5 ms·

To be clear, Peterson's commentary is not original. M. Scott Peck, the Buddha, and literally 100s of other philosophers and psychologists have shared similar i

To be clear, Peterson's commentary is not original. M. Scott Peck, the Buddha, and literally 100s of other philosophers and psychologists have shared similar insights. Remarkably, those thinkers managed to share this insight without offending half the population in order to drive book sales and line their pockets. tldr; there are better sources of this idea than Mr. Peterson.

cgmg 9y ago
> To be clear, Peterson's commentary is not original. M. Scott Peck, the Buddha, and literally 100s of other philosophers and psychologists have shared similar insights. Remarkably, those thinkers managed to share this insight without offending half the population in order to drive book sales and line their pockets. What point are you trying to make with this snide remark? That sources should be disregarded if their ideas “offend” 50% of the population (a claim for which you provided no evidence)? That sources should be disregarded if they made money from book sales? This would mean disregarding almost all sources. That a commentary is "unoriginal" if someone in the past has "shared similar insights"? This is pure nonsense.
- pault 9y ago
  One could argue that quoting a source who is a bit of a lightning rod for controversy makes the conversation more complicated than it needs to be if there is an alternative source available.
- sudosteph 9y ago
  I don't care either way on JP and his book sales, but you have to admit that the quote boils down to "Life is suffering". Which has been the the core belief of Buddhist philosophy since it started. So yeah, that's a pretty unoriginal idea to attribute to someone else.
  - cgmg 9y ago
    > the quote boils down to "Life is suffering" Not in any meaningful sense. Clearly the quote contains more than that. It's like saying "everything boils down to A = A" (Aristotle, Metaphysics), therefore anything following from that is an "unoriginal" idea.
- obscurantist 9y ago
  I can assure any megamind in here that Socrates offended more than just 50% of Athens' population.
Will_Parker 9y ago
To be honest, as a socially awkward middle aged male who has made a few missteps in my life, Jordan Peterson is the only one I've heard in the last decade say that I might have something unique and good to offer the world instead of being a piece of shit who needs to shut up and let other people speak first. This is worth quite a lot to someone like me. If you're trying to understand your enemy, you should understand just how powerful this is. (Incidentally I've read The Road Less Traveled, didn't get much out of it, and find Peck to be much more sanctimonious than Peterson is.)
- opportune 9y ago
  That's because he encourages you to blame your personal lack of social adjustment on women/feminism/PC-culture and not yourself. It's the same with most gateway-alt-righters like the "skeptics." There's a happy middle ground between recognizing the dumbest elements of PC/social-justice culture and swinging the other way on the pendulum because someone absolved you of agency
  - Will_Parker 9y ago
    > That's because he encourages you to blame your personal lack of social adjustment on women/feminism/PC-culture and not yourself. Have you ever actually read him? His main message is to sort out your own life, then, when that's in order, start improving things around you. It's the exact opposite of blaming others, it's taking responsibility for yourself. And finding meaning in this struggle, and the difference you can make, instead of through fleeting happiness. This is a message that underperforming white men simply never hear anymore, and it's quite a startle to have it sink in, in my experience.
    - dabbledash 9y ago
      What message do you think he sends to women? What messages does he send men about women? Does he argue that the dominance of men in society (in the sense that the small group of people with power are mostly men) is natural and thus acceptable? I have not read his book; I’m asking you because it sounds like you have and you derived value from it.
aantix 9y ago
There's plenty of criticisms of the beloved Buddha. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Buddhism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Buddhism The idea may not be completely original but it is articulate of the current condition. And he provides a different context. He is an established clinical psychologist, having counseled 1000's of patients, taught at Harvard and has thousands of citations to his published papers. Knowing the baseline of troublesome thoughts, I find incredibly helpful. "Am I normal?" is a common thought of mine, but I have no frame of reference besides my immediate family. The idea that insightful thoughts can't/won't be offensive is counter-productive to intellectual progression.
- sudosteph 9y ago
  I don't think it was implied that Buddha is beyond reproach, but I mean... "Life is suffering" is literally the core piece of philosophy from Buddhism, a hugely popular religion/philosophy. Seems weird to quote some random psychologist like it's some new and unique insight.
jodrellblank 9y ago
Professor Peterson. His university psychology lecture classroom recordings are available on YouTube - https://m.youtube.com/jordanpetersonvideos?uid=L_f53ZEJxp8TtlOkHwMV9Q https://m.youtube.com/jordanpetersonvideos?uid=L_f53ZEJxp8Tt... Watch some of his lecturing that isn't about gender and see that he's passionate, engaging, knowledgable, human, visibly wants to help his students grow into better more considered people, and if "half the population" choose to take offense at one of his opinions that alone doesn't define him.
MediumD 9y ago
The degree of offense-taken, doesn't necessarily reflect the validity of the thought. How a message is received by society, is obviously dependent on the society of that culture. Those philosophers you mentioned, were received in entirely different time periods and cultures. Saying Peterson's message is worse, because more people are offended today, than probably offended in 400 B.C. by Buddha's message, is completely ignoring context and not really a fair criticism. Peterson gets a bad rap, by people sensationalizing his message and then labelling him as sexist and transphobic.
- fwip 9y ago
  He could try not being sexist and transphobic.
  - jm__87 9y ago
    If you listen to enough of his stuff, you'll realize he is neither of those things (not sure what evidence ever existed of him being sexist), though I can understand why people would think he is transphobic. His original argument against using the non binary gender pronouns is more against legislated coerced speech for people in his position in particular (a professor at an Ontario, Canada university) as opposed to being against transgender people. That being said, he interpreted the laws incorrectly and when confronted with this point, my own impression is he doubled down on his position by saying he won't use the words as it is a neomarxist agenda to coerce people to use these words as opposed to strictly folks who truly feel they are neither male nor female wanting to be labeled appropriately. Ultimately, he did say that if an individual sincerely asked him to use a non standard pronoun, he would.
jm__87 9y ago
This is just a ridiculous comment. Why does originality matter here at all if it is helping someone?

