Is jordan peterson the stupid mans smart person

From Jordan Peterson Criticism Analysis
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Metadata[edit | edit source]

Title: Is Jordan Peterson the stupid man’s smart person?

Link Archive Link

Organisation: Macleans / Rogers Digital Media

Distribution: Macleans Website

Author: Tabatha Southey

Date Published: November 17 2017

Style: Direct Criticism

Central Claims[edit | edit source]

Attempted Link with the Alt-Right[edit | edit source]

The Author goes out of her way to imply that JBP has a link with the alt-right.

To be clear, Jordan Peterson is not a neo-Nazi, but there’s a reason he’s as popular as he is on the alt-right. You’ll never hear him use the phrase “We must secure a future for our white children”; what you will hear him say is that, while there does appear to be a causal relationship between empowering women and economic growth, we have to consider whether this is good for society, “‘’cause the birth rate is plummeting.” He doesn’t call for a “white ethnostate,” but he does retweet Daily Caller articles with opening lines like: “Yet again an American city is being torn apart by black rioters.” He has dedicated two-and-a-half-hour-long YouTube videos to “identity politics and the Marxist lie of white privilege.”

The article includes Cultural Marxism, an alt-right poster idea at one point, as an attempt to explain JBP's dislike of Post Modernism.

“Postmodern neo-Marxism” is Peterson’s nemesis, and the best way to explain what postmodern neo-Marxism is, is to explain what it is not—that is, it is entirely distinct from the concept of “cultural Marxism.”

The comparison to Cultural Marxism is unnecessary in describing what Post Modernism is, and the inclusion as such is another attempted link to the alt-right.

To be clear, Jordan Peterson is not a neo-Nazi, but there’s a reason he’s as popular as he is on the alt-right.

The author denouces JBP's neo-nazi status immediately before a link to the alt-right, puts the words Nazi, alt-right and JBP in quick succession. For the quick skimmer of the article, they may get the false impression JBP is associated with the alt-right.

You’ll never hear him use the phrase “We must secure a future for our white children”; what you will hear him say is that, while there does appear to be a causal relationship between empowering women and economic growth, we have to consider whether this is good for society, “‘’cause the birth rate is plummeting.” He doesn’t call for a “white ethnostate,” but he does retweet Daily Caller articles with opening lines like: “Yet again an American city is being torn apart by black rioters.” He has dedicated two-and-a-half-hour-long YouTube videos to “identity politics and the Marxist lie of white privilege.”

The author unnecessarily offers alt-right style alternative messages to what JBP would actually say. The author implies that JBP's discussion of the topic of riots shows a character-based similarity to the alt-right. The author takes the title of a critical video on White Privilege as an excuse to imply a mischaracterization of JBP.

Misunderstanding of Postmodernism Criticism[edit | edit source]

The article goes on to misunderstand JBP's criticism of Postmodernism. Whilst some of the spirit of the author's comment is correct, not all of the spirit is correct and the details are incorrect.

“Postmodern neo-Marxism,” on the other hand, is a conspiracy theory holding that an international cabal of Marxist academics, realizing that traditional Marxism is unlikely to triumph any time soon, is out to destroy Western civilization by undermining its cultural values with “cultural” taken out of the name so it doesn’t sound quite so similar to the literal Nazi conspiracy theory of “cultural Bolshevism.”

Jordan Peterson argues that if a person carries around with them some parts of the Postmodern theory in their minds, and it influences their behaviour enough that they decide to act on it, you have a bodily group of Postmodernists, acting on the theory. Whether than person has only absorbed 5% of the entire theory, they are still influenced by it as a whole. Rather than constantly refer to the details that are in use in the political sphere at any given moment, the umbrella term Postmodernism is used.

To describe this as a conspiracy theory is a mischaracterization of JBP's position. The author goes on to degrade JBP's actual position to the point where she implies his opposition to Postmodernism is the same as opposition to Cultural Bolshevism, which it is not. The author again makes another allusion JBP is linked to the alt-right via a Nazi reference.

