Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lobster Boy (was: This Jordan Peterson Guy)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #26
    Originally posted by Bruno
    This guy keeps crossing my radar so I thought I’d check the OTF reaction, which looks not unpredictably kneejerk so far. I don’t think he can be called “alt right” and I’m not sure we even know what alt right is at this point (a conversation I don’t want to have). He’s mainly motivated by animosity toward “postmodernism” and “neo-Marxism” but he’s light years from being a Trump supporter.
    Bruno, having read the other examples of Peterson's views posted here by Incandenza, ursus and SB, it's going to take an awful lot to convince me that the man isn't a prize dickhead. Refusing to accept how people choose to refer to themselves, raging against a "murderous ideology", equating Marxism with the deaths of 100 million people...

    Comment


      #27
      Here's an example of the context in which Peterson's voice has been amplified. Wilfred Laurier is not the only Canadian University whose processes exacerbate the issue. Interrogating 20+ year old teaching assistants is not a good look.

      Comment


        #28
        Bruno, as a minor point of order, you suggested Newman's interview was BBC4 - there is a BBC4, but as others have mentioned in passing, the interview was for Channel 4 (News), which is nowt to do with the BBC.

        Comment


          #29
          Surely the point is that you call people by their preferred pronoun. It's not designated by anyone except the only person who it impacts and the only person who should care.

          Comment


            #30
            Originally posted by Bruno
            Here's my question: who decided for all transgender people that the new pronouns in question were the preferred and correct ones? I don't know the data but I've read that most transgender people prefer either he or she.
            Absolutely no one. Peterson refuses to follow someone's request for what pronoun to use after they make it known.

            I also indicated my refusal to apply what are now known as “preferred” pronouns to people who do not fit easily into traditional gender categories (although I am willing to call someone “he” or “she” in accordance with their manner of self-presentation).
            So if a trans man presents enough like a man in Peterson's judgement, he's fine calling that person "he", but if that person asks to be called a different pronoun, he will refuse that request, and also presumably if someone looks masculine in his opinion but asks to be called "her," again, fuck you, according to Peterson.

            Comment


              #31
              Peterson, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, has said that his position isn't so much against the pronouns, but against efforts to persuade people to use them even if they don't want to.

              From the Inside Higher Ed article linked above.

              Comment


                #32
                It appears, then, that he's contradicting himself. "These words are at the vanguard of a post-modern, radical leftist ideology that I detest", very much sounds like he's against the pronouns themselves.

                Perhaps he's trying to walk back his position because it was so obviously stupid, and he's got embarrassed by it.

                Comment


                  #33
                  Originally posted by Bruno
                  I get that, but I'm asking where these new words are coming from, which will surely influence what's considered correct. If anybody can make up any pronoun they want, we could be in for confusing times, especially if you can be fined for using the wrong one.
                  Does it matter where they come from? If someone wants to be called by a pronoun, it's only basic decency and politeness to use that pronoun.

                  Also, nobody is getting fined for using the wrong pronoun accidentally. People are getting called on it when they are wilfully and deliberately using the wrong pronoun, which is almost always going to be done as an attempt to demean a person for having a non-binary gender identity.

                  I also don't understand what you mean by "considered correct". Do you mean the pronoun that someone considers correct for themselves? Surely that is entirely up to them. Or do you mean the pronoun that "society" (in whatever form) considers correct? In which case you're probably creating a straw man.

                  Comment


                    #34
                    Originally posted by Bruno
                    Right, so it seems that the question is whether this just makes him a "prize dickhead" or whether he should also be fined for harassment/discrimination, or run out of his job, or... Since many on the left are in favor of the latter, you can sort of see his point about Mao, as extreme and unhelpfully emotive as it is.
                    Yeah. I have him at prize dickhead. Prize dickhead who has increasingly been pitching his thoughts at Alt-Right/Mens Rights plonkers who'll use it as a veneer of respectability. But, it's not like there aren't other prize dickheads in academia.

                    Not that hounding him out of his job would be the equivalent of Maoism. 100 million Canadians aren't going to die of starvation if Jordan Peterson does lose his job for abusing his position.

                    Comment


                      #35
                      The "If anyone can make up any pronoun they want" sounds a lot like "If we let men marry men, next thing people will be marrying their dog or their horse". This is the sort of thing that's going to be an issue with 1 or 2 people out of a university class of hundreds. If you think this is going to be an issue, it's only because you want it to be an issue.

