JP was mentioned in another thread and I didn't want to de-rail that thread hence I created this one.
In that thread someone suggested that he produced insightful content in 2017, so I did a bit of browsing around and finally came to the conclusion that he's always been a bit of a nut.
I scan-read an article by The Guardian then decided that the best thing to do was to go straight to the source:
I sorted the videos by oldest first, and watched the first which mercifully is only 13 minutes long:
I didn't get far into it to be honest. The warning signs were "I'm an ex-atheist", "God created man and woman so everything divides into masculine and feminine and one needs the other to make a whole", "the patriarchy isn't a thing", "modern people don't think like this", and "women make men self-conscious" then I more or less gave up there. It comes across as a long ramble along the lines of "I found God, now I'm going to mash everything else I can think of into that belief", rather like the fear/love scale in the film 'Donnie Darko'.
More warning signs IMO are vague topic titles and immensely long video clips like this gem here:
The Guardian summarised this clip as:
JP's style very much reminds me of other cranks I've seen on the Internet. One in particular was on a newsgroup or forum over twenty years ago and their signature said something like "Who is I?" followed by some apparently-random characters like "** QO RP I GB ZX** " as if inviting other users to explore the deep inner meaning to their pseudointellectual bullshit.
I'm open to a persuasive argument but one thing I refuse to do is to watch a ~hour long YT clip with only vague justification for why I should potentially waste my time with it. The only time I'll watch hour-long video clips when the topic very much interests me. By all means quote a bit, or cite a few minutes of a clip.
In that thread someone suggested that he produced insightful content in 2017, so I did a bit of browsing around and finally came to the conclusion that he's always been a bit of a nut.
I scan-read an article by The Guardian then decided that the best thing to do was to go straight to the source:
Jordan B Peterson
Parenting premieres May 25th, only on DailyWire+. Jordan B. Peterson is a Canadian professor of psychology, clinical psychologist, YouTube personality, best-selling author and host of the #1 Education Podcast, "The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast." Watch the entirety of Dr. Peterson's catalog on...
www.youtube.com
I didn't get far into it to be honest. The warning signs were "I'm an ex-atheist", "God created man and woman so everything divides into masculine and feminine and one needs the other to make a whole", "the patriarchy isn't a thing", "modern people don't think like this", and "women make men self-conscious" then I more or less gave up there. It comes across as a long ramble along the lines of "I found God, now I'm going to mash everything else I can think of into that belief", rather like the fear/love scale in the film 'Donnie Darko'.
More warning signs IMO are vague topic titles and immensely long video clips like this gem here:
To which my response is "diddums", and you know when someone is full of shit when they start unleashing terms like "the radical left".The Guardian said:
JP's style very much reminds me of other cranks I've seen on the Internet. One in particular was on a newsgroup or forum over twenty years ago and their signature said something like "Who is I?" followed by some apparently-random characters like "** QO RP I GB ZX** " as if inviting other users to explore the deep inner meaning to their pseudointellectual bullshit.
I'm open to a persuasive argument but one thing I refuse to do is to watch a ~hour long YT clip with only vague justification for why I should potentially waste my time with it. The only time I'll watch hour-long video clips when the topic very much interests me. By all means quote a bit, or cite a few minutes of a clip.
Last edited: