to new ideas and were as devoted to him as he was to them. I continued to be one of his strongest supporters at the university and thereafter.

In 2001, three years after Jordan arrived, I took early retirement and left the university. I stayed in touch with Jordan and his family, and while our contacts might have been infrequent, they were always familial and affectionate.

Always intense, it seemed that, over time, Jordan was becoming even more so. He had periods of incredible energy when, in addition to his academic work, he ran a business selling the personality assessment tools that he had developed. He actively collected Soviet, and then Mexican art, on eBay. He maintained a clinical practice. He was preoccupied with alternative health treatments including fighting off the signs of aging as they appear on the skin, and, one time, even shamanic healing practices, where, to my great surprise and distress, he chose to be the shaman himself. And he did all of that with the same great fervour and commitment.

At the same time, his interest in political issues became more apparent. We disagreed about most things, but I don�t ask of my friends that we agree. What was off-putting was his tendency to be categorical about his positions, reminiscent of his lectures where he presented personal theories as absolute truths. I rarely challenged him. He overwhelmed challenges with volumes of information that were hard to process and evaluate. He was more forceful than I, and had a much quicker mind. Also, again evocative of what I saw in the classroom, he sometimes appeared to be in the thrall of his ideas and would not, or could not, constrain himself and self-monitor what he was saying.

That was OK. He was eccentric. There was, however, something about his growing fierceness that unsettled me. Always a man of extremes, it seemed to me that the highs and the lows of his emotional range had increased. But he was hurting no one and my affection and loyalty for him were undiminished.

That all changed, soon enough.

Jordan�s first high-profile public battle, and for many people their introduction to the man, followed his declaration that he would not comply with Bill C-16, an amendment to the Canadian Human Rights Act extending its protections to include gender identity and expression. He would refuse to refer to students using gender neutral pronouns. He then upped the stakes by claiming that, for this transgression, he could be sent to jail.

I have a trans daughter, but that was hardly an issue compared to what I felt was a betrayal of my trust and confidence in him. It was an abuse of the trust that comes with his professorial position, which I had fought for, to have misrepresented gender science by dismissing the evidence that the relationship of gender to biology is not absolute and to have made the claim that he could be jailed when, at worst, he could be fined.

In his defence, Jordan told me if he refused to pay the fine he could go to jail. That is not the same as being jailed for what you say, but it did ennoble him as a would-be martyr in the defence of free speech. He was a true free speech �warrior� who was willing to sacrifice and run roughshod over his students to make a point. He could have spared his students and chosen to sidestep the issue and refer to them by their names. And if this was truly a matter of free speech he could have challenged the Human Rights Act, off-campus and much earlier, by openly using language offensive to any of the already-protected groups on that list.

Perhaps this was not just about free speech.

Not long afterwards the following message was sent from his wife�s email address exhorting recipients to sign a petition opposing Ontario�s Bill 28. That bill proposed changing the language in legislation about families from �mother� and �father� to the gender-neutral �parents.�

�A new bill, introduced in Ontario on September 29th, subjugates the natural family to the transgender agenda. The bill � misleadingly called the �All Families Are Equal Act� � is moving extremely fast. We must ACT NOW to stop this bill from passing into law.�

This is not a free-speech issue so Jordan is wearing a different political hat. And what does a �transgender agenda� have to do with a bill protecting same-sex parents? What is this all about?

Jordan has studied and understands authoritarian demagogic leaders. They know how to attract a following. In an interview with Ethan Klein in an H3 Podcast, Jordan describes how such leaders learn to repeat those things which make the crowd roar, and not repeat those things that do not. The crowd roared the first time Jordan opposed the so-called �transgender agenda.� Perhaps they would roar again, whether it made sense or not.

But why �transgender� in the first place? In that same interview, Jordan cites Carl Jung, who talked about the effectiveness of powerful emotional oratorical skills to tap into the collective unconscious of a people, and into their anger, resentment, fear of chaos and need for order. He talked about how those demagogic leaders led by acting out the dark desires of the mob.

