The Student Room Group

Jorden Peterson DESTROYED by LOGIC!!!

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Why are we all just assuming "it is one of those cut away videos"?


Because whenever an interview with Peterson is uncut, he magically appears better. Whenever there's some 'gotcha' moment against Peterson, it's always from a cut up interview. Strange coincidence, is it not?
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Do you want to hate f*ck me or something?

Your obsession with me is getting creepy.


Nice argument
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Do you want to hate f*ck me or something?

Your obsession with me is getting creepy.


No wonder you are a wash out with the birds. You may want to find a responsible adult to explain this to you: Me pointing out the stupid things you post doesn't mean I want to **** you, it means that I am pointing out you are stupid. Two solutions to this either stop posting stupid posts then I can't point them out) or simply stop posting, then you can't post anything stupid.
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Do you want to hate f*ck me or something?

Your obsession with me is getting creepy.


Pointing out your sophism and general ignorance on matters isn't a sign of obsession. You thinking so, is a sign of lack of critical thinking skills.
Reply 24
2 points;
1] Admitting one were potentially wrong does not equal being "DESTROYED"
2] I fail to see the similartiy between refusing to bake a custom made cake for a gay weddings and disenfranchising en entire race - to equate to the two requires flimflamery of the highest order.
Original post by Logical_Son
No wonder you are a wash out with the birds. You may want to find a responsible adult to explain this to you: Me pointing out the stupid things you post doesn't mean I want to **** you, it means that I am pointing out you are stupid. Two solutions to this either stop posting stupid posts then I can't point them out) or simply stop posting, then you can't post anything stupid.


Don't waste your time with that petty response dude.

And Jordan Peterson isn't perfect, @ChaoticButterfly . I agree with him on a lot, but in this video he was clearly afraid to stand by his initial point. I would have stood by it because of the notion that private means private. A private business should be able to reject any customer for any reason. And I utterly despise racism, but there you go.
Original post by kubissx
Because whenever an interview with Peterson is uncut, he magically appears better. Whenever there's some 'gotcha' moment against Peterson, it's always from a cut up interview. Strange coincidence, is it not?


My main take away with Peterson is he spends most of his time making unfalsifiable claims and generally being obtuse and hard to pin down what he is actually saying. When he does actually say something you can argue with, like lobster social relations being a guide for how humans should behave and why feminism is bad, there is just so much wrong with it. There is no way you can draw the conclusions he draws. He also clearly does not know what post modernism is and why the equalisation between post modernism and Marxism is false. He is the sort of person that sounds like he knows what he is talking about when you yourself don't know much about the subjects he is talking about.

Not to mention he engages in the worse of humanities nonsense which can easily give postmodernism at it's worse a run for it's money. He engages in quantum mysticism that would make the vast majority of physicists jump up and down. He may as well be trying to push theories magic energy crystals.


He is such a weird case. He has this reputation as being this no nonsense skeptic and rationalist tearing the social sciences a new one with all their anti-science nonsense. But the reality is he is the biggest nonsense paddler of them all. Sam Harris and Dawkins annoy me but they actually do more or less practise scientism. It would appear truth is relative and all that really matters is a willingness to "own the libs". We are living in a post truth postmodernist hell and Peterson and his lobsters are a part of it. The fact so much of his fan base is interchangeable from the new atheist crew says it all, Muslim hating atheists will align themselves with someone who claims you need God's help to give up smoking.

IRONIC
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Joel 96


And Jordan Peterson isn't perfect, @ChaoticButterfly . I agree with him on a lot, but in this video he was clearly afraid to stand by his initial point. I would have stood by it because of the notion that private means private. A private business should be able to reject any customer for any reason. And I utterly despise racism, but there you go.


I on the other hand respect the rights of a black or gay person to be able to use the same services and shops as me, over the rights of private property owners.

You may as well be a full on racist. Your position is indesquinsible in terms of outcomes. It would result in structural racism of society if you think private business can discriminate. Which is the point made in the video. You and Peterson's view is saying we should go back to pre Civil Rights society.