cgmg 9y ago

> To be clear, Peterson's commentary is not original. M. Scott Peck, the Buddha, and literally 100s of other philosophers and psychologists have shared similar insights. Remarkably, those thinkers managed to share this insight without offending half the population in order to drive book sales and line their pockets. What point are you trying to make with this snide remark? That sources should be disregarded if their ideas “offend” 50% of the population (a claim for which you provided no evidence)? That sources should be disregarded if they made money from book sales? This would mean disregarding almost all sources. That a commentary is "unoriginal" if someone in the past has "shared similar insights"? This is pure nonsense.

pault 9y ago
One could argue that quoting a source who is a bit of a lightning rod for controversy makes the conversation more complicated than it needs to be if there is an alternative source available.
sudosteph 9y ago
I don't care either way on JP and his book sales, but you have to admit that the quote boils down to "Life is suffering". Which has been the the core belief of Buddhist philosophy since it started. So yeah, that's a pretty unoriginal idea to attribute to someone else.
- cgmg 9y ago
  > the quote boils down to "Life is suffering" Not in any meaningful sense. Clearly the quote contains more than that. It's like saying "everything boils down to A = A" (Aristotle, Metaphysics), therefore anything following from that is an "unoriginal" idea.
obscurantist 9y ago
I can assure any megamind in here that Socrates offended more than just 50% of Athens' population.

