• Welcome to DOSBODS

    Please consider creating a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

TheBlueCat

Jordan Peterson

Recommended Posts

Professor Jordan Peterson is IMO currently one of the biggest philosophers and intellectual thinkers on the planet. 

Newman being out of her depth pushing an agenda and failing miserably against Dr Petersson has propelled him further into the limelight. Hopefully more people will listen to Peterson, think about what he’s saying and write Newman off as a no mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stepping back. I think the expansion of the HE sector have exposed what a bunch of charlatans most of the Art and Hum schools are.

The more you get these idiots go on telly, on the news, and spount crap, the fast the respect is lost.

Family members who never made it to 16 at school ask me if I did a proper subject at Uni.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, swissy_fit said:

I watched it - he was superb, but I'm not sure everyone would actually get that he demolished her arguments throughout - only the moment at about 23 mins when she is stuttering like an idiot makes it very obvious. The rest of the time to understand just how badly it went for her you would have to have an appreciation of the beautiful precision of his English, and I reckon that would be beyond most casual viewers.  For many, it's all about "feelz" these days.

That said, anyone interested enough to watch the whole half hour would probably also be able to understand him well enough.

 

 

It was masterful that's all I can say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TBF, Peterson was doing his job and so should be good at it, so no brownie points for that from me. No generalist interviewer could be expected to be a specialist in Peterson's field. Peterson, on his subject, should be more knowledgeble and I'd be disappointed if he wasn't. I'd hope that no interviewer could unsettle me on my subject, and, if they can I should be doing something different. Peterson wasn't that good, just competent. I'm sure there are people in Peterson's profession that could give him a run for his money.

Where the interviewer was a bint was in asking stupid questions or sticking to stupid dogma, or perhaps in not even realising she was being stupid.

The pay gap was the greatest example of bintness. The apparent failure to grasp the multivariate concept. Apparently, mind-blowingly dumb.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hopeful said:

TBF, Peterson was doing his job and so should be good at it, so no brownie points for that from me. The interviewer couldn't be expected to be a specialist in Peterson's field, Peterson, on his subject, should be more knowledgeble and I'd be disappointed if he wasn't. Peterson wasn't that good, just competent. I'm sure there are people in Peterson's profession that could give him a run for his money.

Where the interviewer was a bint was in asking stupid questions or sticking to stupid dogma, or perhaps in not even realising she was being stupid.

The pay gap was the greatest example of bintness. The apparent failure to grasp the multivariate concept. Apparently, mind blowingly dumb.

Can you give an example of someone in Peterson’s field who could give him a run for his money? Genuinely interested in tips for pointing me towards shining lights in the field of psychology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, swissy_fit said:

I watched it - he was superb, but I'm not sure everyone would actually get that he demolished her arguments throughout - only the moment at about 23 mins when she is stuttering like an idiot makes it very obvious. The rest of the time to understand just how badly it went for her you would have to have an appreciation of the beautiful precision of his English, and I reckon that would be beyond most casual viewers.  For many, it's all about "feelz" these days.

That said, anyone interested enough to watch the whole half hour would probably also be able to understand him well enough.

 

 

My favourite bit of that interview:

"Got you."

She looked like a goldfish out of it's tank at that point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

TBF, Peterson was doing his job and so should be good at it, so no brownie points for that from me. No generalist interviewer could be expected to be a specialist in Peterson's field. Peterson, on his subject, should be more knowledgeble and I'd be disappointed if he wasn't. I'd hope that no interviewer could unsettle me on my subject, and, if they can I should be doing something different. Peterson wasn't that good, just competent. I'm sure there are people in Peterson's profession that could give him a run for his money.

Where the interviewer was a bint was in asking stupid questions or sticking to stupid dogma, or perhaps in not even realising she was being stupid.

The pay gap was the greatest example of bintness. The apparent failure to grasp the multivariate concept. Apparently, mind-blowingly dumb.

Whoo there.

