Jordan Peterson: ‘The pursuit of happiness is a pointless goal’

theguardian.com/global/2018/jan/21/jordan-peterson-self-help-author-12-steps-interview

your thoughts, Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=kIhvZjwOb3k
twitter.com/AnonBabble

What is up with JP and lobsters? What did I miss?

lol wingnuts get told

I don't care about your controlled opposition ecelebs nigger.

This man and I have diametrically opposing worldviews. He refuses to accept that a person can define them-self on their own terms and that this is the only true path to self actualization. Be the person you were called to be, not the one an arbitrary government or culture at a random point in time demands you to conform to.

fucking this, why does JP love sucking jewish cock SO much? it doesn't feel like 88 degree chess to me desu...

Also this.

What a strange photoshoot

buy my carpet

That's what he's saying you double nigger.

his words are meaningless

Der Wille zur Macht
Seeking happiness itself is a lost cause, the correct way is to achieve power and that will gain you happiness

clean your room

There are few things more obnoxious than pop philosophy.

So many trips wtf

lobster show a form of dominance hierarchy. seemingly proving it exists in nature and not just a social construct, like marxist would like you to believe.

Clean your room, then your country

Stupid. Why be alive unless you're happy, or at least trying to be happy?

Happiness is not the same thing as pleasure. One can be in pain and yet be happy.

He is not tho, not at all. I am referring to self actualization in the Kantian sense, whereby I hold my sense of duty above all else.
Men are not lobsters; our dominance hierarchy is artificial and dependent upon the creation of a narrative (role theory/Kant's Great World-Drama). By seizing power you can re-cast the roles and reset the hierarchy.

Did he fuck/eat the lobsters after the photos?

Take that Nazis

youtube.com/watch?v=kIhvZjwOb3k

Clean your lobsters

>anyone who doesn't completely align with my extreme political beliefs is le controlled opposition
Brainlet mentality.

He’s saying don’t pursue happiness as a final goal, because it’s just a temporary state. He sees pursue meaning through struggle and work, and hopefully you’ll have times where you feel happy, but that goes away and you’ll need to work hard again to achieve it.

So, he’s not saying don’t want to be happy, or never be happy, but realize it’s it comes after achieving something, and is temporary.

ALL THESE NUMBERS. is Jordan Peterson channeling kek?

Humans aren't lobsters. It's a shit argument.

he talks constantly about finding your path though? So what's the problem?

men can live in many dominance hierarchies, that's the difference

Lobsters have their own dominance hierarchy but have no real social structure to speak of which demonstrates that it doesn't have to be socially constructed.

What is more we share the same chemical makeup in our brains as lobsters do when they react to being defeated in combat. So lobsters posture will shrink after a loss, but if you give them human anti depressants they perk back up and will fight again.

It shows that when we diverged from whatever was our common ancestors with lobsters were, that mechanism for climbing dominance hierarchies was present.

He's right. So many people now are just disgusting hedonists who care about nothing besides maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain.

The stoics knew this 2.5 millennia ago

He's arguing there's a hierarchy in almost everything. Including planets and atoms. It has nothing to do specifically with lobsters you stupid cunts it has to do with an universal trait

By finding an existing path, you are already conforming. His philosophy is bent to accepting a broken system/culture and making the best of it. I am fundamentally opposed to this, sometimes it is necessary to fully re-write the script.

happiness is the point of life. but happiness isn't fleeing fun

>your thoughts, Sup Forums?
That if you find yourself looking around at the World and are unhappy, you shouldn't take action because you are undoubtedly wrong, ESPECIALLY if this stems from the rejection of the post-WWII philosophy of the brotherhood of man. Jews are fantastic people who are smarter and more adventurous than gentiles, any criticism directed at them as an aggregate group stems from deeply misplaced resentment and jealousy. The divergence in the human population 200,000 years ago doesn't triumph the 65 million years of continuous evolution together, so racial prejudices are unjustifiable. Women and men should recognize their biological predispositions and adhere to classical gender roles as to not upset the delicate balance of social structures. Races need to mingle together because their biological predispositions not supercede muh fee fees and Hitler and genocide and the jews are fantastic people. Did I mention how great jews are?

