5 ms·
How is telling people to use their agency and take action to improve their own lives instead of complaining reactionary sophistry? Your criticism seems incredib
by asabjorn 9y ago
How is telling people to use their agency and take action to improve their own lives instead of complaining reactionary sophistry? Your criticism seems incredibly off-base.
- danharaj 9y agoThat is an incredibly selective sampling of his views and you know it. That's how.
- juliangoldsmith 9y agoWhat are his views, then?
- AlexCoventry 9y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620
- juliangoldsmith 9y agoSo, don't allow yourself to be manipulated by guilt over something you have no power over? That seems reasonable to me.
- AlexCoventry 9y agoIt exemplifies the ignorance of structural inequality underlying his approach.
- juliangoldsmith 9y agoIt's not ignorance, it's rejection of the concept.
- AlexCoventry 9y agoNo, it's rejection of the concept that he needs to pay attention to it.
- juliangoldsmith 9y agoI wouldn't expect someone who rejects the premise of structural inequality to pay attention to structural equality.
- AlexCoventry 9y agoHe actually doesn't reject the premise. He throws around a lot of chaff about other characteristics on which to distinguish people, without addressing the issue that the groups he's ridiculing postmodernists and marxists for being concerned about actually do suffer structural inequality, then ends by saying that he's not obliged to care about the historical circumstances which have favored him in the development of that inequality.
- pacala 9y ago‘So you’re saying ...’
- agota 9y agoIt would be more helpful if you'd point out the views you disagree with instead of being vague.
- asabjorn 9y agoWhich other views does he have that you think proves your point? Saying that I know something without saying what you believe I know is not helpful in assisting me in understanding what you are communicating.
- AlexCoventry 9y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620
- asabjorn 9y agoPersonally I am a bit on the fence about his arguments as these are complex phenomena, but it is not obvious to me how this is sophistry. Why do you think this is an example of him using fallacious arguments with the intention of deceiving (sophistry)? I'll dig a bit more into why I don't think it is clear. This is one of a series of lectures where Jordan Peterson argue against the postmodernist and marxist tendency to define people by identity groups, and defining a oppressor/oppressed hierarchy between those identity groups. The core goal of his argument is to show that this post-modernist thought pattern is similar to marxist thought patterns around identity groups and oppression. He argues that this thought pattern is oversimplified as a person can belong to countless different identity groups, and that identity groups themselves does not properly account for individual differences within the group. He argues that oppression hierarchies between identity groups are meaningless in describing individual circumstances because it is a univariant analysis that doesn't account for the complexity inherent in the problem. He argues that this thought pattern was/is a catastrophe in all communist countries where it has been applied and has lead to deaths of millions of people. He also argues that this thought pattern suppress the very mechanisms of free expression and ideal of equal opportunity that has made the western culture successful. In the end he seems to suggest working hard for equality of opportunity instead of removing opportunity using identity group oppressor/oppressed hierarchies. I would love to see a well-reasoned counter-argument to this viewpoint.
- AlexCoventry 9y ago
- mundo 9y agoNot according to the article we're discussing. > In his videos, he analyzes classic and biblical texts, he eviscerates identity politics and political correctness and, most important, he delivers stern fatherly lectures to young men on how to be honorable, upright and self-disciplined.
- j4ship 9y agoWell that message is clouded in vague phrases ... not that he cant give examples, but in general its sophist, i guessing this technique allows you engage with a broader audience. I dont think he uses it for lack of evidence, instead he uses it so he can invoke emotions to several different people at one. I understand criticizing it , as its seen as cunning trick, not strait speak. In reality all good speakers use it, and criticizing it is just jealously usually. Unless you're Orwell and then you would denounce the use of it entirely.