Jordan Peterson

All other historical discussion, ancient or modern, falls here.
Post Reply
andrewcriddle
Posts: 1556
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Jordan Peterson

Post by andrewcriddle » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:10 pm

I've started this thread with reservations because I fear it will become an unprofitable political debate, but I am interested in members views about Peterson's Jungian interpretation of the Bible and other religious texts.

(I wasn't sure whether to put this in Other Texts or General Religius Discussion )

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5238
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Peter Kirby » Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:17 pm

I share your reservations and hope it can stay on topic.

I was sympathetic to his depiction of the somewhat adrift individual, in the absence of religion, grasping on to one or another vessel for a religion substitute which, while not so directly conflicting with the known facts of science as something like traditionalist Christianity does, perhaps falls short in other respects. I understand the perspective that an individual can be too limited, in having the time and perspicacity, to reason things out from first principles, while also being able to benefit from whatever accumulated wisdom there may be in something somewhat older and more durable than a Hollywood production or some recent academic scribbling.

I'm not sure where it can go from there. I know that we've never lived in a golden age, and people have always been as good or bad as ever, whether disregarding their conscience or because some people don't develop one. But I am disappointed with the absence of a shared language of ethical understanding in the 21st century. Someone like Rev Martin Luther King could speak in terms that could have impact and be felt by anyone of that time, even if they rejected that message, and it was couched in the language of religion and of civic duty. I do wonder if we've lost some of the ability to speak and to listen about ethical matters, and to take it as a serious subject of discourse.

A lot of what we have are like the shattered glass of a once beautiful and coherent mosaic. These bits and pieces have been picked up, used as weapons or kept as reminders of certain parts, but we no longer have the whole picture. We know that this or that thing is evil, but we don't know the grammar of good and evil. A lot of us have lost a sense of proportion about it, a way of relating to it and reckoning about it.

A lawyer used to be able to ask a jury if they agreed that it would be better to let 10 guilty men go free, than to let 1 innocent man rot in prison on insufficient evidence. Some decades ago, they could get wide assent to this principle, which is baked into the legal system as requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet now a lawyer can't expect that level of ethical integrity of their jury. Whether such an idea is still held is entirely dependent on the chance that perhaps a single juror is on the jury who still knows the responsibility that they carry. Neither a commitment to reason nor a sense of mercy seem as important as they once may have.

To bring this back around... is there an alternative?

Because, left to our own devices, we seem to be fabricating our own mythologies at rapid clip, but they're of a rather cheap quality, as if engineered in a vat to win in a memetic arms race, without any concern for the nutrition, health, and well-being of the person it's sold to, or the society of which they are a part. There are still a refreshing number of people who have values that they don't intend to compromise for the sake of whatever brand of cause they've latched onto for a little sense of meaning, but it seems to have fallen by the wayside for some.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by John T » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:21 pm

I watch just a few minutes of one of his lectures and read portions of his lectures.
He seemed very sad while reflecting on, (how can I paraphrase his sentiments?) how the Marxist atheist presupposition for an utopian future was killed by that evil capitalist Ronald Reagan. He claimed to have nightmares about Reagan blowing up the world. Oh, how he longs for the good ole days of the expanding communist movement before Reagan.

His interpretation of the Bible is just as convoluted but hey, this is America, if you can make a buck shucking your wares to liberal suckers, go for it.

In short, a philosopher in the mold of Socrates he is not but rather a sophist in the mold of Protagoras' (c. 490-c. 420 B.C.). The sophistry of relativism which has no objective rights or wrongs. If it makes you feel good, it is good.

Here is just one example of his psychobabble nonsense.

One of his rules for life in the pursuit of happiness is; "Do not try to rescue someone who does not want to be rescued...."
This convoluted selfish morality calls for the non-intervention of suicidal and the mentally ill.

This live and let die view is in direct contrast to Christianity when Jesus said: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I have come to call not the righteous but sinners." Mark 2:17.



Sad, so sad.

John T
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

jude77
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 6:15 am
Location: The Beach

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by jude77 » Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:52 pm

Peter Kirby wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:17 pm
A lot of what we have are like the shattered glass of a once beautiful and coherent mosaic. These bits and pieces have been picked up, used as weapons or kept as reminders of certain parts, but we no longer have the whole picture. We know that this or that thing is evil, but we don't know the grammar of good and evil. A lot of us have lost a sense of proportion about it, a way of relating to it and reckoning about it.


Because, left to our own devices, we seem to be fabricating our own mythologies at rapid clip, but they're of a rather cheap quality, as if engineered in a vat to win in a memetic arms race, without any concern for the nutrition, health, and well-being of the person it's sold to, or the society of which they are a part. There are still a refreshing number of people who have values that they don't intend to compromise for the sake of whatever brand of cause they've latched onto for a little sense of meaning, but it seems to have fallen by the wayside for some.
These two quotes are worth memorizing. Excellent, just excellent.

jude77
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 6:15 am
Location: The Beach

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by jude77 » Sat Jun 16, 2018 1:59 pm

John T wrote:
Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:21 pm

One of his rules for life in the pursuit of happiness is; "Do not try to rescue someone who does not want to be rescued...."
This convoluted selfish morality calls for the non-intervention of suicidal and the mentally ill.

This live and let die view is in direct contrast to Christianity when Jesus said: "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I have come to call not the righteous but sinners." Mark 2:17.

Sad, so sad.

John T
You have spoken well and wisely. I spent 40 years of my life as a psychologist and worked with more than a few addicts. Rarely did I meet one who wanted to be rescued, but the ones who found their way out of the hole were always deeply thankful for the ones with the lifeline. Thank you for your kind and caring spirit.

