2 ms·
This[1] is worth reading. "Jordan Peterson's popularity is the sign of a deeply impoverished political and intellectual landscape" [1] https://www.currentaffa
by JoshMnem 8y ago
This[1] is worth reading.
"Jordan Peterson's popularity is the sign of a deeply impoverished political and intellectual landscape"
[1] https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-deserve https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-d...
- zuzuleinen 8y agoI'm sorry but the first paragraph is very unfair and not true in my opinion. You can figure out for yourself, watch this debate and tell me if Peterson is the type of person described in the article. https://youtu.be/FmH7JUeVQb8 https://youtu.be/FmH7JUeVQb8 I promise I'll read your full article beyond the first paragraph :)
- JoshMnem 8y agoI recommend reading the whole article. Things are busy at work today, but I'll check it out when I have some time. If you could point me to a shorter clip within the almost 2 hours video, I will be more likely to look at it.
- zuzuleinen 8y agoYou can watch anytime at least the first 20 minutes. I just wanted to give a counter example to the first paragraph of the article which describe him like an opaque person who doesn't listen. I particularly like this debate because it shows he can have a decent conversation with a well known atheist and he actually listens to him. That's why I find the first paragraph really off which makes me having some doubts about the whole article. But I will read it nevertheless.
- AsyncAwait 8y agoHe did not came particularly well off in that debate.
- zuzuleinen 8y agoI think both had their good points at times. Anyway, the debate shows a man different than the one described in the article. That's why I posted it
- ramblerman 8y agoThe article mentions that interview and concedes Peterson comes out stronger there.
- zuzuleinen 8y agoI think both had strong arguments at times. Quite fascinating discussion, like watching a match of intellectual boxing :)
- willurd 8y agoThe author of this article either didn't actually read 12 Rules for Life or already made up their mind before going in. > Jordan Peterson appears very profound and has convinced many people to take him seriously. Yet he has almost nothing of value to say. The irony of this is that the author himself has nothing of real value to say. (See, I said it so it must be true)