1 user browsing this thread: (0 members, and 1 guest).
a glitch in the what
|
Author |
Message |
arrhenius
Contributes Regularly
Joined:
Jun 2018
Sex: Male
Posts:
247
Reputation: 408
Rep Post
|
RE: a glitch in the what
10-31-2018 10:45 AM
(10-31-2018 2:59 AM)Macro Wrote: https://youtu.be/AwXAB6cICG0u
Thanks for posting. I didnt think the video was damning to Peterson, though i think its good to scrutinize him. He makes mistakes, but I dont come away thinking hes a manipulative, bipolar lunatic like some of the comments would have me believe.
I liked Weinstein's input as well. Sam Harris i dismissed after his email correspondence with Chomsky, so thats a bias of my own. The comment below was posted in response to the video you linked, it was made by one of the debaters also on the panel with Peterson and Weinstein. Here is what he had to say about the video:
"As the other person in that debate with Weinstein, all I can say is that you misrepresent Jordan's position, which could be understandable because Jordan often does not offer his ideas in complete syllogistic forms, he is conversational and considers his thought to be constantly in process of refining itself. What makes your misrepresentation of his idea less forgivable is how you spend a considerable chunk of the video being an ass and accusing Jordan of ill will and manipulative intention. What you have failed to represent in your rebuttal is the frame of his basic description of physical reality and how human consciousness engages the world, something which he has stated numerous times. His argument is that the world contains an innumerable and overwhelming amount of facts, and human experience is the condensation and focusing of that potentiality into coherent hierarchies of facts. And so although the fact that you found my fingerprints on a gun is indeed true, its importance, its importance in the hierarchy of facts is subordinate to the reason why you are considering that fact and not the innumerable other places on which you can also find my fingerprints. The argument is that this reason for considering my fingerprints on a gun is a higher truth, the purpose (the word true actually means “on target”) it is the “glasses” through which you even bother looking at one fact rather than another, and that higher truth necessarily moves into the realm of story, of ethics at the least, and ultimately in the type of hierarchy of beings and action which is the staple of religious structures. In this sense, for Jordan, facts are tools, necessarily so because you have to pick the facts you attend to and you do that in order to achieve a goal, even if that goal is only to prove a higher level theory about the physical world. "
- Jonathan Pageau
|
|
10-31-2018 10:45 AM
|
|
Macro
Contributes Regularly
Joined:
Oct 2013
Sex: Male
Posts:
395
Reputation: 361
Rep Post
|
RE: a glitch in the what
10-31-2018 12:43 PM
Hmm bit of weird response to the video and my comments.
I am merely saying Peterson is a post-modernist and dead wrong about his view on truth. I'm saying nothing about his character or his views on other subjects. It was not meant to be damning, nor was it made to make Peterson look bad. This video is arguing a singular specific point - JP's views on truth are complete and utter nonsense.
The guy in the video precisely outlines his reasoning, provides numerous videos and quotes of Jordan Peterson espousing these post-modernist beliefs about truth. Either the video is correct about Peterson's views on truth, or it isn't. If it isn't you should provide reasons as to why it isn't: where was the video logically incorrect, where were they not factual?
The quote from Pageau barely even says anything (in typical JP style). He says the fingers prints on a gun is an important truth, fingerprints on his clothes would be a less important truth - ok, so what? Then he says this is a hierarchy of truth - no it's a hierarchy of what you consider important. In no way is fingerprints on a gun more true than fingerprints on your clothing - facts dont care about your feelings. JP actually says far more than what Pageau is claiming, JP says "if it doesn't serve life, it isn't true" - this is effectively a rephrasing of "if a tree falls and no one hears it, it didnt fall" - the definition of subjective truth. He's right on other stuff, just not this.
Big fan of Harris, but agree his correspondence with Chomsky was poor. But Chomsky wasnt great either.
(This post was last modified: 10-31-2018 12:46 PM by Macro.)
|
|
10-31-2018 12:43 PM
|
|
|
Login or register to remove all advertising
|
stefdude
Senior Member
Joined:
Nov 2013
Sex: Male
Posts:
1,760
Reputation: 808
Rep Post
|
RE: a glitch in the what
11-13-2018 6:24 PM
"THE MEANING OF NEO-MARXISM
I think you're looking at the differences between leaves rather than the forest. In the end, the criticism is marxism is pseudoscience, postmodernism is sophism, and feminism simply false, and that these three movements, by making false statements and impossible promises are leading people into sadness and our civilization in decline.
I study the abrahamic > marxist > Postmodern technique of argument (false promises, pilpul (justificationary sophism) and critique (reputation destruction) as the institutionalization of the female anti social personality expression as a persuasive technique. All these are guments use the same technique. They are all false. And they all cause the damage Peterson Claims.
So the none of the details matter - they are but different decorations on the underlying lie.
The term Neo Marxism refers to the transition of the means of UNDERMINING (reputation destruction) from the Marxist economic to the postmodern cultural complaint. Egro, yes Abrahamists > Marxists > Postmodernists > Feminist.
Same technique, same goal, while changing only the critique."
-Curt Doolittle
They've done studies you know...60% of the time, it works every time
|
|
11-13-2018 6:24 PM
|
|
|
Login or register to remove all advertising
|
|
Login or register to remove all advertising
|
Share This Thread