                      Comment


                        #36
                        FWIW I suspect Peterson is a lifelong academic who, either due to his own volition or circumstances, found himself thrown into a hot educational debate. He's clearly the antithesis of media-savvy, and probably didn't expect his musings to be turned into international headlines. Watching his responses to Newman he's clearly learned, or is learning, to consider carefully before replying. He dimly realises he's not in a faculty club discussion anymore. I suspect that's why he's adjusted/moderated his statements since the Toronto Life article over a year ago that UA posted.

                        Comment


                          #37
                          Originally posted by Bruno
                          But that's really my point. People are going to decide what they want to be called according to what they perceive are collectively accepted or recognizable pronouns. I think it's very unlikely that this will individuate, which is part of why I wondered where these pronouns are coming from.
                          Ah. I thought it was fairly well known that there were now 'new/odd/annoying' pronouns being used in the gender-identification conversation. Obviously we're well beyond 'there are only he and she', and words such as ze, zir, hin and of course, they have increasingly been used by people who simply don't identify on the recognized binary. Or, they may indeed identify but don't want the baggage that comes with he/she. So, like virtually any other community, you let them decide what they want to be called.

                          Comment


                            #38
                            Originally posted by Bruno
                            He just thinks there's an ideological connection that boils down to limiting free speech.
                            Mmm. Possible. I guess. And maybe he's worried about being fined and whatnot. Or he's just a small-minded bigot who doesn't want to perform the most basic of civil accommodations because he doesn't agree with them.

                            Comment


                              #39
                              Can we please stop with this "limiting free speech" nonsense? He's free to say what he wants. Freedom of speech =/= freedom from the consequences of your statements.

                              Comment


                                #40
                                As well as looking a lot like an anti-trans bigot, his comments on masculinity and women show him to be a total prick. Whenever someone starts wailing against Post-Modernism as the key to all our ills, you know you are in the presence of an idiot.

                                He might not be alt-right himself, but he doesn’t seem too concerned about being a poster boy for the 4chan arseholes.
                                Last edited by Lang Spoon; 16-02-2018, 18:59.

                                Comment


                                  #41
                                  Hasn't he already said it? The fact that he's being pulled up on his egregious bullshit is quite another kettle of pronouns.

                                  Comment


                                    #42
                                    How on earth are pronouns decided at community level, when we're just "letting" people use the pronoun they're most comfortable with, and not being arseholes by refusing to use that pronoun?

                                    Comment


                                      #43
                                      I am very weirded out by the idea of “community” deciding the proper use of words. That was the half arsed defense some idiots were putting out for the Old Fat Labour masquerading as Corbynite MP who used the words bent and chinkie at a Burns Supper the other week.

                                      Comment


                                        #44
                                        Although I’ve just read you again Bruno and I guess you are meaning to the non binary community, rather than the wider community.

                                        But not, apparently.
                                        Last edited by Lang Spoon; 16-02-2018, 19:15.

                                        Comment


                                          #45
                                          What I meant was you seemed to be suggesting that the majority should decide what words are acceptable. Without PC Gone Mad, my Dad would still want a Chinkie at the weekend rather than a Chinese meal.

                                          Comment


                                            #46
                                            Originally posted by Toby Gymshorts View Post
                                            Can we please stop with this "limiting free speech" nonsense?
                                            Why are you trying to limit my free speech?

                                            Comment


                                              #47
                                              Originally posted by Bruno
                                              I haven't seen enough evidence to tell me that Peterson is a bigot. He insists he isn't transphobic. He's skeptical of the non-binary view but I see no implicit hatred or desire to discriminate against or punish anyone for their identities. I could be wrong obviously.
                                              Have you ever heard a bigot admit he's a bigot?

                                              Comment


                                                #48
                                                Originally posted by Bruno
                                                Well, the majority does decide what words are acceptable. PC Gone Mad = PC won a majority for the example you mention. Usage evolves.
                                                The majority decides only after pressure, usually from the groups being derided/offended/demeaned by current usage.

                                                Comment


                                                  #49
                                                  Originally posted by Lang Spoon View Post
                                                  As well as looking a lot like an anti-trans bigot, his comments on masculinity and women show him to be a total prick. Whenever someone starts wailing against Post-Modernism as the key to all our ills, you know you are in the presence of an idiot.

