The Jordan Peterson discussion thread

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
19,216
JP may have entered his profession to help people, he may also have entered it because he knew he would be good at it and could make a decent living off of it. Given some of the things he has said in the past he hardly strikes me as a purely altruistic person - he probably does want to help people in some sense, I also think he wants to make money off them...
That stinks of a strawman, give me one example of a purely altruistic person.

Adam Smith said:
It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.
 

rietrot

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 26, 2016
Messages
12,165
I think you are confusing value and price... surely the value that people derive from him is unaffected by the amount of money they choose to donate? Of do you think that something cannot be overpriced?
It is voluntary so people are getting way more value than what they donate. I haven't given him a cent and I found his stuff valuable.
 
Last edited:

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
18,919
That stinks of a strawman, give me one example of a purely altruistic person.
I wasn't the one who made the the comment...

his purpose is towards helping people.
Without any proof that this is in fact his primary motivation, I was simply offering other alternative that he might, in fact, be in this for other reasons...
 

Polymathic

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
12,412
I wasn't the one who made the the comment...



Without any proof that this is in fact his primary motivation, I was simply offering other alternative that he might, in fact, be in this for other reasons...
You can see from his behavior that he leans towards helping people which is why he was a practising psychologist for so many years.
 

kolaval

Expert Member
Joined
May 13, 2011
Messages
2,936
Bloody hell this thread can bring up the weirdest debates.

BTW [MENTION=496418]ArtyLoop[/MENTION] You are an innocent victim of a brutal system that seeks your opression.
And to think that such an intellect had to suffer us fools, I feel for you man.
But claim your victimhood, wear it proudly, and may it win you many a debate.
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,115
I wasn't the one who made the the comment...



Without any proof that this is in fact his primary motivation, I was simply offering other alternative that he might, in fact, be in this for other reasons...
You're arguing the indefensible. Who can really say what is anyone's true motive? Really Truly, there is no way to say what's in anyones mind.

However, one thing you can do is is look at the history of the person. There is an absence of skullduggery about his person. Historically, when he had no expectations of being under the microscope, to today where he is and is terrified of making a mistake that would undermine his work thus far.

This to me, underlines that he recognises how mercurial humanity is, that the majority of us are willing to make life decisions based on the Fallacy fallacy. (probably coupled with Loss aversion cognitive bias).

It's been a compounding and revealing discussion on how finnicky our perceptions of each other are that "earning" $80 000 a month through willing donations is enough to discredit a life time of work.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
19,216
Without any proof that this is in fact his primary motivation, I was simply offering other alternative that he might, in fact, be in this for other reasons...
1) Wanting to help people is not mutually exclusive from wanting to get paid for it.
2) If you look at how he started all of this, he started it from an ideological standpoint about free speech. If you look at that first video where he rose to fame, can you see any evidence of him looking to do it to make money?
 

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
18,919
You're arguing the indefensible. Who can really say what is anyone's true motive? Really Truly, there is no way to say what's in anyones mind..
Then don't make the statement that we should give his ideas more credence because "he is trying to help" - maybe he is trying to help, maybe he is trying to prevent meaningful change by suggesting that young people have no place to try and change something they disagree with. It's not a given that he is trying to help, who or what is he trying to help?

However, one thing you can do is is look at the history of the person. There is an absence of skullduggery about his person. Historically, when he had no expectations of being under the microscope, to today where he is and is terrified of making a mistake that would undermine his work thus far.

This to me, underlines that he recognises how mercurial humanity is, that the majority of us are willing to make life decisions based on the Fallacy fallacy. (probably coupled with Loss aversion cognitive bias).

It's been a compounding and revealing discussion on how finnicky our perceptions of each other are that "earning" $80 000 a month through willing donations is enough to discredit a life time of work.
Am not discrediting his ideas, am questioning that some of his current positions may be motivated by other things.
What part of clinical psychology qualifies him to give people 12 rules for life....? Am sure his prior research/work in the field is fine, he is the one that dipped his oar into self help stuff- when academics start writing self help books that try to appeal to a wide audience seemingly for commercial gain, damn right people have a right to question his current leanings. Or do you believe that his 12 rules of life is the culmination of his academic career...?
 

DMNknight

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2003
Messages
3,115
The clue is in his profession? He's had a lifetime of not only teaching people to help themselves, but developing methods to help people gain traction in their lives when they feel they are unable to.
All of these things existed before he was catapulted into fame. That's why I can point to motivation to help people is his primary driver.
His actions pre-dating his fame mirror his words now. That's about a good a measurement as you can get.
 

ArtyLoop

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
6,120
You can see from his behavior that he leans towards helping people which is why he was a practising psychologist for so many years.
L. Ron Hubbard was the same, except he was a practising science-fiction author, albeit a crap one.
 

ArtyLoop

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
6,120
Why are you equating JBP with religious figures?
Because this stuff is exactly like Scientology. Scientology isn't a religion, so let's be clear on that. Its a mind-control cult. This guy operates at the same level as DeMartini and Kehoe, which I guess, makes their peddling more palatable than blunt Scientology
 

ArtyLoop

Executive Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
6,120
LRH was a con-artist, his religiosity was only to get out of paying taxes on money making scheme.
Its more than that actually. While tax avoidance might certainly have been a large factor- much of it is about mind control and making money out of the gullible fools that followed his "technology". While I am not sure exactly where this guy's angle is (and to be frank I am not really interested to find out), I do have to say I've seen this all before, and I've seen the same people fall for it time and again. If I had the time and motivation to do something like this, I would have- have contemplated it many times but the effort and having to think up new believable bullshit never really suited me
 

Cray

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
18,919
Its more than that actually. While tax avoidance might certainly have been a large factor- much of it is about mind control and making money out of the gullible fools that followed his "technology".
Oh no doubt, I think he loved having a bunch of people looking up to him as the source of all wisdom, damn sure the money didn't hurt either.
 

Polymathic

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
12,412
LRH was a con-artist, his religiosity was only to get out of paying taxes on money making scheme.
Because this stuff is exactly like Scientology. Scientology isn't a religion, so let's be clear on that. Its a mind-control cult. This guy operates at the same level as DeMartini and Kehoe, which I guess, makes their peddling more palatable than blunt Scientology
It seems you guys are argueing against a strawman version of Jordan Peterson
 
Top