6 ms·

"certain" students, "certain" speakers, "certain" discussions - I just can't hear the word "certain" any more without assuming that what I'm reading is yet anot

by tom_ 8y ago

"certain" students, "certain" speakers, "certain" discussions - I just can't hear the word "certain" any more without assuming that what I'm reading is yet another angsty, hand-wringing, paranoid-tinged screed about Things These Days, with no specific target, just this anger about these "certain" things that these "certain" people do.

RobertRoberts 8y ago
Maybe here is a more eloquent description of the problem. Also, consider that the writer already feels free speech is so under attack that they are not safe enough to even discuss that free speech is under attack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LquIQisaZFU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LquIQisaZFU
- kadendogthing 8y ago
  Do you have another source besides PragerU? They don't exactly have a good record of telling the truth or being impartial on subjects.
  - RobertRoberts 8y ago
    It's Jordan Peterson talking, he has quite a reputation outside of PragerU. But this one video is very short and sums up the attack on free speech from a unique angle his other videos don't do and it's specifically about universities.
    - kadendogthing 8y ago
      >Jordan Peterson Oh okay.
- kentm 8y ago
  Dangerous people are filling the heads of young people with dangerous nonsense. Who are these people? They are what Jordan Peterson calls “the post-modernists:” neo-Marxist professors who dominate our colleges and universities. And here’s the worst part: we are financing these nihilists with tax dollars, alumni gifts and tuition payments. Time to wise up. Calling Marxists nihilists is contradictory, and Jordon Peterson does not have a good track record of accurately discussing either post-modernism or Marxism. So right off the bat, I don't think this video is going to be a valuable use of my time. Edit: Plus the hyperbolic language included in the description indicates to me that I'm not about to hear an even-handed discussion of the issue that seeks to accurately represent the opinions of the other side.
  - RobertRoberts 8y ago
    He didn't call "marxists nihilsts" it seems he said "neo-marxists" are, which is fitting in my opinion. The video is short, it's good to hear alternative opinions that challenge your own.
    - kentm 8y ago
      Are neo-marxists not marxists? I talk with actual marxists and not a single one has used this terminology, so this really smells like something made up just so claims like the above can be made. It doesn't seem like a good-faith attempt to understand the positions of the "neo-Marxist professors." In my read of Jordan Peterson's stuff, there's a lot of that going on: claiming misconstrued context or playing semantic games to avoid the heart of the matter that his point of view is just not substantiated. The video is short, it's good to hear alternative opinions that challenge your own. Its good to hear alternative opinions that are well formed, even-keeled, and evidenced. To use an extreme example, I do not need to hear an opinion about how the Earth is flat or maybe white nationalism would be a good thing. Right of the bat, I'm told that these "neo-Marxist" professors are dangerous and encouraged to enter a moral panic about nihilism being taught to kids. That doesn't seem like its going to be a good and informative argument.
    - JamesLeonis 8y ago
      Earlier this year there was the promise of Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate this October, but sadly that looks like it isn't going to happen. In the spirit of debate, here are two videos that answer some of Mr. Peterson's points. On Post-Modernism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU1LhcEh8Ms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU1LhcEh8Ms On Marxism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGld3FbDY6s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGld3FbDY6s
  - bassman9000 8y ago
    Go for Stephen RC Hicks. He's Peterson source, it would seem, into the postmodernism philosophy, and does a much better job at explaining it IMHO. https://youtu.be/pKMwJo9DHUQ https://youtu.be/pKMwJo9DHUQ
wemdyjreichert 8y ago
Example from the article: the one about Chinese students offended by Chinese state discrimination against Tibetans. The school removed it, even though China really does. Universities are supposed to be a place of shared knowledge and diverse perspectives. Another example Berkeley, a school which, according to USA Today, "has become known more recently for its violent demonstrations between those with opposing viewpoints." Also, the article presented overall statistics, focusing more on university trends than individuals. I think a presentation of how widespread the issue is is more impactful than attacking one particular person/university.
- chipotle_coyote 8y ago
  Example from the article: the one about Chinese students offended by Chinese state discrimination against Tibetans. The school removed it, even though China really does. The full text of that example from the article is: "At the University of Sheffield, Chinese students complained about a film showing state discrimination against Tibetans in China containing an offensive phrase. It was replaced with a different film, still showing discrimination against Tibetans." It seems to me the last sentence there is rather important for context. Also, the article presented overall statistics, focusing more on university trends than individuals. I think a presentation of how widespread the issue is is more impactful than attacking one particular person/university. Well, yes, and the overall statistics it presented strongly suggest that the answer to the question in the headline -- "Is free speech under threat?" -- is "No, not very much."
  - LanceH 8y ago
    "No, not very much." So, yes?

