10 ms·

Book Review: Twelve Rules for Life

136 points by anatoly 9y ago

rusk 9y ago
This is a nice even-handed review. It has been hard to get a clear picture of what Peterson is about and I've had to sift through an awful lot of partisan spite-pieces on both sides to try to get to the bottom of what's going on with him. The following paragraph jumped out at me here: "The politics in this book lean a bit right, but if you think of Peterson as a political commentator you’re missing the point. The science in this book leans a bit Malcolm Gladwell, but if you think of him as a scientist you’re missing the point. Philosopher, missing the point. Public intellectual, missing the point. Mythographer, missing the point. So what’s the point?" I think part of the problem with our initial impressions of Peterson is he (or comes across) tries to present himself as these things kind of like he misses the point of himself sometimes .. but maybe that's just from having been taking such an embattled position so long. The article goes on to describe Peterson as "a prophet". As a student of psychology I don't personally think his views are "groundbreaking" but he does take a set of very well worn ideas and attune them to modern times. I read Bertrand Russell's "Conquest of Happiness" [0] a number of years ago and to me it seems to tick a lot of the same boxes, but perhaps in a less timely fashion. It's easy to think Russell managed to get his views out without annoying anybody but he had his fair share of partisan controversy in his time as well. It's only after the dust has settled that we view him as one of the most important western philosophers of the 20th Century. [0] https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.222834 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.222834
- psyc 9y ago
  In order to get a clearer picture of what Peterson is about, I did the unthinkable and watched a lot of his lectures. My opinion is that he's extremely thoughtful, formidable not so much in original thought, but careful synthesis of the many well-known sources he draws on most, and above all worthwhile. That is I think he says a ton of things that are fascinating (as Scott says, kind of in the Gladwell sense) and things that a lot of people could do with hearing these days. As far as the Gladwell thing goes, it's different because Peterson isn't making many scientific claims, or even claims as such. He's an intellectual psychologist synthesizing a - again, not original, but lucidly formulated - perspective on the human psyche itself. Not claiming how the world is, but how it is to us in our biological body-minds, which for many purposes is the only place that matters. His message is Jung meets Dostoevsky meets Joseph Campbell meets C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton, but also meets Peterson.
  - rusk 9y ago
    I simply don't have time to engage with his lectures. I've seen all the summaries and they're just something I don't need. Thankfully. What I do see is him continuously parading around the podcast circuit and the polarised discussion online about him. My gut reaction when I heard him on Joe Rogan was one of disgust, while quietly finding I actually agree with a lot of what he says. He's a guy who has access to "truth" (in the pragmatic, William James sense) that many of his attackers do not. I don't believe he's on the level of any of those people you've put up him up alongside. I think he draws on their work, mediates and applies their ideas as a clinical psychologist does. Clever, no doubt, and with a message that is undoubtedly of value to many, and certainly making a lot of money at it too.
    - rwj 9y ago
      If you agree with some of the things he says, why are you disgusted?
      - rusk 9y ago
        The term is called "Dissonance". It's okay and quite normal to have conflicting emotions about things. To have the head and heart in conflict. Peterson himself would say this is part of the process of getting to the truth. If you're just courting "comfortable" ideas all the time you'll get nowhere.
    - psyc 9y ago
      >> I simply don't have time to engage with his lectures. I've seen all the summaries and they're just something I don't need. Then it's easier to understand how you came by your opinions of him. Quite a bit harder, if you'll excuse me, to understand why you wrote more statements about him than anyone else in the thread, though. >> I don't believe he's on the level of any of those people you've put up him up alongside. I agree with this 100% (and would bet my entire net worth that Peterson does too), did not intend to give that impression at all, and edited my comment to reflect that.
      - 9y ago
- LMYahooTFY 9y ago
  I agree, and to segue a bit, I think it's rather unfortunate that his thoughts on psychology, human behavior, and dealing with tragedy are likely buried beneath partisanship for many people. He's a career clinical psychologist, father of two, well studied in Jungian archetypes, and bears all the mannerisms of being a folksy father figure. And what do you know, there is some popularity of memes referring to him as a "father of YouTube/Reddit/Internet" and wishful posts for him to be their father along with them. If there are people listening who have a deficit of such a figure in their lives, perhaps it's good they receive something to compensate for it. That seems more important than the partisan pontificating to me.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
ajaygeorge91 9y ago
So how come not everyone can be a prophet? The Bible tells us why people who wouldn’t listen to the Pharisees listened to Jesus: “He spoke as one who had confidence”. You become a prophet by saying things that you would have to either be a prophet or the most pompous windbag in the Universe to say, then looking a little too wild-eyed for anyone to be comfortable calling you the most pompous windbag in the universe. You say the old cliches with such power and gravity that it wouldn’t even make sense for someone who wasn’t a prophet to say them that way. “He, uh, told us that we should do good, and not do evil, and now he’s looking at us like we should fall to our knees.” “Weird. Must be a prophet. Better kneel.”
