Jordan Peterson

[Lady Jolanda]

Irrc he was diagnosed with schizophreneia at some point and refused to accept the diagnosis.

I would too if I was going through benzo withdrawal.

Hallucinations and psychosis are known withdrawal symptoms.

That's just bad diagnostics.

Edit: Good diagnostics: re-evaluate after 2 or so years after withdrawal.

 

[TheDeathOfYouAndMe]

Peterson: Get your bedroom tidied bucko


Yeah thanks Jordan, dunno how my life would look without you jibbering the obvious.

Like everyone else on tv/social media he has strings attached to the back of him.

 

[Reason]

I think I answered this already. Considering the extent of the threat that he touts Soviets and Marxists are posing, to have his room dressed in Soviet symbols from top to bottom

I don't think the paintings are going to jump off the wall and strangle him

falls in line with his general psychotic behavior and paranoia

What psychotic behavior?

Irrc he was diagnosed with schizophreneia at some point and refused to accept the diagnosis. Regardless of who he is, it's really sad to see a person who's clearly unwell put book sales and clout over mental health, and to see his family support this and not get him the help he needs

He was misdiagnosed with that while he was detoxing from an anti-anxiety medication that he was prescribed to manage his stress from his wife's cancer diagnosis. Once the bad reaction/withdrawal from benzodiazepines was recognized the diagnosis was withdrawn.

You seem to be very low information on the topic of Peterson.

 

[Enso]

My point was more that....why does it matter even if he was correctly diagnosed. I worked with a schizophrenic guy once and he was great, with his medication you would not have known but he was a little undeveloped emotionally so he would go around telling everyone even though he didn't have to. It's a societal assumption that schizophrenics should be dismissed somehow or are unfit to provide psychological expertise, I would argue completely opposite but society doesn't see it that way.

 

[niar]

Schizophrenia and psychosis can be a transition state it is not always a lifelong illness, they are somewhat common in spiritual circles. A good example of how the medical system treats people in this general area is near death experiences, people come back after dying and say they met god and get sent straight to the psychiatrist that will then tell them they are wrong (I'm not exaggerating there are reports of exactly this). Anyway, my point is that it is not a great idea to render his character bad because he had symptoms of schizophrenia.

No. Schizophreneia is a lifelong illness and when diagnosed, doctors take into account the patient's complete history. I don't know what your credentials are, but I'm inclined to believe that a team of qualified pscyhiatrists are aware of this and took it into account when diagnosing a patient.
I don't quite get what the rest of your message is about. I highly doubt a person who just nearly escaped death is sent straight to the psych ward. Have any citations for this?

Also at no point did I say that his character is bad because of schizophreneia, you're pulling a strawman. He's managing fine to be bad with or without it. I was answering a question Reason posed, explaining that in his case, his obsession with communism/soviets/MLs, could be an expression of his psychosis, supported by the fact that mentally healthy people who hate a culture tend to not fetishize it in their private lives. I could never in a thousand years imagine decorating my house in Nazi flags and SS books, while being vehemently against it in public, for example. That's pretty insane.

There's a difference between discriminating against people with schizophreneia, and a very controversial pundit, not been held responsible for his words by making it clear to the public that he might have a mental illness that disturbs one's perception of reality, and leads to intense paranoia and feelings of persecution, when his whole personna and career are based on speaking out against those he feels he's being persecuted by.

You seem to be very low information on the topic of Peterson.

Probably for the best. Still managed to help a couple of friends see him for what he is, a stupid man's smart man, and disentangle themselves from his cult, so I must be doing something right.

 

[Reason]

No. Schizophreneia is a lifelong illness and when diagnosed, doctors take into account the patient's complete history. I don't know what your credentials are, but I'm inclined to believe that a team of qualified pscyhiatrists are aware of this and took it into account when diagnosing a patient.
I don't quite get what the rest of your message is about. I highly doubt a person who just nearly escaped death is sent straight to the psych ward. Have any citations for this?

Also at no point did I say that his character is bad because of schizophreneia, you're pulling a strawman. He's managing fine to be bad with or without it. I was answering a question Reason posed, explaining that in his case, his obsession with communism/soviets/MLs, could be an expression of his psychosis, supported by the fact that mentally healthy people who hate a culture tend to not fetishize it in their private lives. I could never in a thousand years imagine decorating my house in Nazi flags and SS books, while being vehemently against it in public, for example. That's pretty insane.

