Jordan Peterson's Misappropriation of Self Improvement

[Old Things]

"Incremental improvement scales exponentially."

"It's the oscillating self-corrective process that leads you to the final star"

"You don't experience happiness except in relationship to a goal"

"We have to consciously decide that we're going to do everything we can as individuals to walk in the light and to regard that as a noble and heroic endeavor."

Now, one might ask why I am picking on Jordan Peterson for his advice to be a better you. The reason for this is that people do not maintain improvement indefinitely. People generally make some improvement and then they end up recycling the improvement they achieved and it all pretty much just pans out to whatever someone's peak ability is (in an ideal world). Once they reach their peak ability (not everyone can be as successful as Jordan Peterson) then it just becomes somewhat an act of futility where you are trying different things, spinning your wheels if you will, and not really going anywhere. It's a really "feel good" message that you can improve indefinitely, but it is just not a reality and Jordan Peterson seems to not acknowledge this.

My process is pretty much the opposite of JPs as I am a Christian. I feel part of the path to becoming a better you is in the act of recognizing your faults, or sins, if you will. We all have blind spots and without some illumination as to what those blind spots are, we can't really "get better." But in my model, I'm not necessarily advocating that you necessarily have to improve. Part of the process for me as a Christian is letting the Holy Spirit convict me of sins I didn't know I had. Obviously, the goal is to rid yourself of sin, but the more important part is in the recognization that I will never "attain" mastery over my sin. As such it is grace that produces love, which is the highest goal IMO. And it is not actually "me" who is finding these new sins, but it is the work of the Holy Spirit in me through His love for me that he shows me my sin so that I can love God more for His forgiveness of my sin. I will never attain perfection in this world. I will always be a sinner. I can never be perfect. But in recognizing God's forgiveness for me it leads me to love him more for His forgiveness which leads me to love others more.

Matthew 22:36–40 ESV
““Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.””

 

[Hadoblado]

Different improvements have different curves. One percent is an over-simplification but a reasonable one IMO. Incremental shifts in habit will result in superior results to what most people try in their attempts for self-improvement.

While I'm sick to death of JP, compared to the other conservative daddy figures like Musk and Trump, he's actually pretty great. He makes psychology accessible to men who often would otherwise dismiss it.

 

[Rook]

While I'm sick to death of JP, compared to the other conservative daddy figures like Musk and Trump, he's actually pretty great. He makes psychology accessible to men who often would otherwise dismiss it.

i'm always pretty confused when people say musk is a conservative

 

[Cognisant]

That's just Hado's woke bias, I'm still working on deprogramming him.

 

[Black Rose]

i'm always pretty confused when people say musk is a conservative

He is a jobs creator?

 

[Hadoblado]

I said conservative daddy figure. As in conservatives worship him.

Similar to Trump, I see Musk as espousing whatever views suit his material interests at the time. He's a marketing machine, not some passionate ideologue. Jordan Peterson is also adored by young men looking for someone their idea of masculinity will allow them to look up to, but I think JP actually took care of his flock somewhat. He pretty kooky now though.

Also, Cog fuck off calling me woke you pissant. You don't change people's minds by dismissing them as invalid. That's retarded.

 

[Rook]

yeah im still confused musk has a stoner energy figure persona i think all sorta people call him daddy

 

[onesteptwostep]

Jordan Peterson is a secular preacher. His god is the secular good...

It's hard to say whether he's doing more harm than good, but he's more of a symptom of a problem in our current culture rather than any catalyst of something. He's as clueless as any of us are, but trying to help in whatever way he can.

People criticize him for being a gateway to more extreme ideologies but I think that isn't his responsibility. If he was more mindful he'd be serving at some association- I think he needs some major PR adjustments (like stop talking to anyone who'll listen to him and who are controversial) and needs to work within an organization.

Oh and Musk... I'd say on the surface he's an asshole but I give him credit for leading all the companies that he owns and running the projects he's managing. But I think he's running on too much idealism. If I were him I'd get into solving societal issues rather than running a company given his immense brand power. Optimistically that's what he pivots to later on in life. I don't know enough about Musk's upbringing or the extent of his personal life to make any big judgements.

 

[Old Things]

Jordan Peterson is a secular preacher. His god is the secular good...

Pretty accurate in my estimation. His Christ is Jung and Nietzsche.

 

[onesteptwostep]

Jordan Peterson is a secular preacher. His god is the secular good...

Pretty accurate in my estimation. His Christ is Jung and Nietzsche.

Haha I'm not sure about the Christ characterization but he's certainly a Jung disciple and a budding Nietzschean. I think most secular thinkers first wander into Nietzsche just by the virtue of the prevalence of Christianity. Nietzsche is the logical sequence one would take if you aren't Christian in a society that's a Christian hegemony.

 

[Cognisant]

Also, Cog fuck off calling me woke you pissant. You don't change people's minds by dismissing them as invalid. That's retarded.

 

[Minuend]

He looks so utterly miserable and defeated

Attitudes, morals, values mean nothing unless you live a life you think is meaningful and happy. And when you grow up being told what that is and it being inaccessible to you.. We're just going down a very dark line as a species. That tells you to value the things that is foreign to you and that will make you miserable.

Also, Cog fuck off calling me woke you pissant. You don't change people's minds by dismissing them as invalid. That's retarded.

Yeah, feeling like you are able to own other individual human beings, that will make progress. That is what matters...

That's how people are kept in check, they make enemy of each other rather than questioning government and leadership. You are just a puppet doing exactly what is needed to halt progress in society and actually make change that is good for people. Your bad feels are being exploited. Start using your rationality and logic, stop trying to feel good in stupid arguments with people on the internet who would actually be on your side trying to make humanity and society better.

 

[Old Things]

That's just Hado's woke bias, I'm still working on deprogramming him.

If @Hadoblado is as "woke" as you say, that would seem to put him at odds with Jordan Peterson. Jordan Peterson may be far right, but he certainly is not far left. The woke mob has tried to crucify JP a number of times, never actually being successful. One does liken it to Musk or Trump in that regard. The jury is still out on Trump, but I don't think Musk got enough backlash for not going through with buying Twitter IMHO.

 

[washti]

Musk is basically young Trump. Only wasnt in christmans movie yet. Or was he?

 

[dr froyd]

well he's right about one thing - self improvement is all about sustainable progress and internalization of good habits.

 

[Daddy]

Similar to Trump, I see Musk as espousing whatever views suit his material interests at the time. He's a marketing machine, not some passionate ideologue.

I honestly can't believe I used to like him. He's just a forward-thinking salesman, overestimating his companies and selling that misleading representation to the public, kind of like you said.

The only cool he's really done is landing rockets (which is pretty cool, but that's about it). The gigapress thing is cool too, but he just takes the insane investor money and buys them at ridiculous prices with no idea of how he's going to pay everything back (which any company 'could' do as well). Tesla is also funded by EV credits and doesn't actually make profit without them. And his self-driving cars are terrible and never lived up to his claims; and his solar roof business is pretty much a money loss failure that Tesla can't seem to figure out, then there's a strange scandal where he had someone working in his private plane as a massage therapist or something and she didn't want to give him a handjob or whatever he wanted and they kicked her off the plane, so she sued and they settle out of court apparently...oh, and his sudden conversion to conservative was right after that got out, so he could claim the "woke" media are after him. And he has so many kids with different partners, it makes you wonder if he's actually going to be a father figure to any of them. It's really disappointing what money and fame does to people...I used to think he was an interesting guy, but in reality he's like Jordan Belfort in the Wolf of WallStreet, but selling economic ideology, instead of rigged stocks. It's also interesting that it's okay to lie when you're a company selling a false product (the worst that could happen is you get sued and go out of business), but if you sell a false or misleading stock and profit, you're a criminal and go to jail. It doesn't seem much different to me, but then again I'm no lawyer.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

Peterson is a near-total fraud and a self-help guru daddy figure. He oversteps his competence all the time and gives opinions on politics, life and climate when all he really knows is psychology and Bible. He's basically playing the card of being an educated doctor of psychology and giving you expert advice on stuff he has no understanding of and people buy it because he's found his target demographic of sissy conservatives to be a daddy for. He has a strong right leaning conservative agenda and is biased to the max.

I like this video using his actual quotes because it demonstrates what skeletor level nonsense word salad he says most of the time. That guy is real life skeletor and is entertaining in that context, but not as a source of wisdom lol.
He's the guy who tells you climate change or gender dysphoria is fake then cites Bible and psychology as his arguments, complete insanity.

 

[Hadoblado]

I don't think it's crazy to like the idea of him. Futurism is super fucking cool. TBH I had an initial interest in all three (JP, Musk, Trump). Seeing someone rise to the top with a unique approach is noteworthy.

I became disillusioned with Musk after watching Adamsomething and common sense skeptic on youtube. Adamsomething goes over his transportation projects, CSS goes over his space projects. I wouldn't listen to what either says about his psychology (it's pure speculation IMO), but when they go through the logistics of his ideas and point to his record of accurate predictions, I think you get a good picture of how he operates.

 

[Hadoblado]

@Glaensaeth
But he's not. I agree he makes claims outside his competence pretty frequently. He's conservative and many of his takes are trash. Even within his field of expertise, he often exaggerates the evidence for his claims.

