4 ms·

His technical papers are fun to read and based on solid mathematics. He's collecting that work into a book which is about as poorly edited as you would expect b

His technical papers are fun to read and based on solid mathematics. He's collecting that work into a book which is about as poorly edited as you would expect but the math is solid. There is no sense in which Taleb is as vapid as JBP.

dvt 6y ago
I've read a couple, but I'm not a statistician, so I can't comment with any authority on his papers. For what it's worth, JBP has written more papers and is cited way more widely than Taleb. (But I'm not a psychologist either.)
mistermann 6y ago
vapid - offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging. I'm curious how you have evaluated JBP to be vapid, could you provide some details of your analysis?
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  JBP is absolutely off wrt Post-Modernism. He keeps quoting Hicks' books on Postmodernism which must be dismissed as fraud[1]. (Hicks himself presents his book on white supremacist Stefan Molyeux's podcast[2]). my problem with JBP is that he presents his ideas as facts but they are nothing more than pseudo science and cherry picking to fit his narrative (e.g. he hasn't really understood the Jungian archetypes and keeps waffling on about it with great confidence). He seems to fit very well into Alan Sokal's definition of the "intellectual imposter". (the irony here is that Sokal himself hasn't understood postmodernism lol) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHtvTGaPzF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHtvTGaPzF4 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkfH87CgKOQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkfH87CgKOQ
  - ithkuil 6y ago
    Whether Sokal understands postmodernism is besides the point; his hoax was more about a process rather than about an argument
  - blaser-waffle 6y ago
    All of those points sound like a "no true scotsman" -- e.g. "he doesn't understand REAL Postmodernism". All Jungian psychology is pseudoscience; hell most psychology is pseudoscience outside of measurable behaviorist or cognitive approaches.
- war1025 6y ago
  I feel like the thing about Jordan Peterson is the advice he offers seems pretty obvious if it's stuff you've been exposed to. The thing people miss is there are a lot of people out there who haven't been exposed to such ideas. I do think he got too big too fast and wasn't really ready to be a cultural icon like he became. I think him and NN Taleb are on similar footing when it comes to the quality of their thought though. Both are interesting, but the well isn't very deep and you'll have to move on to something new before long.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
    > The thing people miss is there are a lot of people out there who haven't been exposed to such ideas. Every single idea he has is conservative orthodoxy of one kind or another. Nobody living in the Western world has been spared exposure to the ideas he is so in love with. He is just good at failing to explaining them while being as un-concise as possible.
    - war1025 6y ago
      > Nobody living in the Western world has been spared exposure to the ideas he is so in love with If that were the case, he wouldn't have the massive following he does.
      - ithkuil 6y ago
        Over the past decades in the western world those conservative orthodoxies have been challenged and a new set of norms have emerged and are perceived as the new orthodoxies. Peterson's followers follow him because of his "guts" to speak up, but he's doesn't seem to be proposing new norms but rather showing how the conservative worldview can still offer a cure for the current pain points. His followers follow him because he reinforces existing points of view. Nothing wrong with that, just saying that having such following doesn't imply original ideas. I recommend the "what is true?" making sense podcast episode (https://samharris.org/podcasts/what-is-true/ https://samharris.org/podcasts/what-is-true/). It helped me better understand Peterson outside of the spotlight generated by him touching the controversial topics if our society. My opinion on him after that interview is even less flattering: he seemed interested in bending terminology and logic itself for the benefit of crafting a worldview he deems innate to humans, instead of researching our nature though inquiry. The feeling I got was that of an erudite anti-scientist.
- danharaj 6y ago
  I can't prove a negative. Show me something JBP has said that is challenging and novel.
  - mistermann 6y ago
    Are you yet another one of those people that things the onus is on other people to disprove your assertion (whoever speaks first is correct by default)? For all I know you know nothing of him and are simply writing an uninformed opinion, something that is extremely common, and becoming moreso every day.

dvt 6y ago

I've read a couple, but I'm not a statistician, so I can't comment with any authority on his papers. For what it's worth, JBP has written more papers and is cited way more widely than Taleb. (But I'm not a psychologist either.)

mistermann 6y ago

vapid - offering nothing that is stimulating or challenging. I'm curious how you have evaluated JBP to be vapid, could you provide some details of your analysis?

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
JBP is absolutely off wrt Post-Modernism. He keeps quoting Hicks' books on Postmodernism which must be dismissed as fraud[1]. (Hicks himself presents his book on white supremacist Stefan Molyeux's podcast[2]). my problem with JBP is that he presents his ideas as facts but they are nothing more than pseudo science and cherry picking to fit his narrative (e.g. he hasn't really understood the Jungian archetypes and keeps waffling on about it with great confidence). He seems to fit very well into Alan Sokal's definition of the "intellectual imposter". (the irony here is that Sokal himself hasn't understood postmodernism lol) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHtvTGaPzF4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHtvTGaPzF4 [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkfH87CgKOQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkfH87CgKOQ
- ithkuil 6y ago
  Whether Sokal understands postmodernism is besides the point; his hoax was more about a process rather than about an argument
- blaser-waffle 6y ago
  All of those points sound like a "no true scotsman" -- e.g. "he doesn't understand REAL Postmodernism". All Jungian psychology is pseudoscience; hell most psychology is pseudoscience outside of measurable behaviorist or cognitive approaches.
war1025 6y ago
I feel like the thing about Jordan Peterson is the advice he offers seems pretty obvious if it's stuff you've been exposed to. The thing people miss is there are a lot of people out there who haven't been exposed to such ideas. I do think he got too big too fast and wasn't really ready to be a cultural icon like he became. I think him and NN Taleb are on similar footing when it comes to the quality of their thought though. Both are interesting, but the well isn't very deep and you'll have to move on to something new before long.
- TazeTSchnitzel 6y ago
  > The thing people miss is there are a lot of people out there who haven't been exposed to such ideas. Every single idea he has is conservative orthodoxy of one kind or another. Nobody living in the Western world has been spared exposure to the ideas he is so in love with. He is just good at failing to explaining them while being as un-concise as possible.
  - war1025 6y ago
    > Nobody living in the Western world has been spared exposure to the ideas he is so in love with If that were the case, he wouldn't have the massive following he does.
    - ithkuil 6y ago
      Over the past decades in the western world those conservative orthodoxies have been challenged and a new set of norms have emerged and are perceived as the new orthodoxies. Peterson's followers follow him because of his "guts" to speak up, but he's doesn't seem to be proposing new norms but rather showing how the conservative worldview can still offer a cure for the current pain points. His followers follow him because he reinforces existing points of view. Nothing wrong with that, just saying that having such following doesn't imply original ideas. I recommend the "what is true?" making sense podcast episode (https://samharris.org/podcasts/what-is-true/ https://samharris.org/podcasts/what-is-true/). It helped me better understand Peterson outside of the spotlight generated by him touching the controversial topics if our society. My opinion on him after that interview is even less flattering: he seemed interested in bending terminology and logic itself for the benefit of crafting a worldview he deems innate to humans, instead of researching our nature though inquiry. The feeling I got was that of an erudite anti-scientist.
danharaj 6y ago
I can't prove a negative. Show me something JBP has said that is challenging and novel.
- mistermann 6y ago
  Are you yet another one of those people that things the onus is on other people to disprove your assertion (whoever speaks first is correct by default)? For all I know you know nothing of him and are simply writing an uninformed opinion, something that is extremely common, and becoming moreso every day.