ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Monday, October 15, 2018

Vox was right

Of all the words of screen and pen
The saddest are these:
"Vox was right again."
A while back, I wrote a post defending Jordan Peterson against Vox Day’s criticisms. My claim was that while Jordan Peterson’s value is somewhat exaggerated by many of his followers, for whom his ideas seemed new and extraordinary, Vox Day’s claims seemed exaggerated. Vox argued that Peterson was an existential relativist, that he was controlled opposition, that his teachings are more harmful then helpful, and that he was simply insane. All of that seemed wrong, at least hyperbolic. To me, Peterson seemed like a modern Joseph Campbell, essentially a mythologist just teaching the moral stories of myths with the rhetorical skill of a showman. For a generation immersed in social-media and public-school propaganda, this seemed like a generally good thing, especially when coupled with his opposition to bill C-16.

To set the tone for this post, it is only now that I remember that his opposition to this bill was unsuccessful. The bill was passed on June 19, 2017. Not only was it unsuccessful, but Peterson had promised to go to jail if necessary, were the bill passed and accusations of violating said bill brought against him. At the time, it seemed rather admirable. But given the amount of fire he’s been under, it seems strange that his opponents have found no opportunity to challenge his conviction on the matter. Rather than being on hunger strike in some jail, he’s been traveling around the world on tour with his book.

I’m not saying Peterson should actively be hunting out a jail-term in order to be consistent, as that was not what he had promised. But the situation seems a bit incongruous, and most people don’t remember what it was that brought him to popularity in the first place. With the help of a little bit of recollection, however, I have come to believe that Vox Day was, in fact, right about Dr. Peterson.
That pair of comments on the original post haven't aged well. In fairness to those who were snowed by the Canadian Conman, old Uncle Jordy is extremely dedicated to confusing and confabulating his audiences.

Remember, falsehoods have consequences. That's what makes them false.

Labels:

81 Comments:

Blogger The Chortling October 15, 2018 2:38 PM  

OT - 114+ tweets of butthurt (as far as I read) by Google+ insider. Capture before he deletes!

https://twitter.com/morganknutson/status/1049523067506966529?s=19

Blogger Bubba October 15, 2018 2:55 PM  

When interviewed about the pronoun bill, Peterson said he was happy to use whatever pronouns a transsexual desires. His problem was being forced to do so by law.

Blogger LP999-16 October 15, 2018 2:57 PM  

Who is more trust worthy JP or Dr. P

https://infogalactic.com/info/Steve_Pieczenik

Blogger Cynic In Chief October 15, 2018 2:58 PM  

#1 Done.
http://archive.fo/1tlBI

Blogger kurt9 October 15, 2018 3:15 PM  

What did it for me with regards to Jordan Peterson is when he said that Kavanaugh should immediately resign from SCOTUS over what was clearly bogus sexual molestation charges.

Blogger RedPill Angel October 15, 2018 3:18 PM  

Jordan looks strung out, that's for sure.

Blogger Rabbi B October 15, 2018 3:20 PM  

"...old Uncle Jordy is extremely dedicated to confusing and confabulating his audiences."

For God is not the author of confusion but of peace ...For where envy and self-seeking exist, confusion and every evil thing are there. (cf. I Cor. 14;James 3)

Hmmm ...

Blogger DraveckysHumerus October 15, 2018 3:33 PM  

VD isn't correct about everything every time. But it's effing nano close.

Blogger Nate October 15, 2018 3:34 PM  

consequences are what make faslehoods… false.

Its obviously not the craziest thing... but surely it is the DUMBEST thing JP has said.

Blogger Mr Darcy October 15, 2018 3:43 PM  

Apologies for this OT post, but this could be pretty important:

https://freedomnewsreport.com/2018/09/13/wikileaks-says-it-will-bring-hillary-clinton-down-by-october-21/

Blogger Random #57 October 15, 2018 3:44 PM  

@1 The Chortling: You wonder why Google+ was a colossal failure that also fundamentally changed the way the company worked, which people have said really enabled the SJW infiltration that's now killing it?