If we have a �collective unconscious� there is a good chance that it would include our primitive assumptions about gender and biology. Transgender people violate those assumptions. There is an historical example of how upset our species gets about gender ambiguity in other species. The female spotted hyena is larger than, and dominant over, the male and has a clitoris so enlarged as to have the external appearance of a penis. In the bestiaries of the Middle Ages they were reviled, described as �neither faithful or pagan,� �brutal thugs,� �sexual deviants� and �not to be trusted.� Sir Walter Raleigh excluded the hyena from Noah�s Ark in his History of the World (written in 1614) because he believed that God had saved only the purely bred. That historical lesson tells us how deeply disturbed many of us might be in response to gender ambiguity in human beings.

Transgender people appear early in human history but in these socially progressive times, which worry Jordan so much, they have become more visible. Consciously or not, Jordan may have understood that transgender people tap into society�s �collective unconscious� and would become a lightning rod for attention loaded with anger and resentment. And it did.

More recently, when questioned about the merits of 12 Rules for Life, Jordan answered that he must be doing something right because of the huge response the book has received. How odd given what he said in that same interview about demagogues and cheering crowds. In an article published in January in the Spectator, Douglas Murray described the atmosphere at one of Jordan�s talks as �ecstatic.�

I have no way of knowing whether Jordan is aware that he is playing out of the same authoritarian demagogue handbook that he himself has described. If he is unaware, then his ironic failure, unwillingness, or inability to see in himself what he attributes to them is very disconcerting.

Following his opposition to Bill C-16, Jordan again sought to establish himself as a �warrior� and attacked identity politics and political correctness as threats to free speech. He characterized them as left-wing conspiracies rooted in a �murderous� ideology � Marxism. Calling Marxism, a respectable political and philosophical tradition, �murderous� conflates it with the perversion of those ideas in Stalinist Russia and elsewhere where they were. That is like calling Christianity a murderous ideology because of the blood that was shed in its name during the Inquisition, the Crusades and the great wars of Europe. That is ridiculous.

In Jordan�s hands, a claim which is merely ridiculous became dangerous. Jordan, our �free speech warrior,� decided to launch a website that listed �postmodern neo-Marxist� professors and �corrupt� academic disciplines, warning students and their parents to avoid them. Those disciplines, postmodern or not, included women�s, ethnic and racial studies. Those �left-wing� professors were trying to �indoctrinate their students into a cult� and, worse, create �anarchical social revolutionaries.� I do think Jordan believes what he says, but it�s not clear from the language he uses whether he is being manipulative and trying to induce fear, or whether he is walking a fine line between concern and paranoia.

His strategy is eerily familiar. In the 1950s a vicious attack on freedom of speech and thought occurred in the United States at the hands of Sen. Joseph McCarthy and the House Un-American Activities Committee. People suspected of having left-wing, �Communist� leanings were blacklisted and silenced. It was a frightening period of lost jobs, broken lives and betrayal. Ironically, around this time the Stasi were doing the same to people in East Berlin who were disloyal to that very same �murderous� ideology.

Jordan has a complex relationship to freedom of speech. He wants to effectively silence those left-wing professors by keeping students away from their courses because the students may one day become �anarchical social revolutionaries� who may bring upon us disruption and violence. At the same time he was advocating cutting funds to universities that did not protect free speech on their campuses. He defended the rights of �alt right� voices to speak at universities even though their presence has given rise to disruption and violence. For Jordan, it appears, not all speech is equal, and not all disruption and violence are equal, either.

If Jordan is not a true free speech warrior, then what is he? The email sent through his wife�s account described Bill 28, the parenting bill, as part of the �transgender agenda� and claimed it was �misleadingly� called �All Families are Equal.� Misleading? What same-sex families and transgender people have in common is their upset of the social order. In Maps of Meaning, Jordan�s first book, he is exercised by the breakdown of the social order and the chaos that he believes would result. Jordan is fighting to maintain the status quo to keep chaos at bay, or so he believes. He is not a free speech warrior. He is a social order warrior.