But he is a psychologist and his self-help advice tends to be good. Leftists (including myself) often discount the good he does because his 12 rules are kind of obvious self-help stuff. But the difference is that JP reaches audiences that other self-help gurus don't. For whatever reason (I would consider it toxic masculinity but the actual cause doesn't matter), men are dismissive of good self-help advice as they don't want to feel infantalised. JP comes across as hard and authoritative enough that many people feel his takes are revolutionary despite being stuff "Tell the truth – or, at least, don't lie". Wow so insightful!! But there is an insanely large audience who needs to hear this.

Spoiler

And some of it is insightful too IMO. At least I think it is because they were already rules I had for myself that have helped me. "Treat yourself like you are someone you are responsible for helping" is fucking huge for me because it allowed me to use my forgiveness for other people and apply it to myself. It also means I can be pragmatic about my own strengths and limitations.

With JP having lost the plot, other people are stepping into the niche of conservative father figure. Trump and Musk already existed, but they're not reproducible. Even though I don't like JP, Andrew Tate is a grifter and is pushing a much greater degree of bullshit than JP ever did. As JP fades away, you're going to get mountains of redpill bitcoin millionaires leveraging their success to supplant somewhat reasonable gurus.

 

[Old Things]

@Hadoblado,

Do you think someone can improve indefinitely? If they can, then why don't they?

 

[Hadoblado]

Old age

It depends how you're measuring improvement. In reality we don't improve at one thing, we improve at many things. We have reaction ranges for each thing representing where within our genetic potential we currently reside, and as we approach the upper limit the rate of improvement slows (diminishing returns).

But if I said "study for 10 minutes, then increase that by 1% every day", if you follow my advice your improvement to time studying would improve exponentially until you reached your goal.

I understand what you're saying, and yeah a lot of the time he's technically incorrect. But it's good advice regardless. His message is designed to empower people whose lives are so messy they feel helpless to improve anything. He's lowering the bar for achievement to something trivial (1%) and showing how real improvement can be reached by committing to the trivial consistently. He's showing people how to transition their lives and that shit works regardless of whether you can think of ways that his math might be technically incorrect. He is not trying to get you into the Olympics he's trying to get you to wash your balls and be the sort of person that can lead a life worth living. Many men absolutely need to hear this stuff and if they don't hear it from JP they'll hear it from someone else trying to sell them something.

But I'm not a fan of JP myself.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

@Hadoblado
It's fair to say that he's not the worst and that his role as the father of lost people and men and his self-help advice can be helpful.

The problem with him is that he's now a political commentator and a figure of authority on all subjects. He uses the platform not so much to help but to preach his personal worldview.

Look at how he conceals his self interest. He clearly loves attention and the platform he's made, but he never admits how he's pushing his books, services and collaborations to make money essentially and to spread his worldview. It's like 'oh I pity you poor forgotten male minion, thanks for the donations and money's you make me.'

If those other guys replace him I at least hope they will not pretend to care for the well being of their audience or espouse an air of grandiose fight for the betterment of humanity like Musk and Peterson do.

 

[Hadoblado]

Yep, that shit sucks. Fully agree.

 

[Old Things]

It depends how you're measuring improvement. In reality we don't improve at one thing, we improve at many things. We have reaction ranges for each thing representing where within our genetic potential we currently reside, and as we approach the upper limit the rate of improvement slows (diminishing returns).

How would you separate "self-improvement" from simply learning as you get older? To my mind, Peterson seems to separate these things as if self-improvement is an end in itself toward a better you. He even likens it to Christ coming back from the dead in some sense as if Christ's self-improvement was so great that he could have been resurrected. I don't hold that view of Christ. I think even though Christ was "perfected" over time, he was always God (I know that sounds contradictory to you, but just play along for the sake of my point). If self-improvement is some sort of transcendent experience to which Peterson says, "I have no idea what the upper limit of that is" then He's advocating that self-improvement is an end in itself to transcend. How do you square this with neuropsychology? That's why I say people end up trying new things, but they are not actually "improving" and it's why I liken it more to simply the aging process.

 

[Hadoblado]

If he says it's uncapped he's wrong.

But you can compound improvements in different areas to achieve stuff well beyond what you think might be possible.

It's not just the aging process, it's about having the metacomprehension of how to spend time to change yourself towards what you want to be, and perhaps even how to be the person who can become the person you want to be. It's not passive aging.

I'm not really interested in playing apologist for any particular claim JP makes. It's more about the gestalt. I vehemently disagree with much of what he says and to me he represents a lesser evil. But when he's talking self-help, he's a good communicator and his message is mostly correct. I would rather people idolise JP than the other likely candidates because one thing is becoming increasingly clear, and that is that young men are desperate for role models and they will choose a garbage one if a decent one is not provided.

 

[Old Things]

If he says it's uncapped he's wrong.

But you can compound improvements in different areas to achieve stuff well beyond what you think might be possible.