by tom_ 8y ago

RobertRoberts 8y ago

Maybe here is a more eloquent description of the problem. Also, consider that the writer already feels free speech is so under attack that they are not safe enough to even discuss that free speech is under attack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LquIQisaZFU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LquIQisaZFU

kadendogthing 8y ago
Do you have another source besides PragerU? They don't exactly have a good record of telling the truth or being impartial on subjects.
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  It's Jordan Peterson talking, he has quite a reputation outside of PragerU. But this one video is very short and sums up the attack on free speech from a unique angle his other videos don't do and it's specifically about universities.
  - kadendogthing 8y ago
    >Jordan Peterson Oh okay.
kentm 8y ago
Dangerous people are filling the heads of young people with dangerous nonsense. Who are these people? They are what Jordan Peterson calls “the post-modernists:” neo-Marxist professors who dominate our colleges and universities. And here’s the worst part: we are financing these nihilists with tax dollars, alumni gifts and tuition payments. Time to wise up. Calling Marxists nihilists is contradictory, and Jordon Peterson does not have a good track record of accurately discussing either post-modernism or Marxism. So right off the bat, I don't think this video is going to be a valuable use of my time. Edit: Plus the hyperbolic language included in the description indicates to me that I'm not about to hear an even-handed discussion of the issue that seeks to accurately represent the opinions of the other side.
- RobertRoberts 8y ago
  He didn't call "marxists nihilsts" it seems he said "neo-marxists" are, which is fitting in my opinion. The video is short, it's good to hear alternative opinions that challenge your own.
  - kentm 8y ago
    Are neo-marxists not marxists? I talk with actual marxists and not a single one has used this terminology, so this really smells like something made up just so claims like the above can be made. It doesn't seem like a good-faith attempt to understand the positions of the "neo-Marxist professors." In my read of Jordan Peterson's stuff, there's a lot of that going on: claiming misconstrued context or playing semantic games to avoid the heart of the matter that his point of view is just not substantiated. The video is short, it's good to hear alternative opinions that challenge your own. Its good to hear alternative opinions that are well formed, even-keeled, and evidenced. To use an extreme example, I do not need to hear an opinion about how the Earth is flat or maybe white nationalism would be a good thing. Right of the bat, I'm told that these "neo-Marxist" professors are dangerous and encouraged to enter a moral panic about nihilism being taught to kids. That doesn't seem like its going to be a good and informative argument.
  - JamesLeonis 8y ago
    Earlier this year there was the promise of Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson debate this October, but sadly that looks like it isn't going to happen. In the spirit of debate, here are two videos that answer some of Mr. Peterson's points. On Post-Modernism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU1LhcEh8Ms https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cU1LhcEh8Ms On Marxism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGld3FbDY6s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGld3FbDY6s
- bassman9000 8y ago
  Go for Stephen RC Hicks. He's Peterson source, it would seem, into the postmodernism philosophy, and does a much better job at explaining it IMHO. https://youtu.be/pKMwJo9DHUQ https://youtu.be/pKMwJo9DHUQ

wemdyjreichert 8y ago

Example from the article: the one about Chinese students offended by Chinese state discrimination against Tibetans. The school removed it, even though China really does. Universities are supposed to be a place of shared knowledge and diverse perspectives. Another example Berkeley, a school which, according to USA Today, "has become known more recently for its violent demonstrations between those with opposing viewpoints." Also, the article presented overall statistics, focusing more on university trends than individuals. I think a presentation of how widespread the issue is is more impactful than attacking one particular person/university.

chipotle_coyote 8y ago
Example from the article: the one about Chinese students offended by Chinese state discrimination against Tibetans. The school removed it, even though China really does. The full text of that example from the article is: "At the University of Sheffield, Chinese students complained about a film showing state discrimination against Tibetans in China containing an offensive phrase. It was replaced with a different film, still showing discrimination against Tibetans." It seems to me the last sentence there is rather important for context. Also, the article presented overall statistics, focusing more on university trends than individuals. I think a presentation of how widespread the issue is is more impactful than attacking one particular person/university. Well, yes, and the overall statistics it presented strongly suggest that the answer to the question in the headline -- "Is free speech under threat?" -- is "No, not very much."
- LanceH 8y ago
  "No, not very much." So, yes?