- lhnz 9y ago
  I've noticed this in teams, too. Sometimes there is something which is clear to everybody, but which needs the right person to say it, in order for it to have the necessary gravitas to be followed. I think a lot of people need authority figures to function.
- tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
  I can't get onboard with this interpretation. There are a ton of people who are very charismatic and prone to making sweeping statements about the universe, and yet they don't gain a substantial following. Reza Aslan, for example. He's popular, but not nearly on Peterson's level. There are people who are drawn to Peterson simply due to his charisma, but I think at the end of the day there's something else going on. I think he's hit some kind of nerve though it's difficult to pinpoint it. Edit: Ha, maybe I should read the goddamn piece before commenting.
  - rusk 9y ago
    He has absolutely hit a nerve, or hit a few nerves and done so with great accuracy. You see the thing about Peterson is for whatever reason (could even be just for the purposes of marketing himself), he is very much the controversialist. Time and again he'll say something controversial that he knows will troll a huge audience and then he's always got research and facts to back it up. That his take is often facile isn't really of consequence as any typical interviewer doesn't have the tools to take him up on it. The guy is a professor of psychology. You may not like him or his views, but he is "smart", and fundamentally the meat of his message is actually quite benign so you can't even really accuse him of being "bad". It's like he's built his own persona into this gigantic strawman that looks like an ogre to everybody.
sz4kerto 9y ago
"But I actually acted as a slightly better person during the week or so I read Jordan Peterson’s book. I feel properly ashamed about this." This is what happened to me as well. Strange stuff, I think it is well worth the time.
- y03a 9y ago
  A well-timed cat poster can have the same effect. The problem is, if there's little substance to the message, the effect is short-lived. The key to running a good cat poster business is spacing out the shallow messages, you can even reuse them if they're slightly reworded or just spaced far enough apart.
tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
I'll try to explain why I'm enamored with the guy, though I do try and resist it. I've fallen victim to a few cult followings in my past - Ayn Rand in my teens and then Noam Chomsky in my early twenties. So I know the danger signs of falling into an ideological trapping, and I do see that happening with some of Peterson's fans. But I don't care about the fight against "Postmodern Neo-Marxism" or any of his discussion about free speech. His value for me is due to his religious content. I, like many people my age, grew up in a conservatively religious household and became irreligious as soon as I left home. I thought of it as breaking free from burdensome constraints. But after years of attempting to "simply be a good person", I've found that there is indeed some kind of void that needs to be filled. And yet, I just cannot go back to being (in my case) an evangelical christian. Once you're out, you're out. So where should a modern, rational, scientifically literate person do when they need a deeper source of particularly religious meaning in their life? Peterson is the first person I've come across who has even come close to answering that question adequately. No matter how many faults the man has, he has done me this kindness. All the rest is fluff to me. I do think he's a bit of a prophet, in that he has the ability to inspire conviction without guilt, passion without irresponsibility, and courage without hubris.
- ayayecocojambo 9y ago
  This. i felt same. i feel uncomfortable following a passionate thought leader without being able to critize his ideas. for that aim i find myself in thought-provoking arguments with my lgbti activist friends, which was very intellectually-fun times for me. the thing makes me most uncomfortable about his attitude is what he doesn't say. demonizing 'social justice warriors' and repeating danger of politically correctness is ok, but what criticism about rising nationalism, alt-right movement? this is the elephant in the room he does not talk about, instead he is only focusing on small-minority leftist groups. don't know weather he is biased towards right, or he is trying to get-well with these group. but these are my two cents.
  - psyc 9y ago
    He clearly condemns fascism, anti-semitism, etc, and is mostly individualist. I believe he doesn't directly address /pol types much because they haven't been literally inches from his face, whereas identity-politics people have been, as well as surrounding lecture halls carrying on and breaking windows to intimidate him and his audiences. He certainly condemns the worst alt-right ideas.
throwawaymanbot 9y ago
Peterson is a clinical psychologist. So he knows how to make you believe him, to sympathize with him, to be moved by him, be enamored with him and all this with what other commentators have noted in essence, being bland writings spoon fed to you. Thats kind of dangerous. Dont be fooled. Dont be enamored.
clu1590 9y ago
I've watched Jordan Peterson's Personality lectures back when he had only a few hundred subscribers and have been amazed at his immense traction of late. His book is mostly a regurgitation and summary of his lectures with some political and personal anecdotes thrown in; however, I would still recommend it as a introduction to some of Peterson's thought system and mostly agree with the review.