It's not just the aging process, it's about having the metacomprehension of how to spend time to change yourself towards what you want to be, and perhaps even how to be the person who can become the person you want to be. It's not passive aging.

I'm not really interested in playing apologist for any particular claim JP makes. It's more about the gestalt. I vehemently disagree with much of what he says and to me he represents a lesser evil. But when he's talking self-help, he's a good communicator and his message is mostly correct. I would rather people idolise JP than the other likely candidates because one thing is becoming increasingly clear, and that is that young men are desperate for role models and they will choose a garbage one if a decent one is not provided.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I very well could be) but then do you see self-improvement as merely learning (at the fundamental level)? You mentioned "metacomprehension," what is that?

 

[Hadoblado]

The capacity for the abstraction of your cognition.

Someone with high metacomprehension might understand how they learn, what they struggle with, or be able to identify accurately what they do not know. This helps in actively planning out your own progression or shaping reasonable and sustainable expectations for yourself.

 

[Old Things]

The capacity for the abstraction of your cognition.

Someone with high metacomprehension might understand how they learn, what they struggle with, or be able to identify accurately what they do not know. This helps in actively planning out your own progression or shaping reasonable and sustainable expectations for yourself.

How does that differ from having a high IQ?

 

[Hadoblado]

IQ: having a high IQ
Metacomprehension: knowing how high your IQ is and in which ways you excel

People with high IQs tend to be trash at metacomprehension in my experience. They disproportionately feel entitled to being treated as if they are correct without having to demonstrate it, and they have the mental flexibility to justify incongruities in real-time so create a low feedback environment for themselves.

A gifted youngster might be 5head nippon steel gyrificated 10'000 times big brain, but metacomprehension usually requires a lot of experience to acquire. In this way it's more like wisdom than intelligence. While my IQ hasn't really changed over the course of my lifetime, I now understand myself much better than when I was 20, for example.

 

[scorpiomover]

IQ: having a high IQ
Metacomprehension: knowing how high your IQ is and in which ways you excel

People with high IQs tend to be trash at metacomprehension in my experience.

Towns and cities are designed by urban planners. The urban planners have to design it for someone: these days, they tend to design towns and cities assuming the thought processes of the average person.

So the further someone is from the average person's thought processes, the more existing technology and existing infrastructure is ill-adapted for them.

In other words, having a much higher IQ than normal, is like being a Southpaw (left-handed). To play baseball as well as the regular players, you have to learn how to play against righties. But once you learn to play against righties, you know how to play against lefties like yourself and righties, and so you're a switch-hitter (able to use both hands) and so you're a much better baseball player than the other players. So it's a case of you are either much more competent, or much less competent, than the other players. But rarely in-between.

They disproportionately feel entitled to being treated as if they are correct without having to demonstrate it, and they have the mental flexibility to justify incongruities in real-time so create a low feedback environment for themselves.

That would be someone with an inflated self-esteem. That's only one of the cases. There's also the case of the high-IQ person who's sense of competency is far below his actual competency.

While my IQ hasn't really changed over the course of my lifetime, I now understand myself much better than when I was 20, for example.

That's a matter of experience.

 

[Hadoblado]

Those are exactly the sort of gymnastics I'd expect from someone with high IQ. "The world isn't built for average => I'm above average => My higher than average capacity to solve problems makes it harder for me to solve problems => I therefore level up faster and am even more capable than my IQ would imply.

You're making claims about a highly specific field. Is the world built for people with poor problem-solving ability? Somewhat. But this is not analogical to the world being built for the other hand. It's like saying an adult who gets placed in daycare will become much more competent because the daycare is not built for them.

Now if you made that same argument but for neurodivergence? I could agree that that's how it works for some individuals.

There are some things that I do agree make high IQ difficult. I experience high abstract engagement needs and this can make it difficult to connect with people at times. I want challenging conversations. But this isn't IQ alone, as there are many people with high IQ who don't have this issue. More than likely I have attentional difficulties and some social maladjustment.

 

[Old Things]

I'm above average

I don't think this was part of @scorpiomover's point.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

@Glaensaeth
But he's not.

The big problem with media authority is that the audience stops judging what a figure of authority is saying about subjects they have low understanding of or subjects where they've ceded their policymaking to said figure.

So let's say we get young Hitler and he says we should remove the rats and keep the hospitals free of pests. And yeah that is really sound advice and we can find moments when Hitler said reasonable and useful things. But then Hitler is really powerful and he starts fighting an ethnic war against Jews and uses his previous persona of "purifier" to say that Jews are pests too.

It's all in character but because he's become the authority on pest removal and president for life then people don't question that. After all he's been right more than he wasn't so why not listen to what he says, he's a reasonable guy. He's still the old himself but amped up and political. And btw. Peterson is a Hitler apologist in that he humanized his decisions like that, lol.