Hes one bloke, in the spot.

Shell have had been researched. Shell have anumber of people feeding into her ear piece too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Economic Exile said:

Can you give an example of someone in Peterson’s field who could give him a run for his money? Genuinely interested in tips for pointing me towards shining lights in the field of psychology.

No, I'm afraid I can't as it is not my field. So I was speculating. But I am sure he has his equals, if not also some that are his betters.

I'd start by looking at the top universities for Psycology and then focus on whether they are good for clinical psychology (Peterson's field). The top unis will by and large, with a few exceptions, have the top bods. Bearing in mind that some top bods may also be practising independently.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2018/subject-ranking/psychology#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

9 minutes ago, spygirl said:

Whoo there.

Hes one bloke, in the spot.

Shell have had been researched. Shell have anumber of people feeding into her ear piece too.

Nope, makes no difference. I'll cut him no slack. zero. It's his subject. I'd expect nothing less.

You can always spot people who don't know their subject through their unease, and Peterson isn't one of them.

Peterson is good at his job, he should be. And he was doing his job and in his comfort zone.

The interviewer wasn't very good at their job, even though I'd not expect them to be on top of clinical psychology any more than I'd expect them to be versed in all the intracies of global warming. I just expect sensible questions and debate.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was obvious she'd written a bunch of questions to ask in advance. Never mind the fact that her questions were based on what seemed to me to be a wildly flawed and biased viewpoint, what really got me was that she kept going back to ask the next question on the list, even though he'd already rebutted it in a previous answer. So not only did she seem to simply want to push an agenda, she revealed herself not to have listened to the answers he was giving.

When you think her role was 'interviewer', that's a really shit performance. Channel 4 is partly state funded though, so the market dynamics that should see her demoted or sacked won't apply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

No, I'm afraid I can't as it is not my field. So I was speculating. But I am sure he has his equals, if not also some that are his betters.

I'd start by looking at the top universities for Psycology and then focus on whether they are good for clinical psychology (Peterson's field). The top unis will by and large, with a few exceptions, have the top bods. Bearing in mind that some top bods may also be practising independently.

Thanks. I’ll have to keep searching and await someone else of Peterson’s calibre coming to my attention in psychology!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

Peterson is good at his job, he should be. And he was doing his job and in his confort zone.

The difference between Peterson and most other people doing his job is that he's going against the group-think and getting a massive amount of shit for it. That he's prepared to take that and keep buggering on politely but firmly puts him above most in his profession I would say. I take the point that his knowledge of the broad subject may be no greater than others, but he's miles ahead when it comes to strength of character. From what I hear from friends who work there, he's now more or less a pariah at UofT amongst the academics at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hopeful said:

No, I'm afraid I can't as it is not my field. So I was speculating. But I am sure he has his equals, if not also some that are his betters.

I'd start by looking at the top universities for Psycology and then focus on whether they are good for clinical psychology (Peterson's field). The top unis will by and large, with a few exceptions, have the top bods. Bearing in mind that some top bods may also be practising independently.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2018/subject-ranking/psychology#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

Nope, makes no difference. I'll cut him no slack. zero. It's his subject. I'd expect nothing less.

You can always spot people who don't know their subject through their unease, and Peterson isn't one of them.

Peterson is good at his job, he should be. And he was doing his job and in his comfort zone.

The interviewer wasn't very good at their job, even though I'd not expect them to be on top of clinical psychology any more than I'd expect them to be versed in all the intracies of global warming. I just expect sensible questions and debate.

Wrong.  There are thousands of experts who when faced with aggressive questioning simply fall apart and look shite.  Why do you think people have media training and courtroom training?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheBlueCat said:

From what I hear from friends who work there, he's now more or less a pariah at UofT amongst the academics at least.

As he's a tenured professor? he can't be dismissed and I would think his income from his practice, book sales, YouTube/Patreon will assuage the cold shoulder he's receiving from the faculty. As long as the students listen to him they can debunk some of the other theories that are being fed to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, TheBlueCat said:

The difference between Peterson and most other people doing his job is that he's going against the group-think and getting a massive amount of shit for it. That he's prepared to take that and keep buggering on politely but firmly puts him above most in his profession I would say. I take the point that his knowledge of the broad subject may be no greater than others, but he's miles ahead when it comes to strength of character. From what I hear from friends who work there, he's now more or less a pariah at UofT amongst the academics at least.

That doesn't suprise me, but it won't be just for his views. It will also, and in large part, be for his media presence. There will be a large amount of envy aimed at him from his colleagues who are misisng the limelight, even though it is all there for the taking by those good enough.

I still maintain that Peterson is no more than just good at his job. That makes others less good, and there are an awful lot of less good also rans.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wherebee said:

Wrong.  There are thousands of experts who when faced with aggressive questioning simply fall apart and look shite.  Why do you think people have media training and courtroom training?

 

What happened here 

Image result for diane abbott images

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wherebee said:

Wrong.  There are thousands of experts who when faced with aggressive questioning simply fall apart and look shite.  Why do you think people have media training and courtroom training?

 

I couldn't disagree more strongly.

You can have media training to improve a less adequate person, but ultimately, they will fall apart if pressed well enough.

Someone who is good will be fine wthout media training. In this case, media training may help them appear better, for example look into the camera and don't galnce away, speak at 100 wpm or less, reiterate important points three times but in different ways etc

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hopeful said:

I couldn't disagree more strongly.

You can have media training to improve a less adequate person, but ultimately, they will fall apart if pressed well enough.

Yes, but what I am saying is that you can have an expert who is very good, but falls apart under the public eye.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/nov/14/rosetta-comet-dr-matt-taylor-apology-sexist-shirt

How do you think this guy would do against the same interviewer in a hostile interview.  He landed a man made object on a fucking comet, for gods sake, but he'd still be made to look litke a twat on TV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Long time lurking said:

What happened here 

Image result for diane abbott images

Looks like forlorn love

6 minutes ago, wherebee said:

Yes, but what I am saying is that you can have an expert who is very good, but falls apart under the public eye.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/nov/14/rosetta-comet-dr-matt-taylor-apology-sexist-shirt

How do you think this guy would do against the same interviewer in a hostile interview.  He landed a man made object on a fucking comet, for gods sake, but he'd still be made to look litke a twat on TV

TBF he's off subject on textiles. There was a lot going on in that situation. Upon landing probes on comets I'd expect him to be 100% competent.

Similar to the Prof in the spotlighht who said women cry in the lab. That's wasn't his field.

Edited by Hopeful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, sleepwello'nights said:

As he's a tenured professor? he can't be dismissed and I would think his income from his practice, book sales, YouTube/Patreon will assuage the cold shoulder he's receiving from the faculty. As long as the students listen to him they can debunk some of the other theories that are being fed to them.

He's tenured but can still be dismissed if he's found guilty of breaking the law at any point which, and this is the ridiculous part, he would potentially be doing if he refused to refer to one of his snowflake students using gender neutral pronouns.  My guess is that he'll be gone within the next 6 months but, as you say, I don't think he'll be in any danger of starving. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TheBlueCat said:

He's tenured but can still be dismissed if he's found guilty of breaking the law at any point....

Isn't it difficult to dismiss a tenured professor? I recall it being mentioned by him on a presentation I viewed some time ago. He was exhorting other academics to stand up against the faculty bullies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sleepwello'nights said:

Isn't it difficult to dismiss a tenured professor? I recall it being mentioned by him on a presentation I viewed some time ago. He was exhorting other academics to stand up against the faculty bullies.

It's definitely hard, but being found guilty of a criminal offense will usually do it from what I understand. There's a pretty good analysis of that part here:

https://torontoist.com/2016/12/are-jordan-petersons-claims-about-bill-c-16-correct/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.