That guy covered everything, from details about when Larry Page took over, to his hiring a terrible dot Indian manager from Microsoft to ram through Google+. Google changed from a relatively engineering driven relatively bottom up company with a lot of successes into the top down failing more and more nightmare we're witnessing. The blind allocation is also a key, he interviewed to work on Chrome, was hired to work on something else, this harms a lot of people for whom the first job they are allocated is an impossible fit.

Blogger Korppi on oikeus October 15, 2018 3:49 PM  

Falsehoods have consequences. That's what makes them false.

Not even wrong.

Blogger Silent Draco October 15, 2018 3:53 PM  

Understood, sir. Sometimes it take information, time, and wisdom. The SDL tossing a little skull at your noggin will get you to pay proper attention. Let's look at ways to help those caught still in his glamour.

Nate, will agree that it's the dumbest thing PBJ said, since there'd ni video of him saying "Glocks are way cool."

Blogger PragmaticTroll October 15, 2018 3:56 PM  

Schrodinger's Falsehood. Neither true or false until there is a consequence.

Blogger The Deplorable Podunk Ken Ramsey October 15, 2018 4:11 PM  

What a pity. Everything was going so well, until the apple cider!

Blogger Stickwick Stapers October 15, 2018 4:14 PM  

I'm officially done with JBP. I got some useful ways to think about biblical archetypes from him — and don't regret the time I spent listening to those lectures — but his moment of usefulness has come and gone.

I've read little of JBP's written material or any of the commentary about it (or him), but here's what did it for me:

0. His invoking of Freud with anything other than utter contempt;

1. His vast Soviet propaganda art collection;

2. His extremely dubious claim of going weeks with zero sleep;

3. His comments on Kavanaugh's impending confirmation.

What drew me in was his stated commitment to subvert postmodernist university departments, and I even contributed to that effort. #0 I largely disregarded as an academic referring to canonical work in his field, however ridiculous. However, in conjunction with the other stuff, it's part of an undeniable pattern. I discontinued support after #1 gave me some grave concerns. After #2, I stopped taking him seriously. After #3, I had no choice but to dismiss him entirely.

It’s all rather sad. The Western world is obviously hungry for deeply intellectual explorations of the Bible and personality — I personally know three people who either became Christian or started taking the Bible seriously because of JBP’s lectures — but after this debacle, it’s clear that it had better come from someone who is both stable and a believer.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener October 15, 2018 4:15 PM  

Maybe Jordan Peterson's role in the Intellectual Dark Web is to make Ben Shapiro look good by comparison.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 15, 2018 4:17 PM  

Nate wrote:Its obviously not the craziest thing... but surely it is the DUMBEST thing JP has said.
It's more than just dumb. It's foundational to his "philosophy". It's all in his public statements.
Peterson believes truth is that which makes him feel good. Falsehood is that which makes him feel bad.
That's all. It is literally how he sees the Universe. If God makes him feel bad, God is false. If Nietzche makes him feel good, Nietzche is true. This is the only measuring stick he will accept.
This is the ultimate expression of relativism.

Blogger Nate October 15, 2018 4:23 PM  

Since we don't want Vox's head swelling up TO big...

Dance With Dragons came out July 2011.

Throne of Bones came out December of 2012.

I mean its not time start with the Vox R R Day memes... yet. But... I have forgotten pretty much all the characters except Lodi.

Blogger tublecane October 15, 2018 4:25 PM  

@17- Sounds like a "no show" union job.

Blogger Nate October 15, 2018 4:27 PM  

"Peterson believes truth is that which makes him feel good. Falsehood is that which makes him feel bad."

CANCER IS A LIE.

if we just didn't believe it... it would go away. Basically he's the Joel Osteen of philosophy

Blogger Don't Call Me Len October 15, 2018 4:41 PM  

Falsehoods have consequences. That's what makes them false.

When this "public intellectual" gig finally dies off, Jordy doesn't even have the stuff to write fortunes for fortune cookies.

his opposition to this bill was unsuccessful

So he's got that in common with the NeverTrumpers: famous for failing, and even proud of it.