We can argue that Peterson was right on some self-help, but he's doing tremendous damage by polarising and participating in the retarded culture war. He's now drafting all of his followers to join the culture war into this unproductive conflict.

I say that on the whole he's shaping up to be a destructive influence and all wise things he'd said we're already said. He's just been lucky to reach the audience that he did. BUT important to note! His whole rise to fame is also rooted in culture war and his university social justice drama. You can't really separate good Peterson from bad Peterson imo.

In that sense I think it's justified to make a wholesale judgment on Peterson and "execute" him just like we did with other harmful figures. If you add things up he's more harmful than he's helpful. It's especially important to communicate this to the audiences that can't make this judgment on their own. Some audiences just need to hear that someone is bad influence and should be avoided and there lies the value of such cancellings and executions.

 

[Old Things]

It's far too early in this thread to be talking about Hitler.

 

[Hadoblado]

It depends on your point of reference.

My basic assumption is that if it weren't for JP, these people would latch onto Musk, Trump, Tate, Shapiro etc.. There's no point comparing him to people you think are good role models because they had no shot at securing this audience.

I also don't think it's luck. He fits the niche better than anyone else I can name. He's lucky he fits the niche I guess, but it's not just chance that he filled it.

When you characterise JP as an apologist for Hitler, I think that's defining someone by the least charitable interpretation of their most controversial moments. I don't know of JP because of what he says about Hitler, I know about him for his antiwoke takes and his self-help. Compared to his alternatives who are also largely antiwoke, JP is better because he also improves lives. He literally encourages positive masculinity in an audience that desperately needs it.

Which conservative daddy figure would you prefer to lead these men over JP?

 

[Hadoblado]

I'm above average

I don't think this was part of @scorpiomover's point.

Explain it to me?

 

[Cognisant]

So let's say we get young Hitler and he says we should remove the rats and keep the hospitals free of pests. And yeah that is really sound advice and we can find moments when Hitler said reasonable and useful things. But then Hitler is really powerful and he starts fighting an ethnic war against Jews and uses his previous persona of "purifier" to say that Jews are pests too.

Honestly yeah this is why JP scares me, sure he makes a lot of valid points but he's also clearly deeply religious and he's clever enough to present Christianity in a way that's palatable to otherwise secular young men. That makes me VERY nervous.

In that sense I think it's justified to make a wholesale judgment on Peterson and "execute" him just like we did with other harmful figures. If you add things up he's more harmful than he's helpful. It's especially important to communicate this to the audiences that can't make this judgment on their own. Some audiences just need to hear that someone is bad influence and should be avoided and there lies the value of such cancellings and executions.

Settle down Chairman Mao.

 

[scorpiomover]

Those are exactly the sort of gymnastics I'd expect from someone with high IQ. "The world isn't built for average => I'm above average => My higher than average capacity to solve problems makes it harder for me to solve problems => I therefore level up faster and am even more capable than my IQ would imply.

Western governments changed the school system.

Spoiler

Public schools used to focus on teaching soft skills that most people would need, like cooking (home economics), DIY (shop) and basic civic lessons like how to act at a mixed dance. Hard skills like maths and science, were considered vocational, i.e. only relevant to those in the industries that used them, and only would be taught to the more promising students, who might specialise in those areas.

Then in the 1960s, the schools switched to focussing mostly on hard skills like maths, science and computing, making them mandatory for everyone. Soft skills like cooking, basic DIY and how to act at a dance, were quickly made optional, then looked on as a negative, and then removed from the curriculum altogether.

Think about how many millions of people want to go into STEM. For over 20 years, I have heard people say that they can't get a decent coder. When I asked them about the numbers of coders, they usually replied that they can get a coder, but can't get a good one.

Divorces, 80% of which were instigated by women, rose like crazy. Women became much more dissatisfied with their male partners, because their guys were not taught how to behave.

DIY accidents rose astronomically. Home DIY was made illegal in the UK as a result.

High-IQ people tend to be naturally quick learners at the hard skills like maths & science, and tend to be slow learners at the soft skills like cooking, DIY and dating.

So in the old system, they learned the skills they needed, and weren't over-burdened with having to learn maths & science very slowly.

In the new system, they had to accept being taught at the speed that the average person would take to learn maths and science, which made maths and science very boring for them, unless they could transfer to an advanced class. They would also be held back by lack of education in basic soft skills, even though their grandparents were taught those same things.

Is the world built for people with poor problem-solving ability?

Modern society is designed with the average person in mind.

It's like saying an adult who gets placed in daycare will become much more competent because the daycare is not built for them.

Kids who grow up having to make their own dinner and their own amusement, become adults that find it easier to live alone, than most people would.