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by John T » Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:14 pm

According to C.G. Jung, (an early colleague of Sigmund Freud) the attitudes of the ego are invariably partial and prejudicial, even at the extreme utterly defective. In dreams, the unconscious presents to the ego alternative perspectives that compensate these maladaptive or dysfunctional attitudes. The unconscious challenges the ego seriously to consider these alternative perspectives.

http://www.jungnewyork.com/what-is-jung ... ysis.shtml

Freud's perverted theories on dreams have been rightly debunked by modern science and tossed in to the ash heap of history along with phrenology.

Yet, because Freud was an atheist he is still held in high regard in the small circle of anti-religion Jungian psychologists. I suspect that Peterson feels that anyone who thinks that a dream can have religious insight is actually maladaptive and dysfunctional since the dream was actually nothing more than a suppressed expression of sexual drive.

Do I have that about right?
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

andrewcriddle
Posts: 1556
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by andrewcriddle » Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:29 am

John T wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:14 pm
According to C.G. Jung, (an early colleague of Sigmund Freud) the attitudes of the ego are invariably partial and prejudicial, even at the extreme utterly defective. In dreams, the unconscious presents to the ego alternative perspectives that compensate these maladaptive or dysfunctional attitudes. The unconscious challenges the ego seriously to consider these alternative perspectives.

http://www.jungnewyork.com/what-is-jung ... ysis.shtml

Freud's perverted theories on dreams have been rightly debunked by modern science and tossed in to the ash heap of history along with phrenology.

Yet, because Freud was an atheist he is still held in high regard in the small circle of anti-religion Jungian psychologists. I suspect that Peterson feels that anyone who thinks that a dream can have religious insight is actually maladaptive and dysfunctional since the dream was actually nothing more than a suppressed expression of sexual drive.

Do I have that about right?
Peterson is a follower of Jung rather than Freud
Peterson regards dreams as spiritually meaningful.

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5HOhwM7ELY

Andrew Criddle

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by John T » Thu Jun 21, 2018 4:11 pm

andrewcriddle wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:29 am

Peterson regards dreams as spiritually meaningful.
I watched your video link and saw nothing of the sort.
What I did see was incoherent rambling by a man who discards all recent advances in the science behind dreams in order to justify his neurosis along with his notion that theist dreams (past and present) are simply delusional myths.

How do I get back those 9 minutes of wasted time?
For those who would rather spend 9 productive minutes on the meaning of dreams, I recommend the following:

http://time.com/4921605/dreams-meaning/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... -dreaming/
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 5238
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by Peter Kirby » Sun Jun 24, 2018 6:58 pm

Peter Kirby wrote:
Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:17 pm
I was sympathetic to his depiction of the somewhat adrift individual, in the absence of religion, grasping on to one or another vessel for a religion substitute which, while not so directly conflicting with the known facts of science as something like traditionalist Christianity does, perhaps falls short in other respects.
A little bit of a follow-up: here, I am not complimenting Peterson. It doesn't take any particular talent to identify many of these issues. I am also not particularly impressed with Peterson as a writer or academic. I found his prose rather hard to plow through, even by the already rather foggy standards of academic writing.

I rather only recently became vaguely familiar because of the weird media mashup that has resulted from some internet and publishing fame, and I decided to try to slog through the publicly available excerpts on Amazon of the book Maps of Meaning, because I don't like being familiar only at second hand. I expect that most people get things wrong when a topic of controversy is concerned, and I'm usually not disappointed.

With the way that John T here digs into "Jordan Peterson" as some kind of virulent atheist and even (more strangely) a Marxist, while the fourth estate is busy tearing him down with as much aplomb as they put into ripping apart anyone else detected as having betrayed some kind of secular orthodoxy, apparently there is a bit of a cipher here; what people read into it may say more about themselves than the subject.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
John T
Posts: 1069
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Jordan Peterson

Post by John T » Mon Jun 25, 2018 8:07 am

Peter,

Here is a snippet of Peterson's navel-gazing ideology.

"When asked if he believes in God, Peterson responded: "I think the proper response to that is No, but I'm afraid He might exist".[9] Writing for The Spectator, Tim Lott said Peterson draws inspiration from Jung's philosophy of religion, and holds views similar to the Christian existentialism of Søren Kierkegaard and Paul Tillich. Lott also said Peterson has respect for Taoism, as it views nature as a struggle between order and chaos, and posits that life would be meaningless without this duality.[18]"...Wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson

For the record Peter, I do not view Peterson as a virulent (full of hate) atheist/Marxist. Rather, he is a passive neo-atheist or auto-theist. He knows from history that the atheist/communist utopian world can not be obtain by the barrel of the gun or political coercion. He rightly fears that the current post-modern radical neo-Marxist ideology being taught by socialist professors will lead to fascism in America (isn't it already?) and unchecked fascism always leads to war and wholesale slaughter of its citizens.

Peterson's solution? The better path to obtaining the atheist/socialist utopia is through non-violent sophistry that; once we realize we are all gods we will all seek harmony for the collective good of all.

I have little doubt that if Peterson believes Jesus existed at all he sees him merely as a peaceful auto-theist communist that we should emulate.

Tripe.

https://youtu.be/JE5hXeJNRV4

This post was edited (many times) in a futile attempt to clarify the philosophy of a sophist who has very little clarity of thought.
With that said, I have no intention of researching anymore of Peterson's self-delusional videos or lectures.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Post Reply