Blogger Damelon Brinn October 15, 2018 4:43 PM  

@1 Here's a threaded version of his story, so you don't have to read tweet by tweet like an animal.

Blogger InformationMerchant October 15, 2018 4:56 PM  

@1

http://archive.is/OOez3

Backup:

http://archive.is/C2en4

@19 It's long past time. He keeps jumping new books to the front of the line. I would like to read the entire story before I die, I only have a bucket list of about half a dozen things and that is one.

I'm fine with Vox getting a big head over this though. Whenever he comes up against massive disagreement on here and persuades the vast majority of people to do a 180, it's impressive as it's usually pretty hard to change 1 person's mind, let alone an entire crowd's mind. In any situation when he gets proven right after doing that, I'm fine with him getting a big head.

Blogger MrNiceguy October 15, 2018 5:09 PM  

Pretty close to, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law."

Blogger Gregory the Great October 15, 2018 5:15 PM  

You got to hand one thing to Peterson: He sure makes it sound like a very deep insight when he says falsehood has consequences etc.

Blogger Noah B The Savage Gardener October 15, 2018 5:28 PM  

"Remember, falsehoods have consequences. That's what makes them false."

Sounds like he got spanked as a child for lying and he's never gotten over it.

Blogger R Webfoot October 15, 2018 5:30 PM  

"CANCER IS A LIE.

if we just didn't believe it... it would go away."

No... I think it would be more that an implicit belief in one's own invincibility is a lie, because it will mean that if something like cancer happens it will take you completely by surprise. It takes a lot to get through something like that and if you haven't prepared for the inevitable, and if you don't have a stable support network that can handle such a shock... Noah was described as "perfect in his generations" which I take to mean that you have to take care not only of yourself but of your family around you, because when the floods come down, if you haven't prepared everybody around you for the inevitable, you're sunk, because you'll lose your mind and they'll lose their mind and then you'll lose it even more, and there you are, swallowed by the dragon of Chaos and shown everything you haven't accomplished and everything you might have done to avoid your current state all at once and all alone. And That's Hell.

Blogger Bultz October 15, 2018 5:38 PM  

the narrative that he was on the verge of jail for holding an opinion was a big part of why he became as revered as he did. Well, more than a big part, it blinded people from looking at him critically

Blogger CM October 15, 2018 5:40 PM  

The Western world is obviously hungry for deeply intellectual explorations of the Bible and personality — I personally know three people who either became Christian or started taking the Bible seriously because of JBP’s lectures — but after this debacle, it’s clear that it had better come from someone who is both stable and a believer.

It seems like this should exist... somewhere...

But our pulpits are also lacking in Christians, so there's that.

Blogger CM October 15, 2018 5:43 PM  

On the flip side of previous comment, in the absence of believers proclaiming the truth, God will use even the rocks.

J. Peterson - over-glorified rock.

Blogger Evan Hartshorn October 15, 2018 5:55 PM  

VD isn't correct about everything every time. But it's effing nano close.

Actually, it's not even close. We were salty when he predicted Trumpslide because after all his failed predictions, we thought he'd jinxed it.

But he doesn't lie, and he knows more than most people. And that's hella useful.

Blogger Voracious Reader October 15, 2018 6:18 PM  

This was another interesting validation of one of Vox's more provocative sayings, straight outta the Washington Post:

"But seven years later, Breivik no longer seems so isolated. Across Scandinavia, Europe and even the United States, far-right, anti-immigrant politics are ascendant. Speaking to Today’s WorldView, Greengrass said Breivik’s “intellectual worldview has migrated” closer to the political center."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/10/15/how-right-wing-terrorist-anticipated-ultra-nationalist-wave/

Blogger Dave October 15, 2018 6:25 PM  

Arrivederci Merkel

https://twitter.com/matteosalvinimi/status/1051570882299224064

Blogger Eric Johnson October 15, 2018 6:36 PM  

Vox Day's arguments against Peterson is really no different than when Bill Kristol calls Trump supporters fascistic.