Now if you made that same argument but for neurodivergence? I could agree that that's how it works for some individuals.

Studies into neuroplasticity in older people shows that often, situational motivation is key for that neuroplasticity to develop. The same biological principles of brain development should be the same for un-common (divergent) neural skills to develop in children as well.

There are some things that I do agree make high IQ difficult. I experience high abstract engagement needs and this can make it difficult to connect with people at times. I want challenging conversations. But this isn't IQ alone, as there are many people with high IQ who don't have this issue. More than likely I have attentional difficulties and some social maladjustment.

Ben Franklin is quoted as saying "Failure to prepare is preparing for failure." if you prepare well, then the desired result is going to occur a lot of the time.

Spoiler

If you want very abstract and challenging conversations, you just have to learn where they are common, go there, and learn how to encourage other people to express themselves more abstractly and challenge you more in conversation with you.

The way I am expressing myself is key, because if you wish to do things that will achieve an end result, you have to focus on the end result, not interim theories. So if what you want is a challenging conversation, then you aim to do whatever will increase the chances of the other person challenging you.

If that requires insulting people, then you'll do that. If that requires asking questions of other people, you'll do that.

But don't just pin it on high IQ, or you'll miss out on all the low-IQ people who are very challenging, and can happily discuss very abstract problems in terms of analogies to things they are very familiar with.

 

[scorpiomover]

It depends on your point of reference.

My basic assumption is that if it weren't for JP, these people would latch onto Musk, Trump, Tate, Shapiro etc..

In that case, they're seeking male role models like a teenage girl wants a boyfriend. If there are no good ones around, they'll still take a bad one home. So the only sensible choice is to make sure there are plenty of good male role models around.

There's no point comparing him to people you think are good role models because they had no shot at securing this audience.

I also don't think it's luck. He fits the niche better than anyone else I can name. He's lucky he fits the niche I guess, but it's not just chance that he filled it.

He's popular, because he's one of the successful ones who benefitted from the current world order, who is arguing against things that would unnecessarily make things more difficult for many of those who "fell through the cracks in the net" of modern society, and who are struggling as it is.

I know about him for his antiwoke takes and his self-help. Compared to his alternatives who are also largely antiwoke, JP is better because he also improves lives. He literally encourages positive masculinity in an audience that desperately needs it.

Which conservative daddy figure would you prefer to lead these men over JP?

I think we need a very diplomatic person to explain the anti-woke position to woke liberals in a way they would be willing to accept.

 

[Old Things]

I'm above average

I don't think this was part of @scorpiomover's point.

Explain it to me?

They never made the post about themself. You seem to be assuming they are talking about themself as if to say, "oh poor me" but I didn't get the impressing that is what they were on about at all.

And if they were not talking about themself, then your criticism doesn't really hold a lot of water.

 

[Hadoblado]

Right - I don't think I required them to make that specific claim but I'll admit what I wrote comes off pretty stupid if they don't think they're part of the club. My overwhelming impression is that they do consider themselves smarter than average but that might be from context beyond the scope of this thread.

I stand by what I said, it is the sort of favourable rationalisation that characterises smart people meta. The implication that it applies to how Scorpio sees themselves is admittedly shaky.

 

[scorpiomover]

The implication that it applies to how Scorpio sees themselves is admittedly shaky.

I described one of their possible reasons for choosing someone to follow.

Admittedly, that isn't how some woke liberals describe them. But since woke liberals aren't the ones doing the choosing, how woke liberals would describe them is irrelevant to their reasons for choosing JP or anyone else they choose to follow.

What determines THEIR choices, is how THEY perceive themselves, and NOT how woke liberals perceive them. How they see themselves, is probably that they are rational and moral, and thus that their choice to select JP, is also rational and moral.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

My basic assumption is that if it weren't for JP, these people would latch onto Musk, Trump, Tate, Shapiro etc.. There's no point comparing him to people you think are good role models because they had no shot at securing this audience.

You know what? That's a good assumption. In that sense JP is the best they can readily accept and I am a JP supporter if it means having the best available authority figure for conservative males.

When you characterise JP as an apologist for Hitler, I think that's defining someone by the least charitable interpretation of their most controversial moments. I don't know of JP because of what he says about Hitler, I know about him for his antiwoke takes and his self-help. Compared to his alternatives who are also largely antiwoke, JP is better because he also improves lives. He literally encourages positive masculinity in an audience that desperately needs it.

That certainly wasn't great of me. I overdid the comparison. And Shapiro plus other figures are much bigger apologists of bad stuff anyway.

Which conservative daddy figure would you prefer to lead these men over JP?

When you put it like that I agree. We need JP to lead these sissy bois They need a figure that's more center leaning, emotionally fragile, intellectual and balanced so it's the best thing we can get. Let's just hope he doesn't get worse because he's a proper culture warrior now.