In the end, Jordan postponed his plan to blacklist courses after many of his colleagues signed a petition objecting to it. He said it was too polarizing. Curiously, that had never stopped him before. He appears to thrive on polarization. I have no idea why he did that.

I have been asked by some if I regret my role in bringing Jordan to the University of Toronto. I did not for many years, but I do now.

He has done disservice to the professoriate. He cheapens the intellectual life with self-serving misrepresentations of important ideas and scientific findings. He has also done disservice to the institutions which have supported him. He plays to �victimhood� but also plays the victim.

When he caused a stir objecting to gender neutral pronouns, he thanked his YouTube followers who had supported his work financially, claiming he might need that money because he could lose his job. That resulted in a significant increase in monthly donations. There was no reason to think he would lose his job. He was on a sabbatical, and had not even been in the classroom. The university sent him a letter asking him to stop what he was doing because he was creating an environment which would make teaching difficult, but there was no intimation that he would be fired. I saw that letter. Jordan may have, however, welcomed being fired, which would have made him a martyr in the battle for free speech. He certainly presented himself as prepared to do that. A true warrior, of whatever.

Later, when his research grant was turned down by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Jordan told the world he was being punished for his political activities. There was no such evidence. The review system is flawed and this has happened to other academically renowned and respected scholars. (For instance, Prof. Anthony Doob, the former director of the Centre of Criminology at U of T, a member of the Royal Society of Canada and a recipient of the Order of Canada, was funded continuously from the late 1960s until 2006, when he was turned down by the SSHRC. The next year, essentially the same proposal was funded.) These things happen. Jordan, however, took this as an opportunity to rail, once again, against the suppression of free speech by oppressive institutions and into a public relations triumph in the eyes of his followers.

The Rebel, Ezra Levant�s far-right online publication, raised the funds to replace that grant.

This past March, Pankaj Mishra wrote in The New York Review of Books an informed and thoughtful critique of 12 Rules for Life, provocatively titled �Jordan Peterson and Fascist Mysticism.� Jordan�s immediate response was a flurry of angry, abusive, self-righteous tweets, some in response to Mishra�s questioning Jordan�s induction into an Indigenous tribe by referring to it as a �claim.�

Jordan called Mishra a �sanctimonious prick,� �an arrogant, racist son of a bitch,� �a peddler of nasty, underhanded innuendo,� said �gently caress you� and expressed a desire to slap him. (As it turns out Jordan had not been inducted into that tribe, and his publisher removed references to the claim in promotional materials as reported in The Walrus by Robert Jago in �The Story Behind Jordan Peterson�s Indigenous Identity.�)

Jordan is seen here to be emotionally explosive when faced with legitimate criticism, in contrast to his being so self-possessed at other times. He is erratic. One of his colleagues at the University of Toronto, Prof. Will Cunningham, said in a recent Esquire article: �There�s my friend Jordan Peterson, who is this amazingly compassionate person who genuinely wants to help people. And then there�s Twitter Peterson, getting placards demanding he be fired immediately. Even I want to get a placard.�

Jordan exhibits a great range of emotional states, from anger and abusive speech to evangelical fierceness, ministerial solemnity and avuncular charm. It is misleading to come to quick conclusions about who he is, and potentially dangerous if you have seen only the good and thoughtful Jordan, and not seen the bad.

Shortly after Jordan�s rise to notoriety back in 2016, I emailed him to express my upset with his dishonesty and lack of intellectual and social integrity. He called in a conciliatory voice the next morning. I was reiterating my disappointment and upset when he interrupted me, saying more or less the following:

�You don�t understand. I am willing to lose everything, my home, my job etc., because I believe in this.� And then he said, with the intensity he is now famous for, �Bernie. Tammy had a dream, and sometimes her dreams are prophetic. She dreamed that it was five minutes to midnight.�

That was our last conversation. He was playing out the ideas that appeared in his first book. The social order is coming apart. We are on the edge of chaos. He is the prophet, and he would be the martyr. Jordan would be our saviour. I think he believes that.

