5 ms·

Which 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 assistin

Which 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 ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620
- asabjorn 9y ago
  Personally 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
    That full excerpt is an extremely ignorant representation of postmodernism, marxism, and Western culture, and the part I pointed to tops it off by saying he's completely justified in his ignorance. I have a lot of problems with postmodernism, some of which he raises here, but its motivations can't be understood divorced from colonial politics, which is how he tries to present it here. In many ways, his presentation exemplifies exactly the kind of ignorance postmodernism was developed to combat. And his claim that Marxism led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people, and that Western liberal values stand in opposition to that, ignores the hundreds of millions of graves Western society is built on (I don't know where the two World Wars fit into his worldview, just for starters), and the enormous economic pressure Marxist countries were under as a result of the aggressive resistance and suppression they faced from Western countries, from 1917 onwards.
    - asabjorn 9y ago
      > That full excerpt is an extremely ignorant representation of postmodernism, marxism, and Western culture, and the part I pointed to tops it off by saying he's completely justified in his ignorance. Lets handle one thing at a time. What are some specific examples of where you think he gets postmodernism wrong and why? > And his claim that Marxism led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people, and that Western liberal values stand in opposition to that, ignores the hundreds of millions of graves Western society is built on (I don't know where the two World Wars fit into his worldview, just for starters) Western society has definitely had a lot of external aggression through war and colonialism. However, I think Jordan Peterson is more focused on the war on your own society and its social structures. Marxism argues that the old ways of organizing society became a block--a fetter--on the potential for further developments in production. And the conflict could only end, as Marx and Engels put it starkly in The Communist Manifesto, "in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes." In order to facilitate this revolutionary reconstitution marxist countries have enforced identity politics in a way that led to the deaths of millions of people and has necessitated policies of thought control where 1/3 of the population spies on the other 2/3 to keep everyone in line. Because of this I think that although you are making a good point, you are talking about external violence while Jordan Peterson is talking about internal violence inflicted to cause a revolutionary reconstitution. > and the enormous economic pressure Marxist countries were under as a result of the aggressive resistance and suppression they faced from Western countries, from 1917 onwards. Communism in practice appears to fail in promoting work ethics and motivation, and that is more likely to be the biggest contributor to the fall of this system. For example, in a study conducted in the former USSR, over 50% of the work force admitted to drinking alcohol while on the job. Furthermore, unbeknownst to the communist party, nearly 40% chose to work a second job privately to attain more wealth. https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/communism-computing-china/workethic.html https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/commu...

AlexCoventry 9y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbDggKqt3KA#t=620

asabjorn 9y ago
Personally 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
  That full excerpt is an extremely ignorant representation of postmodernism, marxism, and Western culture, and the part I pointed to tops it off by saying he's completely justified in his ignorance. I have a lot of problems with postmodernism, some of which he raises here, but its motivations can't be understood divorced from colonial politics, which is how he tries to present it here. In many ways, his presentation exemplifies exactly the kind of ignorance postmodernism was developed to combat. And his claim that Marxism led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people, and that Western liberal values stand in opposition to that, ignores the hundreds of millions of graves Western society is built on (I don't know where the two World Wars fit into his worldview, just for starters), and the enormous economic pressure Marxist countries were under as a result of the aggressive resistance and suppression they faced from Western countries, from 1917 onwards.
  - asabjorn 9y ago
    > That full excerpt is an extremely ignorant representation of postmodernism, marxism, and Western culture, and the part I pointed to tops it off by saying he's completely justified in his ignorance. Lets handle one thing at a time. What are some specific examples of where you think he gets postmodernism wrong and why? > And his claim that Marxism led to the deaths of hundreds of millions of people, and that Western liberal values stand in opposition to that, ignores the hundreds of millions of graves Western society is built on (I don't know where the two World Wars fit into his worldview, just for starters) Western society has definitely had a lot of external aggression through war and colonialism. However, I think Jordan Peterson is more focused on the war on your own society and its social structures. Marxism argues that the old ways of organizing society became a block--a fetter--on the potential for further developments in production. And the conflict could only end, as Marx and Engels put it starkly in The Communist Manifesto, "in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes." In order to facilitate this revolutionary reconstitution marxist countries have enforced identity politics in a way that led to the deaths of millions of people and has necessitated policies of thought control where 1/3 of the population spies on the other 2/3 to keep everyone in line. Because of this I think that although you are making a good point, you are talking about external violence while Jordan Peterson is talking about internal violence inflicted to cause a revolutionary reconstitution. > and the enormous economic pressure Marxist countries were under as a result of the aggressive resistance and suppression they faced from Western countries, from 1917 onwards. Communism in practice appears to fail in promoting work ethics and motivation, and that is more likely to be the biggest contributor to the fall of this system. For example, in a study conducted in the former USSR, over 50% of the work force admitted to drinking alcohol while on the job. Furthermore, unbeknownst to the communist party, nearly 40% chose to work a second job privately to attain more wealth. https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/communism-computing-china/workethic.html https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/commu...