Blogger Jim Blake October 15, 2018 6:40 PM  

To be fair this is probably what he means:

"Remember, falsehoods have [negative] consequences. That's what makes them false."

It's consistent with his peculiar brand of pragmatist / instrumentalist philosophy.

Blogger CM October 15, 2018 6:49 PM  

It's consistent with his peculiar brand of pragmatist / instrumentalist philosophy.

Maybe, except it is still divorced from reality...

Blogger Mark Stoval October 15, 2018 6:50 PM  

@32

"VD isn't correct about everything every time. But it's effing nano close."

No one but God is always right, so we know that Vox makes mistakes. He is human after all.

However he is damn good at admitting when there is not enough information available to make a prediction or judgement about some issue. So few of us can just say, 'I don't know about that one".

Vox seems strident at times when he does know, but then I get that way myself when asked the same dumb ass question a 100 times. I bet there are many things he has been asked 10,000 times. And then the yahoos who "correct" him. Oh boy.

Hang in there Vox, you are doing the Lord's work.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 15, 2018 7:02 PM  

Eric Johnson wrote:Vox Day's arguments against Peterson is really no different than when Bill Kristol calls Trump supporters fascistic.
Except Trump is not Fascist.
Peterson is dishonest, confused and crazy.
Any you're out of your depth, moron.

Blogger eclecticme October 15, 2018 7:03 PM  


I took a little searching but here it is:

For all sad words of tongue and pen,
The saddest are these,
'It might have been'.
John Greenleaf Whittier

Blogger InformationMerchant October 15, 2018 7:05 PM  

@25

"You can use your own standards of judgment. You can rely on yourself for guidance. You don't have to adhere to some external, arbitrary code of behaviour."

Blogger The Chortling October 15, 2018 7:05 PM  

It's a good indicator of the incestual nature of SV HR-think. Converged, philosophical inbreeding will make Moira G's family look like Normies.

Blogger Nate October 15, 2018 7:08 PM  

"Vox Day's arguments against Peterson is really no different than when Bill Kristol calls Trump supporters fascistic. "

30 bucks says your lips move while you type.

Blogger Doktor Jeep October 15, 2018 7:10 PM  

Vox is always right. How do I know this? Because he never rambles. He still thinking about what he's saying even while he's saying it. That's a mark of a man who is using his head.

Blogger VD October 15, 2018 7:20 PM  

To be fair this is probably what he means:

It's always cute seeing Jordan Peterson fans explaining that Jordan Peterson is really saying what they already think, his actual words notwithstanding.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 15, 2018 7:24 PM  

VD wrote:Jordan Peterson fans explaining that Jordan Peterson is really saying what they already think, his actual words notwithstanding.
"He can't actually mean what he just said. I mean, even I can see that that sort of instrumentalist view of truth and falsehood is self-contradicting and frankly stupid. So, how can I re-interpret the word-symbols is such a way that they make sense?"

It's post-modernism as applied to a critique of post-modernism.

Blogger Jim Blake October 15, 2018 7:30 PM  

@45

You honestly don't think he meant "falsehoods have negative consequences"?

Blogger VD October 15, 2018 7:43 PM  

You honestly don't think he meant "falsehoods have negative consequences"?

No. Because even if he did, how would having negative consequences make them false?

You're making the same mistake everyone else who falls for Peterson's con makes. You assume he can't possibly mean what he very clearly says.

Remember, he thinks VERY CAREFULLY for a LONG TIME about what he says and he chooses his words PRECISELY.

Blogger Dave October 15, 2018 7:54 PM  

To be fair I think this is probably what he means:

"Senator Warren should step down. I'm not certain that is the right move. It's very complex. But she would have her name cleared, and a figure who might be less divisive might be put forward."

It's consistent with his peculiar brand of pragmatist / instrumentalist philosophy.

Blogger OGRE October 15, 2018 7:55 PM  

I have to agree with Jim Blake here. Listening to JP say that its pretty clear he meant consequences in a negative sense, and in conversational speak it would be normal to omit "negative" or "bad." And as Jim says it is consistent with JPs application of pragmatism to truth. But if you write it out as he said it and try to apply it as a definition of falsehood its absurd (For every x, if x is a proposition and x has consequences then x has a truth value of false). And JPs pragmatic idea of truth has plenty of problems on its own. I don't think Jim is defending JPs words so much as clarifying, and I'm certainly no fan of Juden Peterstein.

Blogger VD October 15, 2018 8:00 PM  

Listening to JP say that its pretty clear he meant consequences in a negative sense, and in conversational speak it would be normal to omit "negative" or "bad."

Do you think Jordan Peterson is lying when he says he chooses his words very carefully?

Blogger Jim Blake October 15, 2018 8:05 PM  

VD wrote:You honestly don't think he meant "falsehoods have negative consequences"?

No. Because even if he did, how would having negative consequences make them false?


You would have to ask him to explain it, but apparently he really believes that.

Blogger OGRE October 15, 2018 8:12 PM  

@51 No, but he was speaking not writing and the context can imply the difference. If a father says to his son "if your grades don't improve there will be consequences" the implication is clear that consequences is meant as a negative. I don't at all think JP meant that every thing that has consequences is a falsehood, nor do I think he holds that as a belief. But from the other things hes said and written I do think he believes that we determine what is false because such things lead to negative consequences...a view with which I strongly disagree.

Blogger C.B. Robertson October 15, 2018 8:19 PM  

The greater point is that speaking the truth can still have (negative) consequences. In some cases, telling untruths can fail to have consequences, negative or otherwise (especially when you believe it's true). There are plenty of good reasons not to tell lies, but consequences isn't really a strong one, and it CERTAINLY isn't a DEFINITION of untruth. It doesn't matter how you interpret the statement, it's still wrong.

Blogger Blume October 15, 2018 8:51 PM  

@ Jim Blake if you are going to reinterprete Jbp's words, then you have to defend your reinterpretation. So why would negative consequences make something false? If you can't explain that, then your reinterpretation is is clearly wrong because it doesnt make the statement any more succinct.

Blogger R Webfoot October 15, 2018 8:52 PM  

Not a Peterson fan; I was mimicking how he thinks and talks. I think he has a very consistent narrative at the core, and he throws out a million things that kinda sound related to chum the waters in every direction.

He is not dumb enough to say "cancer is a lie" or anything like it, but he is some kind of existential relativist.

What he is talking about is the fact that, if your understanding is wrong, then when something unexpected happens that hits a flaw in your model, it will cause needless suffering. This IS a feature OF truth and falsehood; his line is that this IS what "truth" and "falsehood" ARE.

A better criticism would be that this means the Bernie Madoff strategy is "true," if you can manage to abscond with everybody's money and die on a pile of gold and whores; the Genghis Khan strategy is "true" if you succeed in raping your way into the genetics of half the planet.

His fundamental error is that malice and deceit are, even from a materialistic perspective, evolutionarily selected for. Looking into your heart and authentically following the search for meaning you are evolved for will not save the world from war, because the heart itself is tainted. Even if you smoke mushrooms.

Blogger fiendeJ October 15, 2018 8:58 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger fiendeJ October 15, 2018 9:02 PM  

VD wrote:You honestly don't think he meant "falsehoods have negative consequences"?

No. Because even if he did, how would having negative consequences make them false?

You're making the same mistake everyone else who falls for Peterson's con makes. You assume he can't possibly mean what he very clearly says.

Remember, he thinks VERY CAREFULLY for a LONG TIME about what he says and he chooses his words PRECISELY.


Someone take a clip of Peterson's and give me a timestamp. I'll count his words per minute over a ten minute period. Let's see how many words he can precisely choose very carefully per minute.

Blogger R Webfoot October 15, 2018 9:02 PM  

"So why would negative consequences make something false?"

Because you expected things to go a certain way, and you invested in that, and then it did NOT happen that way, and everything you invested in that fell apart. The falling-apart happens because your model was flawed. He says, that's what "false" IS.