Our dominance hierarchy isn't artificial, though. Humans live in groups and have found dynamics to make these groups function. Perhaps you can call those tweaks artifical, but we're hardwired to be tribal. That's why men jockey for position no matter what their circumstances may be. It's the reason why so many of us played FPS's growing up because it was as way to see who had the best war strategy and reaction time within the confines of a game.

You philosopher types come so close to finding the truth, but end up blinded by the arcane nature of your field. You spend all this time dealing with Kant or some other cunt from the 19th century rather than synthesizing knowledge with your environment. Get out of the ivory tower and notice patterns for yourself.

dis

What sense of duty? To whom?

>our dominance hierarchy is artifical

So why do we have similiars reactions with lobster? Why do competent peoples usually end up on top?

buy my rug goy

Men who seek to jocky for position have always been ancillary to history, the key figures of any era were those who seized power and smashed the old hierarchy. Englishmen who spent their lives jockeying for position were put to the sword by Normans and it was all for naught, what you say makes no sense. This is the dumbest thing I have ever read.

>an universal
It's an stupidity, fuckhead. It can be demonstrated that there is cooperation in all of these things as well, and in any case, humans aren't atoms either. This is an old argument that was already had in the 1800s, if anything cooperation is more prominent in societies, it's why dumbasses are fine with voting a billionaire because they feel like him in some way.
There are deeper problems, and a discussion of lobsters having a 'dominance hierarchy' is basically useless. It leads nowhere and suggests no resolutions to the problems in society.

>What sense of duty? To whom?
Kantian duty does not work in that way, it would be pointless to debate this with someone who has never read him.
>Why do competent peoples usually end up on top?
They often do not; Tesla died penniless and many of his achievements were stolen.

>reads ecclesiastes once

Being content is possible. Happiness is unrealistic. Also, yes he is right *snibitty snibbitt*

>It leads nowhere and suggests no resolutions to the problems in society
He said it as a response to the cunt interviewer claiming that less female CEO's than male CEO's is caused by the patriarchy. Jordan Peterson then says: no, it's logical that there's a hierarchy like that it even happens in lobsters. Men just act in a way that causes them to rise more in the hierarchy. He said nothing about whether it's a good thing or a bad thing that there's a natural hierarchy in place. So it proves that you don't know what you're talking about

This is exactly what Schopenhauer said during the 1800s, Jordan you're a bit late dude.

>our dominance hierarchy is artificial
lolnope

>t. Unsorted

This is wrong. People always jockeying for position are the least fit to rule, they are betas and omegas. This sort of thing is only prominent in society today because everything is backwards.
If you look at other animal hierarchies, elephants, wolves, lions, etc. (animals much closer than us than lobsters) the leader tends to exhibit empathy and a great sense of care. This was true even in Rome, to care for the Gods as well as people beneath you is a virtue. Dominance is running away with itself because virtue has been lost, or more accurately, thrown out. Anti-virtue is essentially now considered a virtue, and the strange thing with this is that it is essentially a form of cooperation in the stated fundamentals of society. We are all equal in degeneracy, which is why so many degenerates stand behind Hillary and Trump. They see something in them that they feel in themselves.
There is always equality as well as hierarchies. The world cannot be reduced into monisms, especially ridiculous monisms like 'Live Like A Lobster, Bro.'

>kantian duty does not work that way

Then it's not a duty you mong.

ITT: The lamentations of the BTFO

But no one's listening to Schopenhauer, are they?
Why are literal autists so obsessed with saying Peterson's unoriginal? He's historically unoriginal but is unique in a contemporary sense. He's doing what old/pol/ wanted -- modern renaissance.

For people who cry about reading books, you people don't seem to have read much philosophy outside of Marx & Engels. I wonder how many actual philosophy majors post on leftypol...

Humans are animals. That's the point.

That IS a good argument because it undermines the social and anecdotal nonsense peddled 95% of the time. Most feminists will lose an argument in a public space when presented by biological facts.

>they often do not.

Then they're not competent.
>muh autistic virgin died penniless
Yeah, and Napoleon died alone on a shitty island doesn't mean he was incompetent

Good luck with all that bucko

I think thats the mistake hes making, and hes making a bold complaint without it having much relevancy to the rest of his argumentation. I think he means that pleasure is ultimately pointless. Happiness is an essential aspect and goal of the human condition. If he seriously meant that in the way it was written, he needs to go back to the drawing board with his current ideology.

I think Jordan Peterson is a charlatan grifting support from impressionable young fools such as yourself.