There's a difference between discriminating against people with schizophreneia, and a very controversial pundit, not been held responsible for his words by making it clear to the public that he might have a mental illness that disturbs one's perception of reality, and leads to intense paranoia and feelings of persecution, when his whole personna and career are based on speaking out against those he feels he's being persecuted by.

I see we are still stuck on the notion that you can only own soviet artwork if you approve of the Soviet Union or are obsessed by it. Wait until you find out that there are large swaths of people who read books they disagree with, own art painted by people they disagree with, and most "psychotic" of all remain friends with people they disagree with.

Probably for the best. Still managed to help a couple of friends see him for what he is, a stupid man's smart man, and disentangle themselves from his cult, so I must be doing something right.

> You know hardly anything about the man other than what opinions have been assigned to you and yet you're out convincing people not to listen to him.

This is why when i'm talking with radical types I can't fully defend democracy. I can say as Winston Churchill did that it's the least awful system we have available but I can't ever say it's good. Persuasion, not knowledge or understanding determines outcomes which is demonstrated everyday by people condemning others despite having no clue who they are or what they represent. The television assigns the opinion that a person is XYZ, and the public persists in maintaining that opinion despite any further inputs.

 

[Wyote]

 

[InfernoMink]

I used to at minimum listen to this dude if the YT suggested a vid, but after his tweet about how society is pushing overweight models on men, he’s just another human full of emotional mess, to me. This dude was triggered by an overweight model. Sorry, you can’t be an intellectual I can respect, if you can’t keep your ignorant feelings to yourself. He talks about how society is trying to normalize obesity. No it’s not. What society is trying to do is prevent the chubby kids in school from being bullied because the world doesn’t see their worth.

 

[Wyote]

He talks about how society is trying to normalize obesity. No it’s not. What society is trying to do is prevent the chubby kids in school from being bullied because the world doesn’t see their worth.

I can see the value in both your and his perspective.
Valuing physical health is important for a lot of different reasons, and so is valuing mental health.
There's a reasonable middle ground there somewhere.

 

[Jexocuha]

Do you guys think he's an INFJ?

I strongly resonate with him for some reasons.

Although I am not a fan of Jordan Peterson(and I have read is 12 Rules for Life and watched a lot Youtube videos of his interviews, debates, etc.), I do think he is without a doubt an interesting and thoughtful public personality, who's work and ideas I believe are an important voice marker in the cultural zeitgeist, cosmic unconscious, of our current early 21st-century times. That being said, I do not think he is an INFJ, but an ENFJ. Why? 1) His personality and belief system has it's basis on Extroverted Feeling values first and foremost. It's basis is on social-economic hierarchies and is justified in the end by Extroverted Sensing based evidence. A good example is his infamous lobster anecdote, where the more dominant lobster expresses it's strength and health, while the inferior lobster is visibly turned over on it's back and shows it's weakness. That's the crux of his worldview. The tertiary function in MBTI theory represents the manner in which a person thinks, it's the overall furthest expression of the dominant function's initial premise of identity. So when you take social hierarchies(Fe dominant) coupled with sensory evidence(visible displays of attention/affirmation of health/beauty/strength/wealth), you get the dominant and tertiary functions of an ENFJ. 2) He expresses Ni in a very fluid and natural way. INFJs take Ni-seriously, and don't directly express it so casually and easily. Jordan Petersen's Maps of Meaning text is an excellent example of raw Ni auxiliary at play. He understands the cosmic unconscious of other people very well, and can put it into words. INFJs live in the cosmic unconscious, they are the cosmic unconscious, and present themselves as an "anybody"(Fe-aux). Notice too how when Petersen is questioned about his faith in God and the supernatural, he is hesitant to make a serious personal affirmation. He says he believes that belief in God and the supernatural (something to the effect of) is "good for a functioning and healthy society". 3) His personality is one that espouses a role of a "father-like" figure to young 21-century Western men who feel lost and confused about their role as society is going through rapid and extensive social changes. Popular INFJ figures tend to be much less concerned with maintaining or even adjusting social hierarchies as a predominant mission, however some will definitely be driven and speak passionately about such things. I think INFJs are much more connected to staying true to the abstract ideals of their beliefs, and will try to communicate with Fe, in an interpersonal manner, about such things. Political figures such as Ron Paul and Marrianne Williamson come to mind as popular/public INFJs, when compared to Jordan Peterson, the difference is quite easy to see. INFJs support Ni much more with Ti-tertiary principles which are still abstract and language-based, and not so visually immediate as superior-verses-inferior lobsters. Other non-political public INFJs are much more far out there by using Fe to express extravagant theories and imaginative ideas in philosophy and art(e.g. Ken Wilber, Jiddu Krishnamurti, and Matthew Barney).

I'm not a fan of Jordan Peterson simply because he doesn't speak to me. I honestly believe he is excellent for people who are particularly white, male, and having a difficult time making sense of the world as it is changing here and now. That's not a bad thing either. I also think he is an excellent example of the importance of personality and how far the art of personality can take a person's career, to becoming a real voice in the world. ENxJs are master's at this; personality is an Art. But overall, I find Peterson's ideas to be interesting but empty; they are much more culturally driven and directed for a particular place, time, and people of history, for sure.

To end my rant, I'm posting a video that I think is a fair critique of Jordan Peterson, his work, and an interesting comparison of Peterson to T.S. Elliot.

 

[aeon]

there is a lot of scientific evidence saying that specifically cane sugar has no nutritional value.

carbohydrates—including sugars of all kinds, as well as starches, and fibers—are non-essential foodstuffs with absolutely zero nutritive value whatsoever.

Cheers,
Ian

 

[Wyote]

I'm not a fan of Jordan Peterson simply because he doesn't speak to me.

Who speaks to you?
I think you make solid fair points about Peterson.
I try to absorb many different perspectives so I'm always interested in other voices out there.

 

[Jexocuha]

Who speaks to you?
I think you make solid fair points about Peterson.
I try to absorb many different perspectives so I'm always interested in other voices out there.

Quite a few people do and don't "speak to me", and by that I mean I am a fan of their work and can identify with a significant portion of their worldview, in varying degrees. As for public figures/personalities, there aren't any contemporary ones in the media today that I rev with in the same way as fans of Jordan Peterson do. Jordan Peterson, and has explicitly revealed himself, has a particular targeted audience in mind. That's not just my feeling about his work; that's a well-known general consensus. So although I like a lot of what he says, as well as disagree with a lot, I also know that I don't fit his targeted audience. I'm a big fan of Terrence McKenna and recently am going back and reviewing his words and seeing parallels with the current times. Thus McKenna would be like "my Jordan Petersen", in a way. The popular contemporary personalities that I like and share the most common sociopolitical and cultural views with are Bill Maher, Joe Rogan, and Penn Jillette. I also watch a lot of first amendment audits and constitutional review videos on my free time.

 

[Wyote]

Thanks for elaborating @Jexocuha
I'm a fan of those you mentioned as well

 

[aeon]

I'm a big fan of Terrence McKenna

Brutha’ of anutha’ mutha’.

The most incredible speaker I have ever experienced in person. Living magic. A proper shaman. Not kidding.

Respect,
Ian

 

[Ginny]

Could anyone explain the hype about Jordan Peterson without my having to trigger myself by listening to this SoB? I did it a couple of times years ago and my body physically rejected his way of thinking and speaking. Not planning to subject myself to such torture again without good reason.

However, I cannot expect to broaden my horizons without hearing different views, so I am open to listening to people I can trust about what they think of him because I only remember him as entitled, arrogant and just plain wrong.

 

[Work]

Not knowing much about him other than what I try not to read...it seems he is a Jungian who has views and beliefs on gender that were calcified in the 1940's. It is reminiscent of the inherent racism that pervaded early Jungian thought that Jungians have endeavored to think their way out of ever since.

 

[Roses In The Vineyard]

I'll say that my opinions of Jordan has improved over the past couple of months.

 

[Reason]

Could anyone explain the hype about Jordan Peterson without my having to trigger myself by listening to this SoB? I did it a couple of times years ago and my body physically rejected his way of thinking and speaking. Not planning to subject myself to such torture again without good reason.

However, I cannot expect to broaden my horizons without hearing different views, so I am open to listening to people I can trust about what they think of him because I only remember him as entitled, arrogant and just plain wrong.

I don't know if you've ever specified which quote of his that bothered you so much.

 

[philostam]

I think Peterson has good things to say, although personally I'm getting a bit tired of him. He repeats himself a lot. I think his "peak" was a few years ago. I rarely watch/listed/read what he has to say anymore.

Definitely a good influence on me overall.