He may be driven by a great and genuine fear of our impending doom, and a passionate conviction that he can save us from it. He may believe that his ends justify his questionable means, and he may not be aware that he mimics those figures from whom he wants to protect us. But his conviction makes him no less problematic. On the contrary.

�What they do have in common is � that they have the answers and that their instincts are good, that they are smarter than everybody else and can do things by themselves.� This was Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state in an recent interview with the New York Times referring to the authoritarian leaders discussed in her new book, Fascism: A Warning. It sounds familiar.

Currently, Jordan is the darling of the alt-right. He says he is not one of them, but has accepted their affection with relish. Andrew Scheer, the leader of the federal Conservative party, has declined any further appearances on The Rebel, but Jordan continues to appear.

Jordan is not part of the alt-right. He fits no mould. But he should be concerned about what the �dark desires� of the alt-right might be. He could be, perhaps unwittingly, activating �the dark desires� of that mob.

I was warned by a number of writers, editors and friends that this article would invite backlash, primarily from his young male acolytes, and I was asked to consider whether publishing it was worth it. More than anything, that convinced me it should be published.

I discovered while writing this essay a shocking climate of fear among women writers and academics who would not attach their names to opinions or data which were critical of Jordan. All of Jordan�s critics receive nasty feedback from some of his followers, but women writers have felt personally threatened.

Jordan presents a confusing picture, and it�s often hard to know what he is up to. In one of his YouTube videos, Jordan said that if you are not sure of what or why someone is doing what they are doing, look at the consequences. They could be revealing.

That keeps me up at night.

Given Jordan�s tendency toward grandiosity, it should not be surprising to learn that he is politically ambitious. He would have run for the leadership of the federal Conservative party but was dissuaded by influential friends. He has not, however, lost interest in the political life.

Andrew Scheer, the current leader of that party, echoed this proposal which appeared with Jordan�s photo on the front page of the Toronto Sun: �Free speech Prof says cut University funding by 25 per cent until politically correct cult at schools reined in.� In a Toronto Star profile, Vinay Menon reported that Peterson saw a potential starring role when Patrick Brown stepped down in Ontario: �I thought about running when the PC party blew up here, I thought that�s a catastrophe and maybe I can bring some depth to the leadership race.� Doug Ford won the leadership on March 10. On March 19, Jordan was in the Toronto Sun saying that Premier Kathleen Wynne �is the most dangerous woman in Canada.� There was nothing new in the article, but those words are signature Jordan, the language of fear. On May 8, the day before the campaign began, Ford announced that he would scrap Ontario�s sex-ed curriculum and tie funding of post-secondary schools to free speech. This echoed, once more, Jordan�s call to make protection of free speech a condition in the funding of universities. Is Jordan involved with Ford�s political campaign? I have no idea, but it�s not impossible.

Jordan is a powerful orator. He is smart, compelling and convincing. His messages can be strong and clear, oversimplified as they often are, to be very accessible. He has played havoc with the truth. He has studied demagogues and authoritarians and understands the power of their methods. Fear and danger were their fertile soil. He frightens by invoking murderous bogeymen on the left and warning they are out to destroy the social order, which will bring chaos and destruction.

Jordan�s view of the social order is now well known.

He is a biological and Darwinian determinist. Gender, gender roles, dominance hierarchies, parenthood, all firmly entrenched in our biological heritage and not to be toyed with. Years ago when he was living in my house, he said children are little monkeys trying to clamber up the dominance hierarchy and need to be kept in their place. I thought he was being ironic. Apparently, not.

