I don't think his general ideas or intentions are wrong or bad.
But - I'm starting to see his action of castigating ENTIRE subjects in the social sciences and liberal arts as beyond his critique and I wonder if he borders into contributing to cultural divisiveness. If you could stand to extrapolate that sort of speech and tone of his rhetoric, we start to enter militant and oppressive communication. How far is that from actually punishing professors in the public square?
What about his professional ties to social science and liberal arts? He is like many psychologists who use the notion of archetypes to classify ideal human behavior. Which is to say, he essentially cherry picks ideas of the "great virtues" of "humanity"1 based on his interpretation of the canon of Western Civilization.
That is not far off base from what postmodern thought actually argues for individuals to do on a subjective basis, but to do so without acknowledging that perspective reinforces a narrative that is the basis of postmodern critique2 - that other people have lived in the world and have their own experiences that have been drowned out by the colonizer, the oppressor, the barbarian who takes it all.
What do you think?

Footnotes

  1. I put humanity in quotes not to degrade our species but to emphasize that these are all just stories that we use to create the narrative of our species and from those stories, we create directions for ourselves and others about what is "right action" so we can define virtuous action. Generally, the narratives, the stories that actually survive ("the classics" if you will) say something pretty potent. But the use of those narratives (by someone with an agenda) to direct the actions of others, arguably the basis of civilization, can get a little slippery.
  2. My best reference point for when this really starts is when anthropologists started recognizing that they were not inherently morally superior to the people they studied.
this territory is moderated
203 sats \ 1 reply \ @grayruby 5 Apr
I don’t think this is an unpopular opinion.
reply
LOL for real, I just came here to say that, I used to really enjoy his stuff when he blew up initially, and even bought his books, which were annoying to read but I pushed through and cleaned my room, but boy has this dude fallen off majorly, I don't know why people feel the need to keep going, if you've done something and people like it and you feel you can't top it, learn from Satoshi and walk away
reply
I was extremely impressed with JBP when he burst on the scene. His Biblical lecture series is brilliant.
I don't think he's been the same since that severe medical event he had a couple of years ago. I've largely stopped listening to him, because I felt like he just became another Boomer-Con internet personality.
reply
This. His Psychological Significance of the Bible lecture series was his high water mark. It's all been down hill since his subsequent breakdown.
reply
100 sats \ 3 replies \ @Lumor 5 Apr
Being in opposition and hence somewhat divisive is healthy in an unhealthy decaying culture.
I did feel he had a bit of a down-period after his illness, but think he has been getting better again lately. Especially in lifting the trans industry but also in the clips I've seen of him debating "@destiny".
Peterson's take that we gain meaning through assuming responsibility is very aligned with Bitcoin self custody. His take against anonymity is not well aligned though.
Do you have any specific quotes or a specific episode/appearance where he misses the mark?
reply
I took a few to watch the last twenty minutes or so of the "@destiny" episode and I appreciate the commentary from both parties at the end that when people stop talking they start fighting. I wonder now if my aversion to the way he shares his message reveals my own bias for tone policing.
This is a news article that describes a bit of what I'm talking about. I don't think that silencing or erasing academic fields based on the echo of support off one man is good for society.
Being in opposition and hence somewhat divisive is healthy in an unhealthy decaying culture.
Where in history do we have evidence that the elongation, attenuation and amplification of divisive behavior can revive a culture? I agree that so long as we're talking we're not engaging in physical or kinetic violence. I'm just skeptical that inciting debate and what ends up being a bit of lifestyle prescription is enough to change culture. Perhaps I miss the point that divisive behavior in an unhealthy culture can also foster other sorts of behavior...
reply
That news article is dated 2017, but I'm surprised so much had already happened by then. Using artificial intelligence to expose post-modern courses/professors so that students can make informed decisions.
Jordan has indeed dedicated a large part of his life to studying and understanding some of the darkest sides of humanity. To figure out what makes them tick, the context which makes people side with Nazi types. So we avoid repeating the creation of such a context. He was not threatening with violence, he was warning about the path we are on.
Would not put much trust in CBC after how they handled Covid.
reply
Also replying to myself here to record that in that “@destiny” episode JBP made a very good point that it “should have been” the left who were skeptical of corruption in the pharmaceutical industry. That is imo an example of bias/opinion/perspective that may be useful to others.
reply
He is a very effective speaker and he conveys lofty ideas in a way that's easy to understand and inspiring to most people. Especially to young men, who cannot find any purpose and meaning in modern western culture.
But he also reminds me a bit of Michael Saylor. In the sense that his effectiveness comes more from his rhetoric than from the logical unassailability of his arguments. Like Saylor, he tends to cast wide, sweeping rhetorical nets that don't necessarily stand up to careful scrutiny.
Still, in my opinion Jordan Peterson is standing on the "right side" of history in opposing the extremely destructive and Marxist agendas of today's radical left.
reply
JBP out JLP in
reply
I've come to feel this way too. Respect for what I learned from him, turns out there was an upper limit to it. (He always says, "And there's not upper limit to that!" talking about human potential, which is really very cool and almost radical to say).
reply
I'm amazed that he is so well-versed on Marxism but at the same time partners with the same people that created it
reply