Will_Parker 9y ago

To be honest, as a socially awkward middle aged male who has made a few missteps in my life, Jordan Peterson is the only one I've heard in the last decade say that I might have something unique and good to offer the world instead of being a piece of shit who needs to shut up and let other people speak first. This is worth quite a lot to someone like me. If you're trying to understand your enemy, you should understand just how powerful this is. (Incidentally I've read The Road Less Traveled, didn't get much out of it, and find Peck to be much more sanctimonious than Peterson is.)

opportune 9y ago
That's because he encourages you to blame your personal lack of social adjustment on women/feminism/PC-culture and not yourself. It's the same with most gateway-alt-righters like the "skeptics." There's a happy middle ground between recognizing the dumbest elements of PC/social-justice culture and swinging the other way on the pendulum because someone absolved you of agency
- Will_Parker 9y ago
  > That's because he encourages you to blame your personal lack of social adjustment on women/feminism/PC-culture and not yourself. Have you ever actually read him? His main message is to sort out your own life, then, when that's in order, start improving things around you. It's the exact opposite of blaming others, it's taking responsibility for yourself. And finding meaning in this struggle, and the difference you can make, instead of through fleeting happiness. This is a message that underperforming white men simply never hear anymore, and it's quite a startle to have it sink in, in my experience.
  - dabbledash 9y ago
    What message do you think he sends to women? What messages does he send men about women? Does he argue that the dominance of men in society (in the sense that the small group of people with power are mostly men) is natural and thus acceptable? I have not read his book; I’m asking you because it sounds like you have and you derived value from it.

aantix 9y ago

There's plenty of criticisms of the beloved Buddha. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Buddhism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Buddhism The idea may not be completely original but it is articulate of the current condition. And he provides a different context. He is an established clinical psychologist, having counseled 1000's of patients, taught at Harvard and has thousands of citations to his published papers. Knowing the baseline of troublesome thoughts, I find incredibly helpful. "Am I normal?" is a common thought of mine, but I have no frame of reference besides my immediate family. The idea that insightful thoughts can't/won't be offensive is counter-productive to intellectual progression.

sudosteph 9y ago
I don't think it was implied that Buddha is beyond reproach, but I mean... "Life is suffering" is literally the core piece of philosophy from Buddhism, a hugely popular religion/philosophy. Seems weird to quote some random psychologist like it's some new and unique insight.

jodrellblank 9y ago

Professor Peterson. His university psychology lecture classroom recordings are available on YouTube - https://m.youtube.com/jordanpetersonvideos?uid=L_f53ZEJxp8TtlOkHwMV9Q https://m.youtube.com/jordanpetersonvideos?uid=L_f53ZEJxp8Tt... Watch some of his lecturing that isn't about gender and see that he's passionate, engaging, knowledgable, human, visibly wants to help his students grow into better more considered people, and if "half the population" choose to take offense at one of his opinions that alone doesn't define him.

MediumD 9y ago

The degree of offense-taken, doesn't necessarily reflect the validity of the thought. How a message is received by society, is obviously dependent on the society of that culture. Those philosophers you mentioned, were received in entirely different time periods and cultures. Saying Peterson's message is worse, because more people are offended today, than probably offended in 400 B.C. by Buddha's message, is completely ignoring context and not really a fair criticism. Peterson gets a bad rap, by people sensationalizing his message and then labelling him as sexist and transphobic.

fwip 9y ago
He could try not being sexist and transphobic.
- jm__87 9y ago
  If you listen to enough of his stuff, you'll realize he is neither of those things (not sure what evidence ever existed of him being sexist), though I can understand why people would think he is transphobic. His original argument against using the non binary gender pronouns is more against legislated coerced speech for people in his position in particular (a professor at an Ontario, Canada university) as opposed to being against transgender people. That being said, he interpreted the laws incorrectly and when confronted with this point, my own impression is he doubled down on his position by saying he won't use the words as it is a neomarxist agenda to coerce people to use these words as opposed to strictly folks who truly feel they are neither male nor female wanting to be labeled appropriately. Ultimately, he did say that if an individual sincerely asked him to use a non standard pronoun, he would.

jm__87 9y ago

This is just a ridiculous comment. Why does originality matter here at all if it is helping someone?