You're telling me Kantian duty is to no one. It's not a duty then.

>Tesla was not competent
ok

The person you were called to be? Care to share where you find out that information?

You're talking about an interview, this is a book.
There's a difference between saying 'things can happen because of this' and 'this happens so you should live like this.' Peterson's arguments have an element of the latter, because he is a liberal and believes in individual cooperation with the social contract. At the core of what he is saying is essentially self-help reorientation of your feelings to the liberal mythos. The problems in the world don't disappear because 'Yo I'm standing up straight like a lobster, bro.'
The problem with the CEO argument is that it ignores the unnatural state in which we live, and how these positions effectively pull people into them, creating a second form of nature.
Not only are we not lobsters, we are not living in a natural environment. It's a foolishly irrelevant argument to anything that matters in the world.

Lobsters aren't Animals. Lobsters are an animal, and an extremely simplistic one.

Fuck JP

I repeat, fuck JP.

Once again, fuck this boomercuck.

Sorry faggot, you cannot define yourself independent of objective reality

t. conformist dog

So he's simply an anti-collectivist. Stop taking credit for the accomplishments of others you lazy nigger, accomplish them yourself

The point is that we have the same biological mechanism in our brains that lobsters have that has to do with hierarchy and hierarchical behaviour. Its encoded in to us on a biological level, its an innate feature of the human. (and almost all other animals)

Wait, are you trying to say Peterson has defined objective reality?

my my my
JBP really dilates your fuckwounds, doesn't he you tumblr tranny faggots?
As if Sup Forums would dislike a man who suggests taking personal responsibility, even a kermit leaf.
>clean your rooms, faggots

why are Poles so based ?
Is that the effects of more than a century under totalitarian regimes ?

Not even close

Oyyyy, so like, what you're saying gubna, is like, we wuz lobsters n sheit init?

>United States founded on the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness
>(((Peterson))): pursuit of happiness is a pointless goal
SOP
When will (((Peterson))) come out of the closet about his jewish roots? His silence is deafening.

Does anyone have access to the Spectator article about his interview with Cathy Newman? Sharing would be much appreciated

>our dominance hierarchy is artificial
I'd like to see you explain this shit to a chad
>women like you and men admire you, just because society has artificially agreed to find biological indicators of health and wealth adaptive.

just wow nigga

>By seizing power you can re-cast the roles and reset the hierarchy.
This is some next level gnostic power-gaming bullshit

He has a point. You are probably one of the fucking losers he is reffering to. You are a basement dwelling autistic retard with no friends, job or wife with nothing going on for your self in life so you want to join some right wing group and start lynching black people. You say its because you are noble and great but its because you are resentful and bitter that you are such a fucking failure. You just want to take your anger out on someone. You are the different side of the coin of the feminst marxist.

Peterson have showed concern about the falling birth rates in the western world.

>The pursuit of happiness is a pointless goal

Try being miserable, its worse.

>you can define yourself however you want
>cuts off dick
>dons blackface and afro wig
>speaks with Jamaican accent
>howls like wolf on the streets
None of this changes the fact that you are a white American human male. You don't define yourself, reality defines you you Kike. I know it's confusing when your people are forced to wear the skin of the goyim so no one sees your crimes.

Hierarchies of competence dont preclude cooperation tho. Idk why youre so stuck on that. Even in a cooperative team game like hockey theres competition within teams between players vying for mvp. Theres also cooperation between teams in that they agree to play by the same rules. The dichotomy youre trying to set up is too broad and doesnt even invalidate the concept of competence hierarchies.

no problem, definitions are free, i'm sure you don't mind that i define you on my terms

Go back.

What these two guys here said. It became a meme when he did a recent interview with a british airhead journalist kept paraphrasing what he said completely wrong.
He brought up the lobster point and she says "So you're saying women are like lobsters?"

that's dumb
pride in your culture is the starting point to doing something for it, the point where you realize there's a bar to reach and a duty to reach it

LMFAO!! You cant be serious nigger!!

happiness is for soyface fagmales. real men prefer creating & building over being happy

>Kant
kill yourself commie

Im not clicking that shit but based on the title yes the pursuit of happiness is the pursuit of distraction.
If you are happy you aren't working hard enough, you have lost focus.
For example spoiling your child because it feels good. Sure it might make you happy but are you serving your own self interests, are you building a legacy, are you respecting your ancestors, are you properly raising your child?
No you are masturbating in an abstract way

By this logic anyone who is bluepilled is controlled opposition. Remember the jewish veil is strong.

>our common ancestors with lobsters
Neck yourself, (((evolution))) rube.

It just doesn't work that way. Serotonin may be a major factor in lobsters, but humans are much more complex animals - and in a theological perspective, which he conveniently ignores, we are separate from animals, created in the image of Gods.
But lets assume that serotonin is as important to humans as it is lobsters, the very hinge on which human hierarchy swings. It makes you energetic or 'depressed', yet there is no inherent link to hierarchy here, the energetic may be driven towards art or passive enjoyment/happiness as much as hierarchy. Further, depression may lead to extremely aggressive behaviour and dominance.
And still further, this ignores the hierarchies which humans set up as a social construct outside of nature. Especially in family lines this can become important, a king may be born as a depressed figure and change the very structures because of this. There are many cases of isolated kings like this.
It's ironic that Peterson, a liberal, is making this argument in the first place as liberalism is grounded in the very denial of nature, our separation from and destruction of it. We live in an abstract world completely separate from nature and have created denatured institutions, and somehow people believe that one can define nature from such a position. Certainly, distance reveals something regarding nature, but what is really occurring here with reductionism is that nature itself is being separated from nature, elevated into the rules of social contract. And this does not happen merely at the intellectual level, science is trying to create this escape from the 'brutality of nature' in its experiments - which have become an institution of production rather than just buildings for the purpose of knowledge and human improvement. Nature, at the genetic level, is being written into the social contract. Humans have effectively consumed nature due to their distance from and fear of it.

If Peterson really wanted to understand nature and apply it to society he would have to look at the whole of animals and nature, how there are devastating forms of hierarchy, brutal acts, as well as grace and beauty. He does not discuss these things precisely because he is a liberal ideologue and can only see nature from within his mind, which is an escape vessel necessitating the idea that somehow this is all natural and that we must learn to live with it. Nature is seen as dangerous, or at least the path from which greater monsters come, and he would never discuss the forms of nature suggesting the Gulag Archipelago ('which, by the way, I'm a huge fan of, and believe he is the most important writer of the 20th century'), as that would undermine his purpose. He has no interest in really discussing nature, let alone understanding it - and thus will never discuss the termite mounds, the ant colonies, the packs of hyenas, vultures, the fires raging in a forest allowing for new growth. Such discussions are dangerous, so as a liberal psychologist he must discuss the safe aspects of a mechanism within animals, and one which specifically curates possible discussion within his ideology.
If we were truly to discuss nature and liberal society we would picture something more like the mutating fungus spreading through a forest, destroying the trees as they unleash impotent defense mechanisms, only useful for the bugs that used to attack them. Vast forests of standing deadfall, and raging wildfires burning so long that they destroy all soil, leaving a desert. The starving wild dog, hair singed, stumbling towards some vague scent of charred remains and acrid grounds. Spiritually and meaningfully this is where we stand, and for someone who speaks so passionately of meaning it's ironic that Peterson's vision is so pathetic and banal. He is an owl who does not realise that he is being pecked at and chased by a murder of crows.

So where does objective reality come into this? You are claiming it is somewhere within this discussion.

Perspective is very important in these images.
The oscar is closer to the camera, making it appear larger. The same scale cannot be applied to his face, since scaling due to distance is a huge factor.
Same thing goes for the unknown-leg. It could be at an angle, and is further away from his face, so the same scale from his face cannot be applied to the leg.

This is just a bogus, defamatory "analysis".

everything's pointless. we all end up in the black abyss
>*guitar shreds*

>newfaggots can't even into greentext
clean your room

You're what they refer to as "special" in the US, right?

You people are so pathethic at this point it's not even funny. You ignore my argument and try to paint Kant as a Semitic philosopher (read the Nuremberg transcripts for more on that). You are horrible at LARPing as a natsoc poster, just move on.
You completely ignored my Tesla example and are now trying to define competency based on the ability to have casual sex. Nice proxy btw.

>it just doesn't work this way
>serotonin has the same effect on lobster and human


Your arguments about king is shitty too because you had a shitload of succesions wars and other crisis. A king isn't accepted as the king just because of his social statue. If he isn't competent he have a serious risk of getting overthrown.