Is Jordan Peterson a fraud?

I originally gave his ideas a listen after a recommendation from a friend following the Cathy Newman interview. I read his book and watched some of his videos too. His self-help stuff seems genuinely useful but aha... he is not just a self-help guru because he has politics. I'll be more specific... he has very very bad and very stupid politics.

Someone needs to explain to me how Post-Modern-Neo-Marxism is supposed to work. I've read Marx and some post-modernism and they are not mutually compatible. Post-modernism is a fringe faction within social-science academia which is critical of power and also grand narratives, universal truth, and positivism. I don't get what it has to do with political correctness or a desire to define people as victim groups. I also don't get how it was supposed to take over the world, regain its Marxist aspects and also stay a fringe faction within social science academia.

I also don't get how Peterson can define all things he does not like as collectivist as therefore linked to Stalinism. Trans-gender activists apparently have the 'same philosophy' which has killed millions of people. The Google HR department is the same thing too. 🤷

What Peterson is doing is producing the same silly right-wing conspiracy theories and straw-man arguments of Glenn Beck and Alex Jones whilst repackaging it with a fake intellectual mystique. He might be a talented academic psychologist but his understanding of political theory wouldn't pass undergraduate standard. He doesn't use sources and his arguments do not hang together. I struggle to think that he does not understand the flaws in his own arguments.

He speaks confidently and he speaks well. He is an excellent clinical psychologist and his videos probably help turn some people's lives around. Its because of this he is a snake charmer who fools people who should know better into being uncritical of his very weak political ideas.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

okaybut · 56-60, M

I agree he often simplifies things to a large extent. However I have noticed some of these arguments are being placed against similarly simple theories. I am a philosophical materialist with knowledge being based up physical laws read by our senses. I find the notion that gender as being more than binary to be illogical and appreciate his simplified response on this. Of course we can define gender however we wish and with time terms may change with culture, but for a group to arbitrarily shape definitions of gender and legally imply they must be followed is preposterous in my view.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@okaybut I think there are two genders which are binary, distinct and linked to sexual reproduction. I think that there are also a number of people who genuinely do not fit into either camp. They are a tiny and persecuted minority who deserve protection. I don't regard mandating people to change their language when describing these people as a huge problem for me.

okaybut · 56-60, M

@Burnley123 I certainly believe in the protections. However, let me phrase it from a personal level. When I teach my classes, I can barely remember a name let alone a gender. I can see a boy or girl and say him or her easily enough. Someone could state to me their gender (I think 31 in Canada), however it will be very likely I will forget (often 600 students in a term - way too many to remember names or genders). In Canada the use of expressed Genders is somewhat mandated by law - has not yet been brought to a case. So if someone asks that I use a gender, I may likely forget. I could ask them to use a card (you could ask me to create a map of the room, but honestly I don't want to), however, I am not sure if this is illegal that I ask them to do this. This for me is the problem on a personal level and to some extent reveals an issue where language is created ahead of its natural formation by culture. If the government legally stays out, the words should naturally form. We could have government penalizes racist word use, but not neutral. If he or she is not neutral for now, that concerns me greatly.

Burnley123 · 41-45, M

@okaybut I teach too but young kids and the same ones every day, so I remember their names LOL.

Personally, I don't think anyone would mind as long as you show respect to people. If you misgender someone once, it's surely no big deal?

This for me is the problem on a personal level and to some extent reveals an issue where language is created ahead of its natural formation by culture.

I dunno. Governments have always had rules on what language not to use. Even the US Constitution is against hate speech. I agree that having so many gender names is a bit much but I just don't see a huge problem being caused here. Peterson is utterly wrong to imply this will lead to tyranny because he has no historical comparisons.