 

[ZenRaiden]

They serve as inspiration to me.
Musk shows that we have alternative to ordinary space travel ideas.
Whether he does it right or wrong, whether its good or bad or works or not, is besides the point.
There is not much one can change in rocket science though as its basically very difficult goal where you have to go all in, type of strategy.
Or put it other way you have to put all your eggs in one basket, and watch that thing take off and blow up or work.
Or put another way just try out rather expensive sub optimal creative strategies in order to perhaps hit gold.
But oh boy good luck outwitting almost 100 years of engineering in rocket science.
There is some serious math and physics and engineering acumen there, so when guys like Musk walk up in front of people and tell them a rather crazy tale about Mars being colonized as if its scifi its inspiring at best, but ludicrous in reality.
For instance looking at Russia rocket program, we can see how simple rockets built with good engineering can be cheap and good.
Unfortunately there is not that much more room in creativity yet.
Perhaps if many more nations had guys like Musk we could have a decent pattern and real idea what can be done here.
Bronson, Bezos, and Musk are hardly going to be more successful than NASA or ROSKOSMOS, but the investment they made to look for alternatives is outstanding idea.
Commerce and big ass projects like space program have probably got a huge future.
Hopefully not like NOSTROMO from alien.
But who knows what the future brings.
I say cheer on, but don't get sucked in and duped by investment simply because someone says nice things. We shall see what these ideas are made off 40 years from now.
People live in fairy tales if they think guys like Musk can single handed solve it all and be cheaper, but the effort put into this is important.

When it comes to Trump the more I know about the guy the more I see why people hate him, but I also realize how far he took it and realize that the crazy mofo can serve as inspiration too.
He is full of him self and basically a product of the modern world, but the scary and funny part is that it just simply works.
I doubt there are many people who would actually want his life, but nevertheless its all good as long as people don't lose the sight of who they are in the process of making money.

JP is great. He is also inspiring talker.
I watched lots of his videos and I can see that they serve as good inspiration.
Unfortunately its just that.
The solutions he provides are not revolutionary, but basic, but they do work.
He is not there to hold peoples hands, but many people don't have that inspiration.
For me its hit or miss.

The way I would describe these people, especially Peterson and Musk is they are the retail end of intellectual world. Not in bad way, but in way they are there just compressing and pulling concepts together to push a digestible and useful product.

There job is not pioneering or exploring or making new ideas real.
JP thus is talking about Jung or Nietzsche or Pinocchio etc. for this reason.
He provides background and reasons for this knowledge and its utility.

He lets people to do the work.

Einsteins, Max Planks, Mozarts, Ernest Machs, Heideggers, Spinozas, Descarteses, Voltairs, Bohrs, Rutherfords, Newtons, Liebnizes, Kants, Godels, Curies, Brauns, Feynmans, Freuds, Jungsare the ones who dig the shafts for the deep wells.

Interestingly many of these people are direct or indirect off springs of vienna cricle and the austro hungarian empire and germany.
There seemed to have been this golden period of pure intellectual heavy weights for some odd cultural reasons.
Perhaps I am wrong. But it seems that way looking at the names and age they did the best of work.

Unfortunately we are in a world where the retail end is more important of intellect both for livelihood, and general happiness.
We also don't know how to reignite this beautiful idea of pure intellectual heavy weights, in such ways as in case of Wittgenstein or Adler or others.

I am pretty sure its part stability, part, wide spread high quality education, part culture inclination, and part utility and part necessity that gave birth to this. Part money.
Many of these people essentially had the money and means to pursue their ends.
I feel though as if people are rather dumb in thinking this is all simply a single dimension thing. Its multifacet product that took perhaps 100 years of cumulative change to bloom into the spring of intellect the world has not seen since Greece.
The main point is to realize that its a iceberg thing. These names stand on 1000s of backs of hard working scientists and intellectual heavy weights. They simply had the punch to do it properly and earn the champion belt.

Today we are flooded with information, but we don't actually have even time to digest it, so retail end of intellectual world is there to chew this stuff for us and feed it to us in digestible chunks that we can like more and make sense of more.

 

[scorpiomover]

I said conservative daddy figure. As in conservatives worship him.

If they are seeking out a parental figure, then they are seriously lacking in information which parents are supposed to impart.

Teachers are in place of the parents (in loco parentis), which means that public education includes anything that the parents are supposed to teach their kids, but clearly haven't.

Liberalism's values include public education for all, which means that liberals accepted the responsibility of making sure that teachers taught them whatever lacks in knowledge they are seeking, but didn't.

What do you think are the consequences in society when public education fails to fulfil its primary responsibility? What do you think should be done to address those issues?

Jordan Peterson is also adored by young men looking for someone their idea of masculinity will allow them to look up to, but I think JP actually took care of his flock somewhat. He pretty kooky now though.