                                                  He might not be alt-right himself, but he doesn’t seem too concerned about being a poster boy for the 4chan arseholes.
                                                  He just doesn't understand much about history or philosophy - or biology, as his thing about the lobsters is wayyyy off - and yet he imagines himself to be one of the world's great experts on these things and his followers believe that just because he cites books they haven't read, that he must be making an evidence-based argument. This whole business of protecting the individual against "groupthink" is the classic cry of the Dunning-Kruger idiot who thinks reality is a conspiracy against their freedom.

                                                  I mean, that thing about "the West discovering the sovereignty of the individual" is mindbogglingly dumb.

                                                  A) There is no consistently defined place or set of ideas called "The West." It has shifted many times and the idea of "Western Civilization" only emerged in the 19th century. It's all part of the old "Have you read 'Rise of the Coloured Empires' but this fellow Goddard..." stuff.

                                                  B) Nobody "discovered" the sovereignty of the individual. These things are social constructs that we collectively agree to, or not, because we prefer to live in one kind of set-up or the other. It was an idea invented and pushed by a handful of white guys during the Enlightenment period as a response to their displeasure with feudalism, monarchy, and the Church. It only applied to white male land-owners and, to a large extent, it still is largely confined to that group. It may be a good idea for other reasons, but this notion that you can squint really hard and to discover Natural Law that we are all beholden to is obvious bullshit that should not have survived the 18th, let alone the 19th and 20th centuries.

                                                  C) The idealized western liberal democracy that values individual sovereignty and downplays tribal affiliations may have started to emerge in the west first, but in the grand sweep of history, it happened in Europe only a blink before it did other places and did so because of very specific circumstances, not because of any superiority of the "race" or even the culture. So we shouldn't take too much credit.

                                                  D) Places outside "The West" adopted some of the ideas we associate with the aforementioned glorious Western Democracy - India had some "republics" in ancient times, Native Americans had some democratic institutions and, at least in some areas, gave women a lot more leadership roles. The Persians should have been the good guys. Islam has historically been far more tolerant and accepting of religious diversity than Christendom. And fascism persisted in the west, in Spain especially, long after India and Japan adopted democracy. Europe still has monarchs, official churches, and landed gentry, FFS. The US elected Donald Trump.

                                                  E) It's not at all clear that this "sovereignty of the individual" and the complete destruction of communal identity is such a great idea, at least the way it's been implemented by capitalism.

                                                  F) In any event, it's not a remotely Christian idea, unless one's concept of Christianity is confined entirely to right-wing white evangelical American mega-churches over the last 50 years.

                                                  That's six major problems with just one of his pronouncements. Have a left any out? I can't imagine reading 400 pages of that.

                                                  I'd also add that my experience with clinical psychologists is that they, like many academics, don't necessarily know much about anything outside of a narrow field of research. So his credentials aren't that impressive, really.

                                                  Calling trans people by the wrong gender is the equivalent of deliberately and repeatedly getting somebody's name wrong or calling them Chaz when they prefer Charles or Peaches when their name is Elizabeth. It's not strictly illegal, but it's really insulting. Professors shouldn't insult their students and students that are repeatedly insulted have good reason to believe the teacher isn't giving them a fair opportunity.

                                                  Comment


                                                    #50
                                                    Adam Ferguson (now overshadowed by Hume and the willfully misread by bastards like PJ O’Rourke and the Heritage Foundation and obliquely funded dangerous crank UK think tanks Adam Smith) is worth a read HP as far as “Scottish Enlightenment” philosophy goes. In some ways his works are a precursor to modern Sociology, and his critique of Commercial Society puts the boot into the exploiters way more than Smith (whose condemnation of the rentier class and call for universal education as a panacea for the drudgery of industrial labour, and limited protectionism for when country is attempting to develop a new industry would be condemned as Socialism if the pricks who eulogize him actually bothered reading him).

                                                    Unlike the agnostic but Smug Racist Tory Hume, and the at least outwardly Religiously Respectable and studiously apolitical Smith, Ferguson was (originally) a Calvinist Minister who could speak the Gaelic of the dwindling minority (through willing emigration/moving to Lowland Scotland/language assimilation/Involuntary clearance for sheep) of Perthshire. Yet his work in comparative religion and of different societies seems strikingly modern and sympathetic. An influence on Hegel and (Jordan’s fave) Marx. Those were different times. I guess the madness of religious zeal could also burn with the fire of social justice in the Name of Christ’s Kingdom.

                                                    If I could be arsed to study dialectic enough and still had my wits in full I’d be a Frankfurt School Marxist. Anyone who tries to blame them for the deaths of 100m can get tae fuck.
                                                    Last edited by Lang Spoon; 16-02-2018, 21:06.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X