He is also very much like the classic Social Darwinists who believe that �attempts to reform society through state intervention or other means would � interfere with natural processes; unrestricted competition and defence of the status quo were in accord with biological selection.� (Encylopedia Britannica, 2018.) From the same source: �Social Darwinism declined during the 20th century as an expanded knowledge of biological, social and cultural phenomena undermined, rather than supported, its basic tenets.� Jordan remains stuck in and enthralled by The Call of the Wild.

We should be concerned about his interest in politics. It is clear what kind of country he would want to have or, if he could, lead.

What I am seeing now is a darker, angrier Jordan than the man I knew. In Karen Heller�s recent profile in the Washington Post he is candid about his long history of depression. Depression is an awful illness. It is a cognitive disorder that casts a dark shadow over everything. His view of life, as nasty and brutish, may very well not be an idea, but a description of his experience, which became for him the truth. But this next statement, from Heller�s article, is heartbreaking: �You have an evil heart � like the person next to you,� she quotes him as telling a sold-out crowd. �Kids are not innately good � and neither are you.� This from the loving and attentive father I knew? That makes no sense at all.

It could be his dark view of life, wherever it comes from, that the aggressive group of young men among his followers identify with. They may feel recognized, affirmed, justified and enabled. By validating them he does indeed save them, and little wonder they then fall into line enthusiastically, marching lockstep behind him. That is unnerving. The misogynistic attacks on the British broadcaster Cathy Newman, after she was humiliated and left speechless by Jordan in the infamous �gotcha moment� of their TV interview, were so numerous and vicious that Jordan asked his followers to back off. These devoted followers are notorious for attacking Jordan�s critics, but this was different. It was more persistent and more intense. That was not outrage in defence of their leader who needed none; she was the fallen victim and it was as if they had come in for the final kill. Jordan�s inflammatory understanding of male violence for which �the cure ... is enforced monogamy� as reported by Nellie Bowles in the New York Times is shocking. This is upsetting and sad if you are, or were, Jordan�s friend. But it is also frightening.

We would be foolish to not pay close attention and to not take Jordan and his impact seriously. Do I overstate a possible danger? Maybe. I really don�t know. But for historical reasons, silence is not a risk I am willing to take.

�When someone claims to be acting from the highest principles for the good of others, there is no reason to assume that the person�s motives are genuine. People motivated to make things better usually aren�t concerned with changing other people � or if they are they take responsibility for making the same changes to themselves (and first).�

I did not write this, although I might have. It�s taken from 12 Rules for Life. These are Jordan�s words.

I believe that Jordan has not lived up to at least four of his rules.

Rule 7: Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient)

Rule 8: Tell the truth � or, at least, don�t lie

Rule 9: Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don�t

Rule 10: Be precise in your speech

Heller observed that when Jordan slumped, violating Rule 1 (Stand up straight with your shoulders back), his wife cajoled him to correct that. It may be absurd to take that seriously, but the stakes are real, given Jordan�s stated obligation to have changed himself first. He has done a poor job of that.

I knew Jordan when it was possible to know him up close. He was always a complicated man. Even then, it was hard to get a fix on what he was doing. But some things were clear and consistent. In retrospect, I might have seen this coming. I didn�t.

# ? May 2, 2021 19:42

Wark Say: Feb 22, 2013; by Fluffdaddy

Palpek posted:

For anybody curious about how Jorp got his tenure and how he was received by students and colleagues there's a piece from his former good friend who got him the job at the university titled I was Jordan Peterson�s strongest supporter. Now I think he�s dangerous

It's behind a paywall now so here is the full version:

I don't know, I read all of that and even then, younger JorP still sounds like a complete dobber. Sorry don't cut it, Bernard.

# ? May 3, 2021 00:08

The Sausages: Sep 30, 2012; What do you want to do? Who do you want to be?