Accusation of Calling Names and Bad Manners[edit | edit source]

Now, as I’ve said, I failed to get in on the ground floor of the “not using a person’s chosen address” industry which, in a simpler time, was known as “calling people names” and was considered bad manners.

The author implies that not using a transgender pronoun is the same as calling names and is considered bad manners. JBP has complied on an individual basis with the trans individuals he has spoken with, to call them by their preferred pronoun. JBP objects to the law compelling him to do so, not the specific problem it is claiming to solve.

But since calling a certain University of Toronto professor “Jordan Pea-Headerson” is apparently the only thing standing between us and non-stop collectivist potato farming, I’ll do my part for the resistance.

The author goes on in the face of hypocrisy, to call JBP names.

Western civilization is, after all, a delicate thing. Today you agree to call Edda van Heemstra Hepburn-Ruston “Audrey Hepburn,” tomorrow we’re all fighting over water and gasoline in a post-apocalyptic hellscape. Even worse, some social justice warlord will ask you to call him “Immortan Joe,” and that’s not your real name, Joseph.

Mischaracterization or mockery of JBP's issue with Bill C-16 as being over manners.

As far as I can tell, Jordie—and not the cool “Geordi” from Star Trek either— rewards the devotion of his Patreon patsies with regular rants against “political correctness,” and relationship advice I can only call “Angry Oprah Says.”

Mischaracterization of JBP's relationship advice. Many have reported it to be helpful. Clinical Psychologist with decades of practice... unlikely to be "Angry Oprah Says."

He also gives book recommendations apparently drawn from a high-school English-class reading list. If somehow you missed them, Mistress Peterson is the portal to such obscure works as Animal Farm, Of Mice and Men, and that cornerstone of the Western canon, Flowers for Algernon.

Needless mockery of solid book suggestions.

Criticism of JBP's Personality Test[edit | edit source]

For USD $29.99, Petersonites can get access to the Self Authoring Suite (a USD $119.92 value!). Those looking for further opportunities to give him money can pay USD $9.99 for “100 question phrases” which “can be found, along with similar question sets, elsewhere on the web” so that they might learn how your personality compares to 10,000 others. Pro tip: just take a personality test from the back of an issue of Glamour; you’ll only be out about five bucks, and you might find a free perfume sample.

The article fails to mention that the test comes with analysis of the traits you are measured against, as supplied his research students from a prestigious university. Whilst there is a small possibility you could find the same content in a Glamour magazine if they paid for the test details, it has not been supplied as such.

Stupid Man's Smart Person[edit | edit source]

Arguably the culminating point of the article, the author backs up her titular claim with this text:

There is no polite way to put this, but since Peterson claims that “If you worry about hurting people’s feelings and disturbing the social structure, you’re not going to put your ideas forward,” I’m just going to say it: Spend half an hour on his website, sit through a few of his interminable videos, and you realize that what he has going for him, the niche he has found—he never seems to say “know” where he could instead say “cognizant of”—is that Jordan Peterson is the stupid man’s smart person.

Here the author describes JBP's vocabulary as suggested evidence of over-flowery language. Therefore in the author's mind condemning him to appearing smart to a less intelligent viewer. This is the ultimate attacking a speaker for the appearance of their speech argument, rather than the content of it. It suggests more about the author than it does about the audience of JBP, or his relationship to them.

Peterson’s videos go on and on. It’s like opening up a tab for one of those bird’s nest webcams at the height of its popularity: Lots of people are watching, you feel like you should too, but nothing is happening. You keep checking back, the viewer numbers have risen, but the scene is just so grey and drab. You can make out a white object on your screen that may or may not be cracking up, but as time goes on you start to think, “This thing was not incubated properly.”

Again the definition of what "nothing" is happening, is a comment on the author's perspective on intellectual talks, rather than the content of what JBP says.

Mischaracterization of JBP[edit | edit source]

Watching his videos, it’s easy to conclude that Dr. Jordan Eggman exhibits the first documented case of the male-cry voice.

Mischaracterization, suggesting that JBP is speaking in a unnatural manner implying a degree of sadness, hurt or cry for attention via it's emotional tone, as overall generalization of JBP videos. The vast majority of JBP videos are lectures, similar to a university lecture, unsurprisingly.

maybe he’d be more convincing when explaining things like men are helpless before “crazy women” and “harpies” because it’s not socially acceptable for men to hit women and that this is “undermining the masculine power of the culture” in a way that will prove “fatal” if he didn’t sound quite so much like Gwyneth Paltrow accepting her Oscar for Shakespeare in Love.

Mischaracterization based on conflation of the quantity of attention JBP is getting with the joy and frivolity of the Oscars, and an incorrectly implied attention seeking streak in JBP.

Incorrect Arguments[edit | edit source]

I note Jordan Petersonny-don’t go-away-I-am-here-all-alone’s oft-expressed concern about overprotective parents is suspended when the terrifying prospect of ANT208, “Medical Anthropology: an Evolutionary Perspective on Human Health,” hovers into view

JBP's criticisms of branches of teaching, are separate from his criticisms of parents and to the best of my knowledge he has never given parents a free pass to be overprotective.

need only enter the name of the professor teaching a course. If that name isn’t “Jordan B. Peterson,” the class is probably a post-modern neo-Marxist brainwashing scheme.

Incorrect attribution of JBP's criticism, as being towards the name of the active professor for each class, rather than the content of the courses. Whilst in some cases JBP does have criticism of individual professors, it is separate from his criticism of course material.

The University of Toronto Faculty Association released a statement on Friday condemning Peterson’s website plan, without naming him directly; the group said it was “alarmed to learn that a web site may be under construction that is designed to place under surveillance certain kinds of academic content.” No one can objectively look at the level of hyperbole used by Jordan Buttercup Peterson and his fanbase and not acknowledge that the Faculty Association’s concern is justified. I wouldn’t want to be a department at the end of those more than 500,000 Youtube subscribers and more than 250,000 Twitter followers.

JBP's only call to potential action was for himself and maybe some that offered him support, to develop an automated course screening software. There was no call to place under active surveillance a kind of academic content. The tool would be used by the usual student body populace that "surveils" the given student curriculum before applying anyway. It was suggested to be built in a manner where you copy and paste in portions of curriculum and the software itself would not access faculty websites.

Whilst there is a somewhat legitimate point that for a few days after this project is launched, there may be intense public perception focused on a few faculty websites, and that may increase costs in the short term, over the medium to long term that would drop off very quickly. The material is likely already listed and available for "surveillance" regardless of what JBP does, now that the idea is out there. The potential negative impacts have been overstated.

In this rigorously academic course, students learn how “every experience that you have had contains information. If you have fully processed the information in that experience, (1) its recollection will no longer produce negative emotion and (2) you have learned everything you need to know from it.” I’m hard-pressed to find a course on Chaucer that comes this close to promising to clear my thetans.

Author attempts at conflating basic psychological theory with a writer from the 1300s and Scientology, and by extension incorrectly criticizes JBP of the same.

But in between his long rambling pseudo-academic takes on common self-help advice and his weird fixation on Disney movies, is a dreadfully serious message.

Accuses an ex-Harvard, University of Tech professor, who has discussed with some of the most public intellectuals, of being a pseudo-academic.

Implied Call to Violence[edit | edit source]

Peterson says he only thinks of it as a “non-violent war.” But when you insist the stakes are that high, the opposition that pernicious, who’s to say where the chips will fall?

Implied call to violence.

Errors in Criticism[edit | edit source]

Author clearly has a bone to pick, and little time has been put in to making the arguments correct.

Truths in Criticism[edit | edit source]

Some of the facts are sometimes correct. Some characterizations are fair, but not the majority.