personlurking 9y ago
One thing I fight with, internally, is his idea that if you "clean up your room", so to speak, your life will start to have meaning. Because of him, and due to doing his Self-Authoring program, I followed the steps, took responsibility for my life and changed a lot of things, but the meaning part has yet to hit me. Perhaps it's there, yet buried, I don't know.
- rusk 9y ago
  I think you've come up against his particular brand of "pragmatic truth". It's true if the end result is good. You may not have found the meaning you thought you would when you started following his teachings, but perhaps you have improved your life. In the pragmatic sense in which Peterson wields the term (echoing William James), this is "truth" and thus "meaning" has been realised.
- timmytwotime 9y ago
  "Clean your room" is an internalization: how can you judge or even change the world if your room (your life) is a mess? The point is to fix yourself first, then start taking on the world. And do it all in small steps. > the meaning part has yet to hit me You don't feel any sort of pride after getting yourself in order? Are you sure you have yourself in order?
  - personlurking 9y ago
    It's perhaps that the 'getting myself in order' part is still in progress, and I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - timmytwotime 9y ago
      The fact that you are looking for it means something.
    - mercer 9y ago
overthemoon 9y ago
He at least offers a structural critique, not minor tweaks, to the liberal order. If a young person is feeling alienated and disempowered, he recognizes that the solution isn't to just go to school or whatever watery prescription modern society might suggest. There are many conservative thinkers who, though they're basically irreligious, will tell young men to pull their pants up and take out the trash. Our moral landscape is such a wasteland that guys like this can tut about manners or whatever and he seems like a prophetic genius. He's a thoroughgoing Jungian and a mediocre philosopher. He gets sassy with reporters, which people like, I guess. But he's still going to situate the problems with modern society with a couple of french theorists rather than the forces that actually affect people's daily lives. I'd also argue that his popularity is a sign that people still really, really want religion/religious guidance in some form.
hnarn 9y ago
>Jordan Peterson is a believer in the New Religion, the one where God is the force for good inside each of us, and all religions are equal paths to wisdom, and the Bible stories are just guides on how to live our lives. It's hard to take a reviewer seriously when they make a statement like this, that is blatantly untrue ("all religions are equal paths to wisdom"). Peterson is known to be very critical of Islam, and has gone as far as saying that it's incompatible with western values (paraphrasing).
wilsonnb 9y ago
I've listened to a few of his lectures and read a few articles about him and I don't see a difference between what he says and what every other self-help author who wants to sell millions of books is saying. It's mostly vague hand-wavy kind of stuff that sounds profound in the moment but later realize it's either blatantly obvious truth dressed up in fancy words or it's nonsense wearing the same clothes. Had he not gained fame and notoriety through his campaign against that Canadian law and political correctness in general, I don't think anyone would have cared about what he has to say. If anyone familiar with his work could point me towards some of it that would dispute that characterization I would be happy to read or listen to it, provided I don't have to pay for it.
- rusk 9y ago
  I think perhaps check out the Russel Brand "Under the skin" interview - I think that's the closest I've seen to Peterson getting a good stiff interview. You probably know Russell Brand as that guy that was married to Katy Perry but trust me, once you get past his whimsy he's got a razor sharp intellect. On the face of it he embodies much of what Peterson speaks out about, and you'd think they'd be at loggerheads but it was a remarkably enlightening interview.
  - wilsonnb 9y ago
    I'm giving it a listen now. I'm only 10 minutes or so into it, but this is a quote (not exact, but close enough) from Jordan Peterson: "(music and cathedrals) are ways of trying to symbolically represent how things could be if they were put in the proper state of balance or harmony" What does that even mean? The only concrete nugget of knowledge I can get from that is that cathedrals are designed in a relatively balanced manner. Symmetrical, I guess. I plan to listen to the rest of this interview but that statement was a particularly good example of the hand-waavy nonsense that I was talking about so I decided to record it here so I didn't forget.
    - rusk 9y ago
      I think Russell has him sized when he opines that he has ”some mischief about him”
ur_all_autistic 9y ago
I would have no problem with this guy if it wasn't for the fact that he pushes conspiracy theories that Nazis like.
thinkingemote 9y ago
Interestingly this has been flagged, but there's only a couple of replies that I can see that are grey, and only a couple that's critical of the article and subject. But I can't see any flames at all, just the usual HN courtesy. Is the auto flag mechanism to do with up and down votes of comments? Does that make some comments controversial? I like upvoting comments that go against the stream, but would that mean that the whole discussion gets more likely to be auto flagged? Would a user's best bet be to go with the crowd (and to downvote or not vote up such dissenting opinions) ?
- timmytwotime 9y ago
  Probably because Peterson has been associated (wrongly, IMHO) with the alt-right.