Which, if this existence is all there is, is just wrong. You can be a malicious self-deceiving bastard just fine, as long as you understand that there will be a backlash, and prepare to fight it by being an even more sociopathic bastard. Maybe the world will eventually break you, maybe you will break the world.

It is a short-term effective individual strategy, and a long-term effective group strategy.

Blogger Duh-ave October 15, 2018 9:02 PM  

@38 "He is human after all."
I'm betting our Supreme Dark Lord hides a sly smile every time he reads something like this.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 15, 2018 9:10 PM  

R Webfoot wrote:Because you expected things to go a certain way, and you invested in that, and then it did NOT happen that way, and everything you invested in that fell apart. The falling-apart happens because your model was flawed. He says, that's what "false" IS.


That is exactly what he does not say.
I'll give you that the consequences are negative. That's apparent from context. What he says is that negative consequences are what make something false.

Jesus was crucified, a very negative consequence, for speaking the Truth. He did this knowing exactly the consequences. Is the Truth false?
Thomas More was executed for speaking the Truth as he saw it. He was free to recant at any time. Did the execution render his arguments false?

This is the level of sophistry that Peterson is engaged in.
Instrumentalism is the philosophy of moral cowards and psychopaths.

Blogger Blume October 15, 2018 9:25 PM  

@ R Webfoot, even this explanation is clearly wrong for 2 reasons. First if you are lying to someone else, your model is not flawed, that's is. 2 the flaw in a model could take more than one human life time to manifest and; therefore, you would never face any negative consequences.

Blogger OGRE October 15, 2018 9:26 PM  

Peterson is a Pragmatist, hes stated this many times and it was the main point of contention in that Sam Harris 'debate' about truth. A general definition of Pragmatism:

Pragmatism is a philosophical movement that includes those who claim that an ideology or proposition is true if it works satisfactorily, that the meaning of a proposition is to be found in the practical consequences of accepting it, and that unpractical ideas are to be rejected. https://www.iep.utm.edu/pragmati/

JPs statement that falsehoods are defined as having (bad) consequences is quite consistent with his understanding of pragmatism. Thats all Jim Blake and I are saying. Its still a dumb thing to say, because pragmatism applied to metaphysical claims is dumb; and its a useful quote for making him look foolish. But his meaning was pretty clear if you knew he was a pragmatist.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 15, 2018 9:27 PM  

Pragmatism is not a philosophy any honest man can hold.

Blogger Didas Kalos October 15, 2018 9:39 PM  

Instead of a "think-tank" it's become a "think-tub."

Blogger R Webfoot October 15, 2018 9:41 PM  

@61 Jesus and More both accomplished something that outlived their death, so that can be handwaved away - but there have been good men who died horribly, and even their names are forgotten. If this life is all there is, then that is that.

@62 You are correct, somebody with a correct model can still lie. The media whores and SJWs, though, are self-deceiving. Such creatures pretend very hard that the world is as they wish it, in the hopes of bullying everybody else into pretending along with them. It is an effective strategy. And, as you say, sometimes the consequences outlast one's lifetime - so from an individual perspective it can be successful. As a group strategy even more so - even if an individual may be destroyed by the group's behavior, the sociopathic group merely has to recruit or create members as fast as they are removed.

Blogger OGRE October 15, 2018 9:42 PM  

@64 If applied broadly, you're right. If applied as a heuristic tool it can be useful, which is how it was originally conceived by CS Pierce.

Blogger Avalanche October 15, 2018 9:55 PM  

@50 "Listening to JP say that its pretty clear he meant consequences in a negative sense, and in conversational speak it would be normal to omit "negative" or "bad.""

If:
Falsehood has (negative) consequences, which makes it false...

And:
TRUTH sometimes has negative consequences.

Then:
Does that make a truth that has negative consequences not true?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 15, 2018 10:08 PM  

OGRE wrote:If applied as a heuristic tool it can be useful,
"Falsus in uno…"

Blogger tublecane October 15, 2018 10:42 PM  

@68- That's where the fun of being a pragmatist can be found. You pick amongst consequences to see which you do and don't like, then you can assign veracity and falsehood on a whim.

