0_0 » 13 Mar 2018 17:07 wrote:lol i agree with jerky on this, i can't stand jordan peterson but it's mostly because i'm allergic to all self-help gurus who claim that with just some little tweaks here and there life can be a wonderful bold adventure. that's why i only read schopenhaur, it's all doom and gloom and misery and that's how i like it, and if that's your attitude you'll even end up pleasantly surprised now and again. when you take the self-help gurus snake oil on the other hand you're just setting yourself up for more disappointment, and that's why they themselves are all on prozac. Oh god and the interviewer is russell brand, kudos to anyone who can sit through that! What puzzled me most about this thread tho was pufpuf93's comment:
Indeed. We should never lose sight of the fact that Peterson's main shtick at this point (and it;s a lucrative one) is as Patreon Panhandler. Turns out there's gold in telling a certain type of intellectually insecure, defensive, beta-wannabe-alpha anti-cuck gamergate wanking expert exactly what they want to hear, over and over and over again.
Really? Are you sure about how you're using the "by and large" idiom in this case? Because I'm pretty sure it's NOT, by and large, a cult of personality.
Really? Are you sure about how you're using the "by and large" idiom in this case? Because I'm pretty sure it's NOT, by and large, a cult of personality.
J.
Jerky!!!
Ha! Cult of personality.
I've never had the pleasure of interacting with you. Maybe one day I will have the pleasure.
Better to question what I mean by 'cult of personalty' than 'by and large'.
Well... the fact that we are assembled here thanks to our mutual interest in the writings of Jeff Wells. I would argue that's meager grounds for calling this board a cult of personality, and assume that's not what you mean.
Jerky » Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:05 pm wrote:Well... the fact that we are assembled here thanks to our mutual interest in the writings of Jeff Wells. I would argue that's meager grounds for calling this board a cult of personality, and assume that's not what you mean.
J.
Thank you, Jerky. That was more pleasant than I could have hoped for. And no, I was not referring to the estimable Mr. Wells, though the possible connection had not escaped me.
Jeff Wells has not participated on this board in years. He's all but abandoned it to Slad and others. I have chosen not to have a facehook, in doing so, I miss out on most all entries by him.
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”
^^A whole page of completely off-topic posts.. The topic is not Jerky, though he wishes it were. Nor is it Who is a Fan of whom? Please let's return to topic.
streeb » Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:09 pm wrote:I don't have an opinion on either Peterson or McGilchrist, although I adore Russell Brand, and I'll check out those interviews...
... but MacLeans would be the stupid person's idea of a smart magazine. I can proudly say that I've been personally called out twice in the house rag of Canadian neoconservatism.
Thanks, Streeb. I know nothing about McLean's, but that "review" repays close reading. It is really instructive in the way it takes such pains to demonstrate its own superiority and succeeds only in parading its own helplessness. The reviewer shoots himself in the foot repeatedly, beginning with that foolishly contemptuous title. To quote a great phrase from the poet Geoffrey Hill, he is "sniggering with fright". He has penned the stupid person's idea of what a smart put-down would look like. No wonder Jerky loved it. Perhaps he even wrote it.
Theres's no there there. Literally nothing but bluster and bluff. Look:
Peterson fandom [sic], on RI. Wow. Who'd have thunk it. [Only a fool would think it was fandom.]
This guy is one of the most monumental frauds in the history of public intellectualism, guilty of everything he accuses the dreaded "neoMarxist postmodernists" of, and more. [So you assert. Are we expected to take your word for it? Yes.] Also, even if he isn't strictly speaking Far Right, he's definitely become a favorite of the Far Right. [This is the amoeba's idea of a sound logical argument.] I think his definition of "moderate" or "centrist" is probably somewhat suspect. [Oh really. Why should anyone care that you think that?]
The dude is a loon, to boot. He weeps at some Disney movies and finds dark, social engineering conspiracies in others. He thinks stories shouldn't have morals (or "political ones" at least, laughably), except for morals he approves of. He's terrified of lipstick and high heels. [All this is the barnacle's idea of a witheringly smart put-down]] He's a fucking buffoon.[In stark contrast to Jerky,who is smart.]
J.[We know who you are, and you are not our old pal.]/quote]
"The dude is a loon" - Thus Spake Jerkythustra If Peterson's a loon, then why does the renowned Dr Ian McGilchrist choose to spend half an hour of his valuable time talking to Peterson about the intricate workings of the brain, rather than to a truly smart person like, say, Jerkythustra?
"He's a fucking buffoon." - Thus Spake Jerkythustra, again. So how did Peterson manage to acquire two B.A.s and a doctorate, then become a practicing clinical & developmental psychologist, and then acquire a position as Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto? I mean, the University of Torointo could have appointed somebody smart, a non-buffoon like, say, Jerky. Couldn't they contact him? Haven't they seen Jerky's pathbreaking scholarly work in the field? A truly smart university would have noticed immediately that Jerky is much better qualified than Peterson for the task of explaining the mind to the young.
The world is so unjust.
When can can we expect to see an excited and engaged Russell Brand interviewing Professor Jerky le Bouef? Inquiring minds want to know.
-----------------
Back on topic. The topic is not Jerky.
Last edited by MacCruiskeen on Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966
I'm in the process of reading Peterson's book right now. It's not very good, but I do find a need to know about him as a cultural signifier. His rise to fame was on the back of a gross/willful misunderstanding of Canada's C-16 bill, and he's been gaining support from a certain type of disaffected male since then. What I find most interesting about him and his "followers" is that they come from a background (at least, their representations on the internet) of STEM/tech and a hatred of the humanities, but most of this guy's topics are like Humanities 101 level. He's a self-help guru who's repeating stuff for people that don't have the attention span to read Joseph Campbell on their own, I guess. YouTube videos supplanting books. It's all very of the moment.
As someone who gravitated more towards Richard Rorty than Derrida/Baudrillard (mostly because I found the latter too difficult to understand, blame my brain) the Neo-Marxist Postmodernists conspiracy he peddles is hilarious. I definitely understand why he's become such a hit among the YouTube youth-- it's because they're craving more Humanities in their life! Just wish they'd cut out the blowhard middleman and go straight to the source material.