136 points by anatoly 9y ago

rusk 9y ago

This is a nice even-handed review. It has been hard to get a clear picture of what Peterson is about and I've had to sift through an awful lot of partisan spite-pieces on both sides to try to get to the bottom of what's going on with him. The following paragraph jumped out at me here: "The politics in this book lean a bit right, but if you think of Peterson as a political commentator you’re missing the point. The science in this book leans a bit Malcolm Gladwell, but if you think of him as a scientist you’re missing the point. Philosopher, missing the point. Public intellectual, missing the point. Mythographer, missing the point. So what’s the point?" I think part of the problem with our initial impressions of Peterson is he (or comes across) tries to present himself as these things kind of like he misses the point of himself sometimes .. but maybe that's just from having been taking such an embattled position so long. The article goes on to describe Peterson as "a prophet". As a student of psychology I don't personally think his views are "groundbreaking" but he does take a set of very well worn ideas and attune them to modern times. I read Bertrand Russell's "Conquest of Happiness" [0] a number of years ago and to me it seems to tick a lot of the same boxes, but perhaps in a less timely fashion. It's easy to think Russell managed to get his views out without annoying anybody but he had his fair share of partisan controversy in his time as well. It's only after the dust has settled that we view him as one of the most important western philosophers of the 20th Century. [0] https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.222834 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.222834

