Great book especially with his new one coming soon. Beyond Order is being released on March 2nd, 2021.
If you haven’t read this, maybe now is the time? :)
CamelCamelCamel.
Admit it you have a bias against him.
How is that scamming people? You might want to check rule 10 ;)
No one is being forced to donate to his patreon. People donate because they feel like they gained something from his content.
His comments that you are willfully misrepresenting are in reference to the idiots who want to shut his speech down, not his fans, it's basically a "(profanity) you, no matter what you do I just get bigger"
No doubt he's making absolute bank but so what? More power to him after the way the radical left universities treated him. Why is he a scammer?
People want to hear what he has to say, they pay him to do so; that's not a scam. He's not even a sensationalist or a partisan, far worse loud mouths making their money on Patreon. If 'the libs' didn't whip up so much hysteria around the guy he wouldn't be so popular with people sick of their nonsense, hack or person of substance.
I wouldn't call myself a huge fan of JP but I think he makes some pretty convincing arguments. Some of his talks and interviews are quite thought provoking.
Just beat me to it (was typing a longer version of this)
Nicely worded
"He makes pretty convincing arguments"
"How so"
"Well, I agree with them"
"And"
"No, that's pretty much it"
Read my response above, I posted it before I saw this comment.
Why is this guy so hated? I only heard of him because of OzB deals but never cared to Google him.
You are probably going to have to come to your own conclusions with this one, way too much bias and outright miss information being posted here
This is the interview that really kicked off his internet fame, if you've got an hour to spare it's worth a watch.
Thanks! I'll put it on the side while working next week.
Because he triggers those on the left.
If you take a browse of his book it's basically self help
Rule #13 eat only red meat
Rule #14 get hooked on benzos
Rule #15 don't use this book as toilet paper
You'll be much happier in life if you show empathy and compassion to people when they are suffering, rather than try to tear them down.
He is human too.
He's telling them to take responsibility for their life rather than expecting it be handed to them.. Lazy campaigners don't wanna hear this
Those who want respect give respect.
GoodQuestion
GoodAnswer
I always find the way sjw’s react to Jordan Peterson to be both baffling and a little bit frightening. A more milquetoast and mundane, slightly left-of-centre, Biden-supporting moderate Democrat you could scarcely find. Peterson is clearly intelligent, clearly knows psychology, and is clearly only saying things to try to help his target audience. But the way these radical leftists respond to his perfectly middle-of-the-road, commonsense approach, is to scream and melt like they’re the wicked witch of the west doused in water.
And these are the people that have all the power in society now - and are using that power to censor dissent and silence free speech.
If we Normies are going to continue to enjoy the freedoms our forefathers took for granted, like freedom of speech and freedom of religion - we’re going to have to fight for them, and we’re going to have to defeat these fanatics.
yes we must stand up for our right to express ourselves by silencing those who we do not agree with
Some people’s idea of free speech is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage.
Who’s being silenced? You label people ‘radical leftists’ and ‘social justice warriors’ for expressing an opinion. Nobody is being prevented from publishing or reading this book.
Parler was shutdown in the blink of an eye by Corporate monopolies acting as proxies for the incoming government.
They were silenced.
New York Post, the oldest newspaper in America, was censored and had their twitter account blocked for the crime of doing investigative journalism on a Democrat politician.
They were silenced.
The sitting President of the USA at the time was banned from Twitter.
He was silenced.
It is happening everywhere and with increasing velocity. Those were just the prominent examples - it has been happening for more than 3 years now and growing in severity with each passing month.
There is a term for when the government and corporate monopolies cooperate in this way: that term is "Fascism".
Fascism doesn't mean "Nazi". Fascism means "a system of government where an elite class control both the government with one-party rule, and corporate entities which have monopolies on their respective economic sectors".
If don't you think America has become a left-wing Fascist country over the last few months - you don't know what the word "Fascist" means.
And yes, you're right - racism is a defining characteristic of Fascism too.
But the left-wing Fascists ARE racist - racist against people of European heritage - barring them from certain jobs and excluding them from government assistance on the basis of a birth factor that they have no control over. That is the definition of "racist".
The US is a left wing fascist state. I love the Internet sometimes.
But the left-wing Fascists ARE racist - racist against people of European heritage - barring them from certain jobs and excluding them from government assistance on the basis of a birth factor that they have no control over. That is the definition of "racist".
Lol.
A reminder that Jordan Peterson's best-selling books remain freely available, as does the New York Post newspaper. Trump as POTUS could command a global audience without Twitter, and for you to claim a newspaper has been silenced because they've lost a social media channel is pearl-clutching in the extreme. In fact it's a joke.