JP is an academic. He's the opposite of the right-wing perception of masculinity. However, he is someone who is willing to teach them some of the things that parents and teachers are supposed to impart, but didn't.

If your education had left you totally unprepared for how to manage your bills, and someone taught you how to manage your bills, and you suddenly found that your life went massively better because you actually are able to pay the rent now, wouldn't you be pretty happy with that guy?

 

[Hadoblado]

You stretch definitions a lot.

Lacking parental figure != lacking information.
Loco parentis != public education imparts everything parents haven't
Liberals advocating for public education != liberals accepting responsibility for what is taught.

Then you ask me three rhetorical questions and I don't know where you're trying to take me. To even begin to engage with you I would have to either accept that we're having seven simultaneous conversations, or accept this framing and then work backward to it when whatever you're trying to convince me of doesn't follow from how I see things.

What is the belief I hold that you are trying to correct?

 

[scorpiomover]

You stretch definitions a lot.

Lacking parental figure != lacking information.
Loco parentis != public education imparts everything parents haven't
Liberals advocating for public education != liberals accepting responsibility for what is taught.

Then you ask me three rhetorical questions and I don't know where you're trying to take me. To even begin to engage with you I would have to either accept that we're having seven simultaneous conversations, or accept this framing and then work backward to it when whatever you're trying to convince me of doesn't follow from how I see things.

What is the belief I hold that you are trying to correct?

That you think that it's reasonable to make bland abductive statements that imply extreme condescenscion.

1) Such as saying that they must be looking for a "daddy figure" which makes them sound childish, when you could have used a non-judgemental term like "male role model". Was it necessary to imply childishness?

2) Such as saying that they have interest in JP is because they are looking for a daddy figure, without giving any sort of rational explanation of how being interested in JP => looking for a daddy figure. Are people who study relativity using Einstein as a daddy figure?

Would it not make sense to use reason, logic and evidence to deduce what their psyche must be doing, to be so interested in what JP has to say?

Would it not make sense to remain impartial?

Could you have civility between people without these 2 things?

Could you have a rational and useful conversation without these 2 things?

If we ignore the "they're the evil ones" bias, and treat them the same way as you'd treat left-wingers, or just treat everyone the same, and then we also consider matters as to how they really could happen rationally, you'll find that I'm very open to that sort of thing, and often have changed my mind as a result of such an approach.

 

[Hadoblado]

I am arguing against the leftist take and for that, I phrase it in leftist terms. Language is a toolbox. I successfully convinced a leftist that JP isn't that bad within a framework they hold, when previously they were comparing him to Hitler.

I'm sorry if what I said offended you, but dialogue between perspectives can't happen with this level of language policing. If you disagree that JP acts as a father surrogate, by all means, dismantle the position, but I'm not responsible for packaging everything I say towards every possible listener at all times.

 

[scorpiomover]

I am arguing against the leftist take and for that, I phrase it in leftist terms. Language is a toolbox. I successfully convinced a leftist that JP isn't that bad within a framework they hold, when previously they were comparing him to Hitler.

I commend that you have a sense of reason and justice within you. It's still not reasonable to talk like that. It might be understandable in those posts in which you were arguing with someone taking a more extreme position. But you didn't seem to be doing that in post #6 of this thread.

I'm sorry if what I said offended you, but dialogue between perspectives can't happen with this level of language policing.

Language is a toolbox.

Spoiler

If someone is not making sense, they're not using the reason and logic tools in their language toolbox.
If someone is unnecessarily degrading language, they're not using the diplomacy, persuasion and rhetoric tools in their language toolbox.
If someone is not making sense when they are making claims, they're not using the decision-making tools in their language toolbox.

What is the point of a toolbox whose tools are never used?

If you disagree that JP acts as a father surrogate, by all means, dismantle the position, but I'm not responsible for packaging everything I say towards every possible listener at all times.

Do you think that all those women who bought and read 50 Shades because Oprah recommended it in her book club, are women with mommy issues? I don't see a basis to even begin the suggestion.

 

[Hadoblado]

You're wrong that I'm not diplomatic. You're wrong that I never use gentle words.

I'm sorry but I can't take you seriously when you just make shit up like this. Just block me if my words are so offensive.

Do you think that all those women who bought and read 50 Shades because Oprah recommended it in her book club, are women with mommy issues? I don't see a basis to even begin the suggestion.

This is the bones of a decent point. But defending this position doesn't interest me (so I won't). I pick and choose my battles, and I don't think this is one that will result in changed minds. You are free to attack the position all you want, but anyone who believes that JP is a surrogate father figure won't be convinced. For a few years there the internet was submerged in JP content - beliefs that people hold have an enormous prior that won't be outweighed by a single conversation.