psyc 9y ago
In order to get a clearer picture of what Peterson is about, I did the unthinkable and watched a lot of his lectures. My opinion is that he's extremely thoughtful, formidable not so much in original thought, but careful synthesis of the many well-known sources he draws on most, and above all worthwhile. That is I think he says a ton of things that are fascinating (as Scott says, kind of in the Gladwell sense) and things that a lot of people could do with hearing these days. As far as the Gladwell thing goes, it's different because Peterson isn't making many scientific claims, or even claims as such. He's an intellectual psychologist synthesizing a - again, not original, but lucidly formulated - perspective on the human psyche itself. Not claiming how the world is, but how it is to us in our biological body-minds, which for many purposes is the only place that matters. His message is Jung meets Dostoevsky meets Joseph Campbell meets C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton, but also meets Peterson.
- rusk 9y ago
  I simply don't have time to engage with his lectures. I've seen all the summaries and they're just something I don't need. Thankfully. What I do see is him continuously parading around the podcast circuit and the polarised discussion online about him. My gut reaction when I heard him on Joe Rogan was one of disgust, while quietly finding I actually agree with a lot of what he says. He's a guy who has access to "truth" (in the pragmatic, William James sense) that many of his attackers do not. I don't believe he's on the level of any of those people you've put up him up alongside. I think he draws on their work, mediates and applies their ideas as a clinical psychologist does. Clever, no doubt, and with a message that is undoubtedly of value to many, and certainly making a lot of money at it too.
  - rwj 9y ago
    If you agree with some of the things he says, why are you disgusted?
    - rusk 9y ago
      The term is called "Dissonance". It's okay and quite normal to have conflicting emotions about things. To have the head and heart in conflict. Peterson himself would say this is part of the process of getting to the truth. If you're just courting "comfortable" ideas all the time you'll get nowhere.
  - psyc 9y ago
    >> I simply don't have time to engage with his lectures. I've seen all the summaries and they're just something I don't need. Then it's easier to understand how you came by your opinions of him. Quite a bit harder, if you'll excuse me, to understand why you wrote more statements about him than anyone else in the thread, though. >> I don't believe he's on the level of any of those people you've put up him up alongside. I agree with this 100% (and would bet my entire net worth that Peterson does too), did not intend to give that impression at all, and edited my comment to reflect that.
    - 9y ago
LMYahooTFY 9y ago
I agree, and to segue a bit, I think it's rather unfortunate that his thoughts on psychology, human behavior, and dealing with tragedy are likely buried beneath partisanship for many people. He's a career clinical psychologist, father of two, well studied in Jungian archetypes, and bears all the mannerisms of being a folksy father figure. And what do you know, there is some popularity of memes referring to him as a "father of YouTube/Reddit/Internet" and wishful posts for him to be their father along with them. If there are people listening who have a deficit of such a figure in their lives, perhaps it's good they receive something to compensate for it. That seems more important than the partisan pontificating to me.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

ajaygeorge91 9y ago

So how come not everyone can be a prophet? The Bible tells us why people who wouldn’t listen to the Pharisees listened to Jesus: “He spoke as one who had confidence”. You become a prophet by saying things that you would have to either be a prophet or the most pompous windbag in the Universe to say, then looking a little too wild-eyed for anyone to be comfortable calling you the most pompous windbag in the universe. You say the old cliches with such power and gravity that it wouldn’t even make sense for someone who wasn’t a prophet to say them that way. “He, uh, told us that we should do good, and not do evil, and now he’s looking at us like we should fall to our knees.” “Weird. Must be a prophet. Better kneel.”

lhnz 9y ago
I've noticed this in teams, too. Sometimes there is something which is clear to everybody, but which needs the right person to say it, in order for it to have the necessary gravitas to be followed. I think a lot of people need authority figures to function.
tenaciousDaniel 9y ago
I can't get onboard with this interpretation. There are a ton of people who are very charismatic and prone to making sweeping statements about the universe, and yet they don't gain a substantial following. Reza Aslan, for example. He's popular, but not nearly on Peterson's level. There are people who are drawn to Peterson simply due to his charisma, but I think at the end of the day there's something else going on. I think he's hit some kind of nerve though it's difficult to pinpoint it. Edit: Ha, maybe I should read the goddamn piece before commenting.
- rusk 9y ago
  He has absolutely hit a nerve, or hit a few nerves and done so with great accuracy. You see the thing about Peterson is for whatever reason (could even be just for the purposes of marketing himself), he is very much the controversialist. Time and again he'll say something controversial that he knows will troll a huge audience and then he's always got research and facts to back it up. That his take is often facile isn't really of consequence as any typical interviewer doesn't have the tools to take him up on it. The guy is a professor of psychology. You may not like him or his views, but he is "smart", and fundamentally the meat of his message is actually quite benign so you can't even really accuse him of being "bad". It's like he's built his own persona into this gigantic strawman that looks like an ogre to everybody.

sz4kerto 9y ago

"But I actually acted as a slightly better person during the week or so I read Jordan Peterson’s book. I feel properly ashamed about this." This is what happened to me as well. Strange stuff, I think it is well worth the time.

y03a 9y ago
A well-timed cat poster can have the same effect. The problem is, if there's little substance to the message, the effect is short-lived. The key to running a good cat poster business is spacing out the shallow messages, you can even reuse them if they're slightly reworded or just spaced far enough apart.

tenaciousDaniel 9y ago

I'll try to explain why I'm enamored with the guy, though I do try and resist it. I've fallen victim to a few cult followings in my past - Ayn Rand in my teens and then Noam Chomsky in my early twenties. So I know the danger signs of falling into an ideological trapping, and I do see that happening with some of Peterson's fans. But I don't care about the fight against "Postmodern Neo-Marxism" or any of his discussion about free speech. His value for me is due to his religious content. I, like many people my age, grew up in a conservatively religious household and became irreligious as soon as I left home. I thought of it as breaking free from burdensome constraints. But after years of attempting to "simply be a good person", I've found that there is indeed some kind of void that needs to be filled. And yet, I just cannot go back to being (in my case) an evangelical christian. Once you're out, you're out. So where should a modern, rational, scientifically literate person do when they need a deeper source of particularly religious meaning in their life? Peterson is the first person I've come across who has even come close to answering that question adequately. No matter how many faults the man has, he has done me this kindness. All the rest is fluff to me. I do think he's a bit of a prophet, in that he has the ability to inspire conviction without guilt, passion without irresponsibility, and courage without hubris.

ayayecocojambo 9y ago
This. i felt same. i feel uncomfortable following a passionate thought leader without being able to critize his ideas. for that aim i find myself in thought-provoking arguments with my lgbti activist friends, which was very intellectually-fun times for me. the thing makes me most uncomfortable about his attitude is what he doesn't say. demonizing 'social justice warriors' and repeating danger of politically correctness is ok, but what criticism about rising nationalism, alt-right movement? this is the elephant in the room he does not talk about, instead he is only focusing on small-minority leftist groups. don't know weather he is biased towards right, or he is trying to get-well with these group. but these are my two cents.
- psyc 9y ago
  He clearly condemns fascism, anti-semitism, etc, and is mostly individualist. I believe he doesn't directly address /pol types much because they haven't been literally inches from his face, whereas identity-politics people have been, as well as surrounding lecture halls carrying on and breaking windows to intimidate him and his audiences. He certainly condemns the worst alt-right ideas.

throwawaymanbot 9y ago

Peterson is a clinical psychologist. So he knows how to make you believe him, to sympathize with him, to be moved by him, be enamored with him and all this with what other commentators have noted in essence, being bland writings spoon fed to you. Thats kind of dangerous. Dont be fooled. Dont be enamored.

clu1590 9y ago

I've watched Jordan Peterson's Personality lectures back when he had only a few hundred subscribers and have been amazed at his immense traction of late. His book is mostly a regurgitation and summary of his lectures with some political and personal anecdotes thrown in; however, I would still recommend it as a introduction to some of Peterson's thought system and mostly agree with the review.

personlurking 9y ago

One thing I fight with, internally, is his idea that if you "clean up your room", so to speak, your life will start to have meaning. Because of him, and due to doing his Self-Authoring program, I followed the steps, took responsibility for my life and changed a lot of things, but the meaning part has yet to hit me. Perhaps it's there, yet buried, I don't know.