Blogger OGRE October 15, 2018 11:05 PM  

@68 You touch on one of the big criticisms of pragmatism, in that its usually pretty vague in how it defines things like 'truth' and 'consequence' and often either defines things circularly or not at all. You basically ask If something had good and bad consequences how true is it? That depends entirely on how you define each of those terms. But remember for a lot of pragmatist truth doesn't have the meaning that we typically give it; for them truth is but a tool and is judged solely by its usefulness.

@69 facile. And completely inapplicable.

Blogger GammaCatch October 15, 2018 11:46 PM  

Raging success!

Blogger John M October 16, 2018 3:02 AM  

@OGRE the truth has negative consequences only to dishonest, evil people. And only such people will want to use the rejection of inconvenient truth as a heuristic tool.

Blogger S. Thermite October 16, 2018 3:08 AM  

I can understand the people who were vocally upset like I was when Vox said something like “I don’t give a fraction of a damn about Peterson, I’ve neither watched his videos nor read his books.” But Vox did grace me with a response back then, that I would see his contempt for Petrrson was justified in due time. And he was right, in spades.

What boggles the mind are the few still posting here trying to defend Peterson after Vox has wriien about reading “12 Rules” and (blargh) “Maps of Meaning” and watching some of his Pererson’s insane claims/rambling in his video interviews. Who’s rationalizing a madman and painting with broad brush strokes now? It certainly ain’t Vox.

Blogger Solon October 16, 2018 3:15 AM  

It's completely wrong. Their falseness is independent of any consequences they should bring.

Blogger nswhorse October 16, 2018 3:56 AM  

I'm somewhat curious why Cernovich picked that particular one liner to include in his trailer. Was he just looking for something that sounded like "lies have negative consequences"?

Blogger Helldoge Desotryer October 16, 2018 9:16 AM  

Yeah. Never liked men that talked fast

Blogger OGRE October 16, 2018 11:03 AM  

@73 John M

Thats not what the pragmatists are about. The basic idea was to apply something like the scientific method to critical thinking, in order to give clarity of purpose to thought. Take ideas that don't "work" or are irrelevant and discard them, leaving the ones that do work for further analysis, just as the scientist does when testing a hypothesis. As a tool for learning and processing large amounts of information it is extremely useful.

The pragmatic maxim quickly went off the rails though as the pragmatists sought to apply this on a much broader scale, to things like ethics and metaphysics. And this is where Peterson is coming from, trying to apply Pragmatism on a metaphysical scale, and its a quest thats doomed for failure.

Theres a ton of confusion here about Pragmatism, so I'd suggest people take a few minutes to read up on it. Here is a rather short article about it that covers the history and basics. https://www.iep.utm.edu/pragmati/ Its very useful to help understanding what Peterson is getting on about so you can counter what hes doing, as well as some of the other dangerous thinkers out there like Habermas, Rorty, and Dussel.

I'd also suggest reading up on CS Pierce, the 'father' of pragmatism although he himself realized that others had taken it too far, because he is one of the greatest minds to ever come out of the US. https://infogalactic.com/info/Charles_Sanders_Peirce

Blogger R Webfoot October 16, 2018 11:12 AM  

@76
'I'm somewhat curious why Cernovich picked that particular one liner to include in his trailer. Was he just looking for something that sounded like "lies have negative consequences"?'

I'm pretty sure it's that. This is a documentary about fake news, so it was probably about the fact that the media lies their heads off and are shocked when it doesn't turn out like they wanted.

Blogger Expendable Faceless Minion October 16, 2018 3:46 PM  

If cancer is a lie, then falsehoods really do have consequences. So at least there is a scrap of consistentcy to be had.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash October 17, 2018 12:29 PM  

OGRE wrote:Take ideas that don't "work" or are irrelevant and discard them, leaving the ones that do work for further analysis, just as the scientist does when testing a hypothesis. As a tool for learning and processing large amounts of information it is extremely useful.


It can only be useful as an expression of prejudice.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts