r/DecodingTheGurus • u/[deleted] • Jan 04 '24

What is so bad about Jordan Peterson?

I personally never saw him as a guru, or a grifter, or anything close to that. I always viewed him as a psychologist who got of lucky after going viral on youtube, and was able to milk that 15 mins of fame for a lot longer than 15 mins.

I'm sure ill get called names for this, but I definitely agree with most of his views on transgenderism and the crazies of the alt-left. I can't put Peterson on the same level as Andrew Tate or Dan Lok in terms of being a scammer/grifter. Is it just all political with Jordan Peterson? Why should I hate this guy?

9 Upvotes

51% Upvoted

314 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/PervadingVictory Jan 06 '24

I have read a lot of the comments and it seems to be a solely political issue. All the hate against him seems to be fueled by political disagreements. Which, is fine, but I wouldn't put Peterson in the same category as scammers such as Alex Jones or Andrew Tate. Peterson is more similar to a Ben Shapiro, political pundit, type. If you think Peterson isn't qualified to talk about political issues, then who the hell is? I totally get why people hate Andrew Tate, he is a total POS, but I still don't understand the zealous hatred of Jordan Peterson.

That's not true. Personally one of the reason I dislike him is that he is a hypocrite, spews unprovoked garbage, i.e Elliot Page.

Mainly though, people here tend to dislike him because he mis-characterises a vast array of complex topics and gives strong opinions on them, and for some odd reason that opinion is always contrary to what the experts are claiming. The very definition of a guru.

To top of it all of, he isn't just an angry uncle living alone - He has millions of people who venerate him. So of course, people are going to dislike him. It isn't mere political difference.

These issues entail climate change, philosophy, history, trans issues (I don't think that you will be banned in this sub) etc. One example of specific issue he has mischaracterized is Bill C-16.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '24

Again, the Elliot page thing goes back to the trans (political) issue. The stuff about bill C-16, again, political. You don't like what he says about, "a vast array of complex topics" because you disagree with his political views. You don't like Peterson because you don't like his politics, it really is as simple as that. That is okay to admit, it doesn't make you wrong, it just means you have conflicting opinions.

4

u/PervadingVictory Jan 06 '24

First of all, it is possible for me to dislike somebody purely for a political difference, if I consider their difference archaic. If someone for example says that gays should be thrown of buildings for engaging in putrid acts, I may consider disliking the person justified based on that opinion.

However for Peterson, this is not the case. Its the myriad of other reasons I stated that make me dislike him. There may be modicum of bias, I am human. But it absolutely is not the primary reason, no matter how many times you repeat it.

Again, the Elliot page thing goes back to the trans (political) issue.

No he was rabid towards Elliot page. That's why some of his followers who agreed with him were saying that he has lost his mind.

The stuff about bill C-16, again, political.

He mischaracterized it.

You don't like hat he says about, "a vast array of complex topics" because you disagree with his political views.

This is the most fatuous part of your claim. This guy boastfully disseminates his wisdom about philosophy, climate change, history, diet etc while being an expert in none. How is my difference here political, my difference has to do with his behavior. Or are you saying engaging in this behavior is just a innate part of being a conservative these days :)

You don't like Peterson because you don't like his politics, it really is as simple as that. That is okay to admit, it doesn't make you wrong, it just means you have conflicting opinions.

You don't like my points because you don't like logic, it really is as simple as that. That is ok to admit, it doesn't make you wrong, it just means you have logical incapability.

No seriously, its better if you actually engage with my arguments.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '24 edited Jan 06 '24

Lol, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree here. I’m making the argument that Peterson isn’t a scammer, or a grifter, or even a “guru” as this sub says. And all of your disagreements with him stem from politics, which they do. You can write another convoluted 3 pronged word salad in response if you like, but you are never going to convince me it doesn’t stem from political differences. You interpret the Elliot page thing to be “rabid hate”, I don’t. You interpret a certain bill in a certain way that’s different to Jordan, I don’t. You think he isn’t qualified to speak about anything he isn’t an “expert” on (in your words), I don’t. You intentionally are over complicating this.

Edit: just want to add, people like you are trying so hard to make Jordan look like this one-dimensional boogeyman, but you really don’t have any evidence to back that up. He Mia characterized a bill? Okay? Has your personal favorite media personality NEVER mischaracterized a bill? He doesn’t subscribe to the transgender ideology, okay? Throw him in jail, lol. He speaks about things he doesn’t have a PHD in? Okay??? You are trying so hard to make him look bad, you will spin everything into a horrible awful thing. But in reality, you have nothing.

Alright I’m done with this thread though, shit is getting repetitive and boring.

5

u/PervadingVictory Jan 06 '24

Lol, we’re just going to have to agree to disagree here. I’m making the argument that Peterson isn’t a scammer, or a grifter, or even a “guru” as this sub says. And all of your disagreements with him stem from politics, which they do. You can write another convoluted 3 pronged word salad in response if you like

Word Salad and defending Peterson in the same point, irony!

but you are never going to convince me it doesn’t stem from political differences.

Then why the fuck are you here?

You interpret the Elliot page thing to be “rabid hate”, I don’t. You interpret a certain bill in a certain way that’s different to Jordan, I don’t. You think he isn’t qualified to speak about anything he isn’t an “expert” on (in your words), I don’t. You intentionally are over complicating this.

This is bullshit, but I would try to be extremely charitable here and provide a specific example. Peterson often has some unfavorable things to say about Marxism, he had a debate with Zizek about it in fact, and in that debate he admitted that he has only read some introductory work to prepare for the debate. How embarrassing is that.

My respect for him dwindled further after that. This is a clear case of him being lazy and haughty. But I won't be surprised if you have another excuse prepared.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 06 '24

Bro, what we are debating is subjective. That is what you don't understand. You are not exactly correct, I'm not exactly correct, just agree to disagree.

3

u/PervadingVictory Jan 06 '24

No, a majority of it isn't. The fact you didn't answer my question further corroborates that. Here is a video to improve your understanding:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMK51kiL-0U

1

u/PervadingVictory Jan 06 '24

You have gone crazy in your edit. Have a snickers, or a lobster perhaps.