It's good to be concerned about the power of governments and corporations. It's silly to panic about grumpkins and snarks victimising white people.
slightly left-of-centre, Biden-supporting
this mf thinks joe biden is on the left. joe biden isn't even considered on the left in the country that just replaced a proto-fascist president lmao
Do you realise how extremist you sound trying to claim that Joe Biden - the leader of the left-wing Democrats - is not "on the left"?
You've instantly lost all credibility in the eyes of normal people now.
Normal people think Joe Biden is a Moderate-left Democrat.
If you don't think he's left-wing, your political compass is waaaaaay off calibration.
Normal people think Joe Biden is a Moderate-left Democrat.
Normal people think joe biden is one of the most conservative democrats in existence. That was the stated reason he was chosen as Obama's VP. And Democrats are almost uniformly behind Reaganite economics — definitely a strongly left-wing ideology!
Go spam your lame projecting buzzwords at someone else.
The Overton window has shifted so far to the right that anything that isn't Republican looks left-wing.
The US does not have a major left wing party. The Democrats are by-and-large a neoliberal party.
@unelectric: You are mistaken, the Overton window has moved to the left. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez is one of the most emblematic members who represent the Democratic Party in 2021. In no way is she neo-liberal or right-wing, far from it. It is AOC and the people like her who define the Democrat Party in 2021, and the only word to describe it is “left”.
@Gamer Dad Reviews: AOC and the progressive Squad are 6 members out of 221.
Also if AOC is emblematic of the Democratic party then surely the party would've rallied behind Bernie in 2016 and 2020. Oh, wait…
sjw
Radical leftists
You forgot soy boy beta cucks
Society isn’t so blatantly left or right
SJWs are angry about their situation in life and inability to take responsibility for it.. it's masked as wanting equality for all.
Projection & conservatives.
Name a more iconic duo.
Progressives and hypocrisy.
Success and wealth.. try it sometime
@cobrakai: And here you are using your wealth and success to get 30% off eBay underwear (with cash back).
Was a huge fan of Peterson when I first came across his stuff, especially his talks about agreeability and how to be a good parent. I then listened a few debates and realised that whenever he doesn’t know how to counter an argument, he typically says ‘I don’t believe that’s true, numerous studies support the contrary view’. There was a debate once about transgender people and the argument was put to him as to why we can’t spare them the simple courtesy of referring to them as their preferred pronoun as these people experience bullying, degradation etc, and his response was effectively him saying ‘that’s not true, studies don’t support that, in fact I have numerous transgender people who write to me saying the opposite’. Anecdotal evidence and referencing uncited and most probably handpicked or non-existent studies - that’s when I lost interest…
Yup. Basically if he can't find 'facts and logic' that support his claim, he'll find 'alternative' facts and logic even if they're not supported by the vast majority of experts in their field. He does this to hide his disrespect of certain peoples wishes/needs.
There was a debate once about transgender people and the argument was put to him as to why we can’t spare them the simple courtesy of referring to them as their preferred pronoun as these people experience bullying, degradation etc,
I don't agree with everything he has said, but he's position on pronouns, although potentially misguided has been repeated ad nauseam. He doesn't have an issue with using preferred pronouns, just with the government compelling their use. He would equally be against white men in America deciding they were a Master, and the government forcing people to call them it.
False equivalency much? Pronouns - she/he/they etc do not indicate superiority. 'master' does. That's a different topic.
Only if you deliberately go out of your way to take it out if context. The fact that he spoke out on an issue involving trans rights was purely coincidental, he has said that he usually uses people's preferred pronouns. His issue is what he viewed as compelled speech, my point doesn't try to draw any equivalence, it simply points out the fact that his objection actually has little to do with trans rights, anything else you read into it is your projections.
@tryagain: Your point is inherently drawing equivalence by drawing it up as a counter-example, especially since you're mentioning "He would equally be against white men in America deciding they were a Master". This isn't projection, it's just reading it as you've written.
Additionally, "he has said that he usually uses people's preferred pronouns" - So who is he to judge what someone wants to be called? Clearly he has some bias in the matter and is arguing in bad faith. It's less about limiting government compulsion and more about wanting to be nasty to those he doesn't like.
Your point is inherently drawing equivalence by drawing it up as a counter-example
That would be debatable, if you took it out of context of the previous comments and considered it in isolation, but in context not even close.
Additionally, "he has said that he usually uses people's preferred pronouns" - So who is he to judge what someone wants to be called? Clearly he has some bias in the matter and is arguing in bad faith. It's less about limiting government compulsion and more about wanting to be nasty to those he doesn't like.
Sigh, it seems as if you don't understand his position on this, he doesn't really have issue with people having preferred pronouns, he generally doesn't have an issue with using them, he did have an issue with what he perceived as the government dictating compelled speech and those who were advocating for it. Some people seem to lose their objectivity when they hear it involves trans rights and totally miss the point
Which then brings me back to my comment of using an extreme example to show why allowing a government to dictate compelled speech based in how somebody see themself is a bad idea. My "equally" had nothing to do with equating the example at hand and the extreme case, it was to highlight that he would have been just as against the law even if it was as far removed as possible.
He has commented on this a few times and everytime I've heard him comment, he said that he would refer to people by their preferred pronoun. He doesn't want the law to determine that he has to. It turns out that his interpretation of the law wasn't correct but people are still angry about this position.
I borrowed this junk from local library after a long waiting period. Nothing more than the usual junk of waking up early and sh1t , especially suitable for that wannabe like Mr/Ms Westpac troll. Definitely a neg for $12. but recommend it under $2.
kinda expensive for toilet paper, even during shortages
Your mummy buys it anyway
It's truly amazing how triggered folks get for someone who is empowering people. Who gives a flying f*k what nonsense you think this guy produces and whether it's right or wrong. Like food, like electrical products people have a different taste depending on a variety of things. If you don't like him, great! Move on! But playing the righteous card like your some sort of genius is pathetic.
IMO it's a good deal for tangibly saving my suicidal cousin from self destruction. Doing better and turned his life around from reading/watching his content.
Regardless of your sensitivities towards the content his produced through his personal opinion, his helped people and that's more than most could proudly state.
People should be able to debate in an open and civil way though.
That's awesome news about your brother though and hope he continues to do better.
If they were paying you $12 to read this book, it still wouldn't be a good deal
Easier to just get $12 from welfare right
If only Jordan Peterson’s supporters and detractors spent half as much energy on finding and posting great bargains to this site instead of whatever is going on in this thread
He's a grifter of the highest order, and the epitome of the stupid man's smart person.
He's got lot of shit takes including but not limited to
Do you think we should remove gender binary categories for sport then?
Forget the men's and women's, all sports are now open gender, as the categories are irrelevant?
Would this be good for women?
Wow, you think those are all "shit takes" that says a lot.
I honestly regard every single one of those points you raised as being obvious and self-evident. If you have an actual argument as to why they’re not, it ought to be a bloody good one or else you’re just taking out of your ass.
Well you're wrong with your first point in both respects.
Gender is a social construct, not biology, so there are as many genders as people want them to be. This is very basic.
Sex is biological, you're right, but you're a bit dim because there is a portion of the population that is intersex anyway, so good luck putting them into binary categories.
It's amusing how confident ignorant people are.
Not sure what you're trying to prove but you're only promoting the benefits of his thinking by those points.
I hope for the sake of the intelligence of the human race you only try breeding with the same gender…
He's a grifter? So people who support him don't know they really don't support him? People can give their money to who they want and for whatever reason they want. I wouldn't, but if someone will they aren't being taken advantage of.
Fair enough you don't like all of his takes and I'll agree, he has some shit ones but let's not start lying.
The reason why he came into prominence is that he refused to use compelled speech in Canada. The law was telling him which language to use, and would punish him otherwise.
Yes the things you listed are known.
But there is a large vocal group in USA and Canada that try to promote alternatives.
Your argument is poor because you don't understand why he's espousing these things.
This guy is a lightweight populist Tracey Grimshaw common sense style warrior.
He is outclassed by Sam Harris by miles in their series of talks. Even an aussie comedian made him look an intellectual amateur during their interview.
Waste of money
Sam Harris seems to respect Jordan Peterson to a high degree. As someone who has been interested in both. They both have their intellectual flaws but that doesn't make them 'amatuers'. They are both recognised in their fields and as public speakers. However, check out Very Bad Wizards podcast if you like Sam Harris.
If people think either one is downright dumb, you probably have misinterpreted something.
Reading through these comments half seem to be from people who have read one guardian opinion piece and got angry at the 'right wing'.
Nothing you’ve said invalidates anything I have said.
I don’t ‘like’ either of them. I enjoy reading/watching/listening to a range of views.
I may have missed it, but in any of Jordans rules, is there anything along the lines of “it’s not hard to show people some respect”
It is really sad that Leftists get triggered over advice that is life-enhancing & helps people to become better persons.
Jordan Peterson's entire 42 rules are listed here:
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-valuable-things-ever…
There is nothing political about them.
Following a rule such as "Make friends with people who want the best for you" will make a person's life become better, irrespective of whether the person votes Greens or whether they vote Nationals.
A lot of Leftists suffer from a severe inferiority complex… Rather than work hard at improving themselves it's easier to bitch about what advantages others have. Pathetic really.
I don't think it's an inferiority complex.
It's an idea that something greater is responsible for society's (and in turn, your life's) every ill. Government, patriarchy, misogyny, capitalism, fatphobia, transphobia, endemic racism.
It leads to a miserable existence - rather than gratitude for what little you have and realising most of us have some small but important levers which control how our life turns out, yelling at the sky and always complaining about something you have almost zero control over is somehow seen as a better, and more productive way forward.
No one cares about his rules, I hope you realise. They're all the same generic self-help ideas that have been regurgitated for hundreds of years. People only care about his real world politics and/or hilarious life choices.
As someone who is left of centre. Yes, it's sad to see so many people triggered and responding based on opinion pieces, not on anything they have actually seen of his work. This is clear whenever an example is brought to that is clearly is missing context i.e. Jordan Peterson refuses to call trans people by their preferred pronoun, whereas he has literally stated that he would. He just said that he doesn't want the law to compel him to do so.
Edit: C-16 just adds gender identity as a protected class against discrimination. Nothing to do with pronouns.
You are right, he was wrong in that case.
Grifting mysoginist who is now hilariously yet sadly now hooked on benzos proving himself a hypocrite.
What a sad individual you are. Misogynist Lollll ok
Down vote for saying there is anything good about Jordan Peterson. He can take his sexist racist bigotry ideology and (profanity) the (profanity) off.
Bloke is a dead set (profanity) hole.
No he's not, but truth hurts… I can tell.
What truth? That this guy is stuck with 1900s mindset and trying to dress it up with new age speak?
I see a bigot, I call a bigot.
The irony of calling him a biggot when one of his central messages are dividing people up into groups is a bad idea.
Many posts about JP being racist, sexist etc. Can someone post links?
Ok rundown on him here https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/how-dangerou…
Basically if you like someone who is an alt-right icon, maybe you're alt-right as well… He is a good talker and writes and speaks very well but his messages are toxic and fall in line with some of the worst people.
A lot of people think oh wow he knows his stuff and take his message to heart, like women havent suffered and feminism is bad, women should know their roles and stay out of the man's world.
I've only seen some of his videos that have popped up on my YouTube feed. But I didn't believe he appeared to be as "dangerous" as many here are saying.
I don't buy the idea that if you like him you're an alt right. Liking some of his ideas doesn't automatically suggest support for everything he has said/done.
Linking an article off the internet means nothing.
He is not alt right.
Keep trying to silence and dismiss him by calling him names though
Firstly that's an opinion piece. Secondly, where has Peterson said that "women should know their roles and stay out of the man's world"?
Can you find a nore left wing anti JP source for us. I'm not sure that one is convincing enough.
Go make yourself a soy latte and have a lay down.
I wouldn't necessarily say he's racist (although he happily hosts podcasts with white supremacists) but he's a Christian so holds sexist/homophobic views:
but he's a Christian so holds sexist/homophobic views
The irony of accusing someone of being broadly dismissive, whilst being broadly dismissive.
He holds those views and is a Christian, no? It's not much of a leap to say one influenced the other.
@Autonomic: For all I know, you may well be correct and he does hold those views, but that was not what I was referring to.
Your statement that because he is a Christian, he must have sexist and homophobic views, as if all Christians must hold the same values as the Old Testament.
That was the broad sweeping statement I was referring to.
What? Christian automatically a sexist and homophobe? Lollll
Sounds like you're a bigot here.
I tried reading some of Peterson's stuff once and found his style very convoluted, kind of like some Scientology stuff I had read previously; it is written in such a way that it can often mean whatever you want it to mean.
You could probably get the same life lessons by attending a church, and that costs nothing.
It's funny because none of Peterson's views are in any way controversial if you actually listen to, and acknowledge his arguments and talks in full.
It's interesting to watch people misrepresent him somehow as a Nazi or whatever to try and dismiss and silence him, and force compliance. He is probably the most intentionally and unintentionally misrepresented person in the world.
People are happy to read any old headline on the internet and accept it, and form their life view off it, but apparently don't have half an hour to engage him with an open mind.
It's the Twitter age… anyone who disagrees is a nazi … and some how right wing is a bad thing…
@istyler: Sorry, yes calling him a scammer is probably incorrect (as I noted above). An opportunist is probably better.
Re controversy - he seeks the controversy as that’s what makes him the money. And my point is that he is not an expert in the field yet he is marketed as one.
The views he puts forward are controversial and often extreme and I think it’s important that we can seperate out who is an expert in a field versus who is a pundit. Especially when people who seem to agree with him really cling to the fact that what he said is ‘scientific and factual’ when it is not, it’s conjecture and opinion.