rusk 9y ago
I think you've come up against his particular brand of "pragmatic truth". It's true if the end result is good. You may not have found the meaning you thought you would when you started following his teachings, but perhaps you have improved your life. In the pragmatic sense in which Peterson wields the term (echoing William James), this is "truth" and thus "meaning" has been realised.
timmytwotime 9y ago
"Clean your room" is an internalization: how can you judge or even change the world if your room (your life) is a mess? The point is to fix yourself first, then start taking on the world. And do it all in small steps. > the meaning part has yet to hit me You don't feel any sort of pride after getting yourself in order? Are you sure you have yourself in order?
- personlurking 9y ago
  It's perhaps that the 'getting myself in order' part is still in progress, and I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - timmytwotime 9y ago
    The fact that you are looking for it means something.
  - mercer 9y ago

overthemoon 9y ago

He at least offers a structural critique, not minor tweaks, to the liberal order. If a young person is feeling alienated and disempowered, he recognizes that the solution isn't to just go to school or whatever watery prescription modern society might suggest. There are many conservative thinkers who, though they're basically irreligious, will tell young men to pull their pants up and take out the trash. Our moral landscape is such a wasteland that guys like this can tut about manners or whatever and he seems like a prophetic genius. He's a thoroughgoing Jungian and a mediocre philosopher. He gets sassy with reporters, which people like, I guess. But he's still going to situate the problems with modern society with a couple of french theorists rather than the forces that actually affect people's daily lives. I'd also argue that his popularity is a sign that people still really, really want religion/religious guidance in some form.

hnarn 9y ago

>Jordan Peterson is a believer in the New Religion, the one where God is the force for good inside each of us, and all religions are equal paths to wisdom, and the Bible stories are just guides on how to live our lives. It's hard to take a reviewer seriously when they make a statement like this, that is blatantly untrue ("all religions are equal paths to wisdom"). Peterson is known to be very critical of Islam, and has gone as far as saying that it's incompatible with western values (paraphrasing).

wilsonnb 9y ago

I've listened to a few of his lectures and read a few articles about him and I don't see a difference between what he says and what every other self-help author who wants to sell millions of books is saying. It's mostly vague hand-wavy kind of stuff that sounds profound in the moment but later realize it's either blatantly obvious truth dressed up in fancy words or it's nonsense wearing the same clothes. Had he not gained fame and notoriety through his campaign against that Canadian law and political correctness in general, I don't think anyone would have cared about what he has to say. If anyone familiar with his work could point me towards some of it that would dispute that characterization I would be happy to read or listen to it, provided I don't have to pay for it.

rusk 9y ago
I think perhaps check out the Russel Brand "Under the skin" interview - I think that's the closest I've seen to Peterson getting a good stiff interview. You probably know Russell Brand as that guy that was married to Katy Perry but trust me, once you get past his whimsy he's got a razor sharp intellect. On the face of it he embodies much of what Peterson speaks out about, and you'd think they'd be at loggerheads but it was a remarkably enlightening interview.
- wilsonnb 9y ago
  I'm giving it a listen now. I'm only 10 minutes or so into it, but this is a quote (not exact, but close enough) from Jordan Peterson: "(music and cathedrals) are ways of trying to symbolically represent how things could be if they were put in the proper state of balance or harmony" What does that even mean? The only concrete nugget of knowledge I can get from that is that cathedrals are designed in a relatively balanced manner. Symmetrical, I guess. I plan to listen to the rest of this interview but that statement was a particularly good example of the hand-waavy nonsense that I was talking about so I decided to record it here so I didn't forget.
  - rusk 9y ago
    I think Russell has him sized when he opines that he has ”some mischief about him”

ur_all_autistic 9y ago

I would have no problem with this guy if it wasn't for the fact that he pushes conspiracy theories that Nazis like.

thinkingemote 9y ago

Interestingly this has been flagged, but there's only a couple of replies that I can see that are grey, and only a couple that's critical of the article and subject. But I can't see any flames at all, just the usual HN courtesy. Is the auto flag mechanism to do with up and down votes of comments? Does that make some comments controversial? I like upvoting comments that go against the stream, but would that mean that the whole discussion gets more likely to be auto flagged? Would a user's best bet be to go with the crowd (and to downvote or not vote up such dissenting opinions) ?

timmytwotime 9y ago
Probably because Peterson has been associated (wrongly, IMHO) with the alt-right.