# ? May 3, 2021 08:40

Mr Interweb: Aug 25, 2004

Wark Say posted:

I don't know, I read all of that and even then, younger JorP still sounds like a complete dobber. Sorry don't cut it, Bernard.

it's rightwing affirmative action

# ? May 3, 2021 08:52

Palpek: Dec 27, 2008; Do you feel it, Zach?
My coffee warned me about it.

Wark Say posted:

I don't know, I read all of that and even then, younger JorP still sounds like a complete dobber. Sorry don't cut it, Bernard.

Yeah, his lectures before he got famous were already full of christian right-wing talking points and ideologically chosen data too. I watched him say poo poo like "If you're a 30 year old woman and you don't want children then there's something deeply wrong with you" with contempt pointing at a room full of female students. When he analyzed The Lion King and Pinocchio he made sure to point out several times how Frozen is a dusgusting propaganda film (despite being an extremely popular movie when popularity of Disney movies was his biggest argument proving that therefore their stories are important on an evolutionary level). It's not fame that made him hateful.

# ? May 3, 2021 12:10

Zulily Zoetrope: Jun 1, 2011; Muldoon

Palpek posted:

For anybody curious about how Jorp got his tenure and how he was received by students and colleagues there's a piece from his former good friend who got him the job at the university titled I was Jordan Peterson�s strongest supporter. Now I think he�s dangerous

It's behind a paywall now so here is the full version:

I've heard this story (though this adds a nice level of detail), but what I'm really curious about is the stuff preceding it. Like, this guy was dazzled by Jorp's ability to chew the scenery, and missed all the red flags, sure, but Jorp also showed up with an impressive degree and a spotless CV, and how he got those is what baffles me. Like were his professors and reviewers also just blinded by Jorp's sheer confidence in presenting his opinions as facts, or did he at one point have the ability to extract reasonable statements from actual sources?

# ? May 3, 2021 12:51

ikanreed: Sep 25, 2009; I honestly I have no idea who cannibal[SIC] is and I do not know why I should know.

syq dude, just syq!

Palpek posted:

For anybody curious about how Jorp got his tenure and how he was received by students and colleagues there's a piece from his former good friend who got him the job at the university titled I was Jordan Peterson’s strongest supporter. Now I think he’s dangerous

It's behind a paywall now so here is the full version:

Jorp being the result of what is effectively affirmative action for right wingers is the most important aspect of the story because that's a repeat pattern that has entire college departments with chuds.

# ? May 3, 2021 13:41

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

I've heard this story (though this adds a nice level of detail), but what I'm really curious about is the stuff preceding it. Like, this guy was dazzled by Jorp's ability to chew the scenery, and missed all the red flags, sure, but Jorp also showed up with an impressive degree and a spotless CV, and how he got those is what baffles me. Like were his professors and reviewers also just blinded by Jorp's sheer confidence in presenting his opinions as facts, or did he at one point have the ability to extract reasonable statements from actual sources?

if you look at his resume on Linked In he worked for a number of IQ testing companies before coming back to academics. maybe he got tapped into the same group of academic racists that promoted characters like Philippe Rushton

# ? May 3, 2021 14:12

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

I've just received word that Jordan Peterson has just had his first bowel movement since the start of his all-meat diet and it has been confirmed to have happened right in his britches

# ? May 3, 2021 14:27

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

Preliminary reports put the casualties at both his underwear and his pants. No confirmation on whether or not it went up his back and onto his shirt or down his legs into his socks and shoes. We will update as we know more

# ? May 3, 2021 14:28

Wark Say: Feb 22, 2013; by Fluffdaddy

Mr Interweb posted:

it's rightwing affirmative action

Indeed.

Funniest thing, though? Reading the article and seeing that the fuckface had clear political aspirations in the back of his head/set on sight is that I'm pretty certain that whatever political aspirations he might have probably died somewhere between the dumb cold-turkey, the drug overdose and the brain damage.

# ? May 3, 2021 17:34

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

Wark Say posted:

Indeed.

Funniest thing, though? Reading the article and seeing that the fuckface had clear political aspirations in the back of his head/set on sight is that I'm pretty certain that whatever political aspirations he might have probably died somewhere between the dumb cold-turkey, the drug overdose and the brain damage.

The president of the united states a mere six months ago was an obese pedophile with a second grade reading level at best and you think Jordo is disqualified from politics?

# ? May 3, 2021 18:16

Rutibex: Sep 9, 2001; by Fluffdaddy

Who What Now posted:

The president of the united states a mere six months ago was an obese pedophile with a second grade reading level at best and you think Jordo is disqualified from politics?

canada has higher standards

# ? May 3, 2021 18:19

I AM GRANDO: Aug 20, 2006

Who What Now posted:

The president of the united states a mere six months ago was an obese pedophile with a second grade reading level at best and you think Jordo is disqualified from politics?

Look out, Pierre Trudeau!

# ? May 3, 2021 18:20

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

Rutibex posted:

canada has higher standards

Jordan Peterson will somehow become president of the USA despite not being a natural born citizen and we will deserve what happens to us as a nation

# ? May 3, 2021 18:22

Giggle Goose: Oct 18, 2009

Eh even taking Donnie into consideration, I don't think anyone with Jorp's voice would have much of a shot with modern chuds.

E. Lol, that and the canadian thing of course.

# ? May 3, 2021 18:26

Space Gopher: Jul 31, 2006; BLITHERING IDIOT AND HARDCORE DURIAN APOLOGIST. LET ME TELL YOU WHY THIS SHIT DON'T STINK EVEN THOUGH WE ALL KNOW IT DOES BECAUSE I'M SUPER CULTURED.

Rutibex posted:

canada has higher standards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8h0BgBo5qg

# ? May 3, 2021 18:28

thunderspanks: Nov 5, 2003; crucify this

Rutibex posted:

canada has higher standards

an uncharismatic, gay-hating robot covered in human flesh was our PM for 9 years. Don't put too much faith in us to vote past a good PR campaign.

edit: I think Jorp has the sense not to properly enter politics, given that his inability to deal with the spotlight is what got him into the whole russian benzo coma thing in the first place- but I also believe that his demographic popularity and a savvy marketing team would make him a real political contender if he took a serious go at it. Assuming he wasn't immediately smeared to hell and back in the media.

thunderspanks fucked around with this message at 18:44 on May 3, 2021

# ? May 3, 2021 18:35

Galewolf: Jan 9, 2007; The human gallbladder is indeed a puzzle!

That kitty is visibly distressed :ohdear:

# ? May 3, 2021 18:42

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

Also Rob Ford is in Canadian politics, soooooo

# ? May 3, 2021 18:44

Galewolf: Jan 9, 2007; The human gallbladder is indeed a puzzle!

Came to here after months to ask this: When did Joe Rogan finally lost his goddamn mind? Telling people to eat elk meat is one thing but saying "if you are under 21 and healthy, don't take the vax" is beyond insane and straight up dangerous, holy poo poo.

Also the guy he had on the show when he said that looks and talks like a Metal Gear villian, please c/d.

# ? May 3, 2021 18:45

Douche Wolf 89: Dec 9, 2010; 🍉🐺8️⃣9️⃣

Rutibex posted:

canada has higher standards

A dead crackhead's somehow less-personable brother is my Premier because he promised $1 beers.

# ? May 3, 2021 18:47

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 27, 2024 15:56

Who What Now: Sep 10, 2006; by Azathoth

Ever since Joe Rogan moved to Texas and got picked by Spotify he only has on ultra-chuds because those get the most clicks. All his liberal or leftist friends are still in California so he has nobody to push back and say "No, Joe, I love you but that's the dumbest poo poo you've ever said".

# ? May 3, 2021 18:48

The Something Awful Forums > Main > General Bullshit > Jordan Peterson is Back: Incelsior!

«‹›384 »