I'm assuming you do not respect the rights of a debating society to exclude certain speakers at a university. If a shop keeper can refuse to serve blacks, then I do not see how you can object to a collective decisions to exclude speakers who want to argue how race science leads to racist conclusions.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Dandaman1
The 'Left' doesn't fail to disappoint with its defensive lashing out at J.B.P. Anyone who looks like they got the better of him or to have debunked something he said becomes an instant source of comfort and reassurance for many. This, however, is hardly a "destruction" of the man. As per usual, the uncut footage will probably reveal a degree of unflattering (or downright misleading) editing.


Feel free to climb out of his backside.

Of course Peterson is a hugely intelligent individual, but the bizarre worship and sheer unquestioning adoration that certain people have for him is really unhinged. Indeed, so much as criticise him and his fanboys come flocking in an instant to shout a load of buzzwords at you.

He's a human being, he makes bad arguments at times like anyone else. He did so here and he admitted it. You don't need to jump to his defence as if you were his body guard.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
I on the other hand respect the rights of a black or gay person to be able to use the same services and shops as me, over the rights of private property owners.


You don't have a right to somebody else's produce. That's an appalling statement.

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

You may as well be a full on racist.


This should be interesting...

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

Your position is "indesquinsible"? (sorry, I'm not familiar with that word) in terms of outcomes. It would result in structural racism of society if you think private business can discriminate. Which is the point made in the video. You and Peterson's view is saying we should go back to pre Civil Rights society.


Combating racism was a cultural change, because the idea that blacks are inferior to whites is a cultural belief, that had manifested - not only as a majority view for a brief period - but a political ideology in terms of slavery.

You don't combat an opinion or idea by silencing it with coercion. You tolerate it and challenge it. If we simply let private businesses be... well, private, then do you really think the majority of private businesses in this day and age are going to reject black people? It's simply not a wise business decision, since a business can make more money by having all demographics purchase their goods. A business that rejects blacks is not going to do very well.

Original post by ChaoticButterfly

I'm assuming you do not respect the rights of a debating society to exclude certain speakers at a university. If a shop keeper can refuse to serve blacks, then I do not see how you can object to a collective decisions to exclude speakers who want to argue how race science leads to racist conclusions.


A university, so long as it's private, can choose and reject whomever they want. If the university is funded by taxes, then people would have a right to criticise the selection of the panel since it's their money being funded.

Just look at Question Time's twitter every Thursday. Thousands of people complaining that there's too many/not enough left/right wingers on the panel. That's the problem with public funding when it leads to stuff like this.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Joel 96
Don't waste your time with that petty response dude.

And Jordan Peterson isn't perfect, @ChaoticButterfly . I agree with him on a lot, but in this video he was clearly afraid to stand by his initial point. I would have stood by it because of the notion that private means private. A private business should be able to reject any customer for any reason. And I utterly despise racism, but there you go.


It's a silly argument to make, especially when you're not going to be the one who is being denied service.

Do you really think that it is better for society to have schools, restaurants, shops etc which don't allow gay/ black people in than it would be to prevent such discrimination by law?

Again, when you're not a back kid who suddenly finds out that you're being banned from all sorts of places, it makes it a lot easier to puff your cheeks and go 'well businesses should be able to do what they want'.
Original post by Joel 96
You don't have a right to somebody else's produce. That's an appalling statement.



This should be interesting...



Combating racism was a cultural change, because the idea that blacks are inferior to whites is a cultural belief, that had manifested - not only as a majority view for a brief period - but a political ideology in terms of slavery.

You don't combat an opinion or idea by silencing it with coercion. You tolerate it and challenge it. If we simply let private businesses be... well, private, then do you really think the majority of private businesses in this day and age are going to reject black people? It's simply not a wise business decision, since a business can make more money by having all demographics purchase their goods. A business that rejects blacks is not going to do very well.



A university, so long as it's private, can choose and reject whomever they want. If the university is funded by taxes, then people would have a right to criticise the selection of the panel since it's their money being funded.

Just look at Question Time's twitter every Thursday. Thousands of people complaining that there's too many/not enough left/right wingers on the panel. That's the problem with public funding when it leads to stuff like this.


Except businesses did do that in the past and they didn't go out of business for it... The economic consequences did not persuade them otherwise. Indeed with the way certain places in Europe is going, who is to say that in a few years it wouldn't attract people to shop at places that banned certain races? You can't rely on economics to combat racist discrimination.

Were the US wrong to ban segregation? Was South Africa wrong to ban apartheid?
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by DeBruyne18

Were the US wrong to ban segregation?


Certain members of the NOI would say yes.
Original post by Logical_Son
Certain members of the NOI would say yes.


And they'd be idiots for it. Banning segregation was clearly a massive positive.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by DeBruyne18
And they'd be idiots for it. Banning segregation was clearly a massive positive.


And you could get called racist saying for that.
Original post by Logical_Son
And you could get called racist saying for that.


No you couldn't. Stop being a plonker. Unless you think banning businesses from refusing black people service is actually racist.
Original post by DeBruyne18
Feel free to climb out of his backside.

Of course Peterson is a hugely intelligent individual, but the bizarre worship and sheer unquestioning adoration that certain people have for him is really unhinged. Indeed, so much as criticise him and his fanboys come flocking in an instant to shout a load of buzzwords at you.

He's a human being, he makes bad arguments at times like anyone else. He did so here and he admitted it. You don't need to jump to his defence as if you were his body guard.


I'm happy to admit that he's wrong on occasion. I don't mind that. However, I dislike the sheer volume of misleading propaganda and slander that is thrown his way, making me quite defensive when I see rhetoric like "Peterson DESTROYED" from people I know are so desperate to discredit him.

People love Peterson because he's become a figurehead and a weapon against a political establishment many have grown to hate. It's not just what he says; it's what he's doing. That's why he gets an almost cult-like level of support. Frankly, I'm very much enjoying his rising influence and notoriety.
Original post by DeBruyne18
No you couldn't. Stop being a plonker. Unless you think banning businesses from refusing black people service is actually racist.


In your desire to appear all "woke" you miss the point. Do you know who I mean when I refer to the NOI?
I thought this was gonna be a troll thread. Misspelled name, uses the triggered word 'destroyed'.... but nope this person is serious. There is no hope for this generation.
Original post by Dandaman1
I'm happy to admit that he's wrong on occasion. I don't mind that. However, I dislike the sheer volume of misleading propaganda and slander that is thrown his way, making me quite defensive when I see rhetoric like "Peterson DESTROYED" from people I know are so desperate to discredit him.

People love Peterson because he's become a figurehead and a weapon against a political establishment many have grown to hate. It's not just what he says; it's what he's doing. That's why he gets an almost cult-like level of support. Frankly, I'm very much enjoying his rising influence and notoriety.


Anyone who is held up to superman hero status is going to be a target for others to find the chink in their armour. That's a good thing. That's better than unquestioning support and adoration.

I really don't get how you don't understand sarcasm. The use of the word 'DESTROYED' was taking the mick out of his die hard supporters who upload his every video on YouTube with a a caption of 'Peterson DESTROYS liberal crybabies' etc. And then thousands more of his cult like followers flock to the comments to post messages of sheer adoration.

He's a clever guy, he makes some great arguments and some bad ones. He's not some infallible being.

It's the incessant and nauseating fan boys such as yourself who make it impossible for people such as myself who would like Peterson, from enjoying his work. Of course though his fanboys can't take a joke, despite consistently moaning about pc culture, they are the first ones to take offence to everything.

The funny thing is, is that people such as him encourage others to think for themselves. Yet his fanboys don't think for themselves, they just think what he tells them to.
(edited 5 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest