Sup Forums's thoughts on Jordan Petersen?

Sup Forums's thoughts on Jordan Petersen?

He should shut his mouth when i t comes to philosophy.

He doesn't know what PoMo is.

sorted

He’s a voice of reason in an age of stupidity. Sometimes it seems like he would take twenty minutes to order at a drive through. He never has a short answer

/thread

A right wing phylosofer, if he was in Nazi Germany he'd be sucking Hitler's Dick.

Loser that sounds smart to stupid people. So obviously a right wingers wet dream.

>Pordan J Memerson

He's aight

This.

He has incredible knowledge when it comes to psychology. However, his "philosophy", if you can even call it that, is highly ruled by his emotional standpoint. Don't get me wrong, emotions have value when it comes to philosophy, but reason is much more important.

>debate with David benatar
>constructs a strawman to benatars argument
>benatar explains when his argument is a strawman and not applicable
>insists the strawman is his whole argument and fails to see the point

This. I greatly enjoy listening to him and have spent a lot of YT time watching lectures from him.

You have no idea how ridiculously assassin that statement looks. hahahahahaha What a retard. Don't even bother responding you mental midget, I know exactly what you would say and you'd be wrong, yet again.

Everything about this post screams narcissist.

Precisely. The accuracy of this post will blast many asses.

Washed up relic of the 80s. In love with his ideas. His head is to far up his ass to know see how the world has changed around him.

samefag

I think he "know see how the world has changed around him" just fine, hence why he spends so much time talking about it. You retard.

Wrong again. Poor little religiotard. Always wrong.

The ideas of personal accountability and opposing those that would legislate what you are allowed to say are obviously Nazi ideas. You are obviously very enlightened.

It's funny, the commie bots don't even know how how to handle this, the only thing professer Jesus worshiper hates worse than social programs is Commies. I can see the smoke rising out of their ears now. Ya, I`m talking to you. Get an education and then watch his informercials for God, Inc.

To be fair Communism has a murderous history and deserves hate.

That wasn't communism, hat was Lenin, Stalin, etc. Communism makes a lot of sense and is much more evolved that caveman capitalism. Ruskies and Chinese used it wrong. The philosophy of communism is sound and Peterson knows that, but he can't see past his faith. Must be noisy inside his head.

>Get an education
. . . the commie bots don't even know how how to handle this

>Get an education

That wasn't communism, hat was Lenin, Stalin, etc. Communism makes a lot of sense and is much more evolved that caveman capitalism.

>Get an education


Is anyone else noticing a pattern among those that do not like Peterson?

I mean besides my pointing it out.

He may be wrong, but he extraordinarily smart. As wrong as he may be, his dialogues expand the parameters on which conversations are had. And that alone is of great value itself.

Like when he debated Sam Harris on 'truth'. Harris kept checkmating him only for Peterson to expand the chessboard in such a way that he is not checkmated. Harris does it again, and the pattern continues. As I listened I realized my realm of thought expanded, and I value that, even if I believe he is wrong.

He's addressed this before. If I remember his argument, it was that it shows how naive you are to think that if you had just been the one to implement it, that it would have worked. Moreover even if you were well intentioned and tried to implement it perfectly, someone else would be more ruthless than you an just fucking kill your ass and take the lead. Which is exactly what Stalin did.

The point is the system sounds good, but fails in practice.

...

how's he right-wing?

Isn't that young Jeremy Irons?

Fine but overrated like all the other youtube philosephers that appeal to the alt-right. He has some good ideas but like anyone giving general or political advice you need to analyze everything they say.

The things they speak of aren't hard sciences like Physics or Chemistry, there aren't any truly hard absolute truths.

Because apparently to liberals these days, freedom of speech is considered right wing fascism

muh gender pronouns

Guy is a fucking national treasure! He nails so many things right! Everyone needs to listen to him!

I ain't got no problem with that personally.
Every day I work to convert more Nazis and every day the left works a thousand times harder.

I'm left (not new age neo left) and I love what this guy has to say. You're probably too fucking dumb to know the difference between right and left.

He tricked a fuckton of people into giving him cash for a personality quiz; a true inspiration for any aspiring capitalist, take notes.

This....i don't get half these retards who always think people have to be right....if it's a constructive conversation than it has value

He's an atheist/deist who pretends to be a Christian to appeal to a conservative market, depsite the fact that he already is conservative based on his blind traditionalism.
Completely caught up in Jung hype, plagiarises his work and pretends like he is an original thinker.
Repurposes conservative ideals of indpendence for the sake of a clueless masculine ideal he worships.
Doesn't understand willfully what Postmodernism is for the sake of seeming intellectually rebellious despite just spouting sophistry in response to complex questions and contemplations.
Racist
Sexist
Proudly transphobic

He's a menace.

The hallmarks of a narcissist/sociopath
"I can never be wrong"

If aspiring capitalist means snake oil salesman then sure

...

I don't get it?
Some sort of trans joke?

>Completely caught up in Jung hype

This is my biggest thing with him. I wish he treated it as a theory instead of a fact.

I guess it used to say "me" above the first pic. It was probably some MtF trans who claimed women could have a penis etc...

But the guy who posted it changed the "me" to a post number to indicate that that person is a faggot.

Have you completed your archetypal exercises today? Life is abou achieving the ideal of your essence, remember, nothing exists outside of this warranted destiny.

God

Lol regressive leftist spotted

Or they could just not be a right-wing nut job?

>Racist
>Sexist
>Proudly transphobic
I don't see what's wrong with any of those things.

Of course you don't
Those things are bad and you're a bad person.

>Those things are bad and you're a bad person.
Ooh, let's be tolerant until we're offended, then everything is evil. Typical regressive left.

There are good indications of psychological and intellectual differences between races. Ignoring these and pushing against further research in these areas is hurting science for the sake of social politics.

There are differences between the sexes that also should be acknowledged. The two sexes fulfill different evolutionary roles and have physical and mental differences. There's utility to there being traditional cultural roles for each sex, which leads to far more fulfilling lives for both sexes when they can express their respective masculine and feminine qualities naturally.

Transgender people are struggling with mental illness, and modern psychiatry is hurting them by indulging and endorsing their delusions rather than getting them the help they actually need but don't want.

Liberals take these issues and politicize them until we can no longer discuss them objectively and rationally and everything is instead about feelings and social politics. The real world is far more nuanced than the boxes that liberals love to put things in.

True Communism is a nice idea
Human nature means we can't have nice things
ergo, True Communism isn't achievable.

There will always be people like Lenin, People like Stalin, People like Mao.

oh no, Sup Forumsack has been triggered.
I can hear you cheetos encrusted finger creak and crack as you types as fast as your pudgy fingers will let you.

>hurting science for the sake of social politics
race realism is pushed by right-wingers, that's the social politics behind that whole machine.
> There's utility to there being traditional cultural roles for each sex, which leads to far more fulfilling lives for both sexes when they can express their respective masculine and feminine qualities naturally.
I believe in individual rights and capitalism, sorry I don't agree to your bullshit fascism.
>Transgender people are struggling with mental illness, and modern psychiatry is hurting them by indulging and endorsing their delusions rather than getting them the help they actually need but don't want.
and what might that be?
>liberals take these issues and politicize them until we can no longer discuss them objectively and rationally
I'm fine with discussions, I am a very objective person, but when you're saying that you approve of racism, sexism and transphobia, you are more than welcome to shit being thrown at you.
Are you that much of a narcissist were u dont understand that?

I'm not seeing an arguement there mate.

Communism is achievable once we reach a state of perfect efficiency in regards to robotic worker classes.

Well humans would reck the perfect system in rebellion against it. If all needs were fullfilled we would fuck it over just to have change.

It doesn't matter. The entire internet is trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls and everyone's forgotten and thinks everyone is serious. Why do you think people post the shit about athiests being dumb on here and get people to get baited every time?

Communism is bad eat breakfast and get a meaningful job. Oooh scary evil Religiofessor. lol. If you like him keep listening to him and ignore people who make poor internet arguments. Have a nice day.

Only an unsorted bucko would believe this

Also, because fuck it, saying communism wasn't done right is the worst argument in the book and if you're making it and NOT trolling (At least the trolls I respect) your retarded.

Also grammar bait.

Nah, humans would have maximal freedom in a public canvas for a projection of their wildest dreams, you could still work in a coal mine for fun, or have McDonalds, we would just have an eternal safety-net.

>race realism is pushed by right-wingers, that's the social politics behind that whole machine.
Maybe this wouldn't be the case if any time research on this topic is broached, someone didn't have to cry "DAS RAYSIST!"

So often people just throw these words around willy-nilly to kill any idea they don't like, regardless of whether or not it has any intellectual or social value. Racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted. These words are the killers of rational discourse.

>I believe in individual rights and capitalism, sorry I don't agree to your bullshit fascism.
Traditions have nothing to do with rights or economics. They are cultural norms which provide a foundation for society. Liberals don't actually want to do away with cultural rules... they just want to change them. Now when a woman just wants to be a housewife instead of a "strong, independent woman who don't need no man", they get shit on by feminists. Sure, men and women should be free to do whatever they want. But these cultural norms do have utility, and ultimately people who live by them have more fulfilling lives, because these are time-tested systems, as opposed to all of the social experimentation that progressives seem to love. People who embrace these new, untested cultural systems seem to be extremely bitter, cynical, and unfulfilled later in life. Maybe there can be a new system that works, but a balance must always be found between tradition and progress. I don't want to turn back the clock, I just think we should learn from history.

>and what might that be?
If you're referring to the help trans people actually need, I couldn't tell you. What I do know is that there's really not a whole lot of research on the topic of transgenderism, and the modern treatments haven't been around long enough to confirm their effectiveness, despite the trans community swearing by it. However, in the field of psychology, the goal is to fix the mind, not change the body to match the mind.

cont.

Sure, we can have an abundance of necessary resources like food, shelter and even go above and beyond with things like education.

But people won't be happy. Some will still be more beautiful/charismatic/smarter/athletic/etc than others. And the resources of love, attention, affection, etc will still concentrate unevenly.

What then?

cont.

Changing the body in this way is a very inelegant solution, and doesn't have a very good success rate so far. Look at the suicide rates of trans people, even post-op. If you applied the same success rate to any other mental illness, it would not be considered an effective treatment at all. Clearly there needs to be another solution. Ruining that person's body only exacerbates the issue when they realize that it doesn't actually make them women.

However, because of social politics, there is so much push-back against looking for a genuine cure of transgenderism that no research is done on the topic at all. So perhaps there is no better treatment for this disease, but we'd have no way of knowing unless we actually try to find out.

>I'm fine with discussions, I am a very objective person, but when you're saying that you approve of racism, sexism and transphobia, you are more than welcome to shit being thrown at you.
The second half of your statement flatly contradicts the first half. You really need to re-examine your philosophy on this.

We're talking about a viable and sustainable economic system. Not a utopia. The world will never be perfect.

>What I do know is that there's really not a whole lot of research on the topic of transgenderism, and the modern treatments haven't been around long enough to confirm their effectiveness
their treatment is called transitioning. Even if they kill themselves after, they got what they wanted, it's their choice to hurt themselves incidentally.
>Racist, sexist, homophobic, bigoted. These words are the killers of rational discourse.
No, they're adjectives.
Also, and there is a correct answer here:
Does race realism affect the justification for equal civil rights for you?
>They are cultural norms which provide a foundation for society.
exactly, you are a fascist, you want to retain a "natural" harmony to society, fascists operate on this structure, they create social classes to keep people satisfied because it gives them a role and purpose to a chaotic individualistic landscape life is, fascists are weak and so are traditionalists. Change is coming.

This is the beauty of life
This is philosophy
perfection doesn't exist

Sometimes quite smart sometimes quite stupid. He does talk from a position of privilege and this is coming from someone who agrees mostly with his political views.

How the flying fuck do you think a person being in a 'social role' that naturally fits them (i.e. they are comfortable in it) fascist? You think the state dictates that to them? Sure, a fascist state may insist upon it, may try shoving it down their throats and bemoaning any that say otherwise, including those that simply try to say that their personal opinion is to do otherwise. Such people don't wish to do harm or impede others, they just want to live life on their terms and don't want to be lambasted for having their own, personal opinion. Now look in the mirror, fascist.

>liberals are the real fascists
what a joke
idgaf what people CHOOSE to do, I dont like people saying what they ought to be doing based off superficial features like their sex or gender.

>their treatment is called transitioning. Even if they kill themselves after, they got what they wanted, it's their choice to hurt themselves incidentally.
So you think one has absolutely nothing to do with the other? Even for a liberal, that's naive. And most transsexuals don't get what they want. They don't become women. They just become mutilated men. I'd imagine that they are very emotionally distraught by this realization.

It's important to recognize as well that even if there is currently a treatment, it doesn't mean that it's the best treatment. We used to cure diseases with leeches. Look how far we've come because of science. Like I said, I'm not against progress. In fact, in this case, it would appear that the left is. Leftist ideals often butt heads with science, because those ideals and facts are often not compatible.

>Does race realism affect the justification for equal civil rights for you?
That depends. If there was another intelligent species that was capable of interacting with our society but was generally less intelligent, and had a tendency to be violent and belligerent, like say Orcs, wouldn't it be preferable to take those things into account when discussing the best way to deal with their place in society? Hypothetically speaking. Assuming the races are entirely equal in intellectual capacity and behavior, then any such talk is ludicrous. But this is accepted rather blindly, simply because it's a nice idea. But while the races are not actually separate species, the evidence does mount in favor of race realism. That evidence is so often dismissed without much justification other than "it's racist". But that doesn't mean it's wrong. Sometimes things aren't the way we'd like them to be. And frankly, it would explain a lot, and allow us to deal with many pressing social and economic issues much better, when we know more of the variables involved.

cont.

Why does it matter if someone talks from a position of privilege or not? I never got this meme. You can be the worlds richest cunt and if you're right, you're right.

>They don't become women. They just become mutilated men. I'd imagine that they are very emotionally distraught by this realization.
Yeah it doesn't help when the world constantly fucking reminds them of their existential displacement. You don't help them in any way.
>I'm not against progress. In fact, in this case, it would appear that the left is. Leftist ideals often butt heads with science, because those ideals and facts are often not compatible.
You are a fucking idiot, is this a meme? The left hate science and the right love it?

>like say Orc
here we go
>Sometimes things aren't the way we'd like them to be. And frankly, it would explain a lot, and allow us to deal with many pressing social and economic issues much better, when we know more of the variables involved.
just get to the point you fucking racist

cont.

I don't call black people "niggers" or have anything against any races. I just accept the possibility that the facts may not be in favor of total racial equality. And if that's the case, we need to know how to deal with it. We can't learn that when we kill rational discourse in this area with cries of racism and bigotry.

>exactly, you are a fascist, you want to retain a "natural" harmony to society, fascists operate on this structure, they create social classes to keep people satisfied because it gives them a role and purpose to a chaotic individualistic landscape life is, fascists are weak and so are traditionalists.
I don't believe in forcing people to do anything. Many different ideas and sociopolitical positions have merit. The problem is when people shove these ideas down others' throats and refuse to allow these discussions to happen. This is why I in particular have a distaste for the regressive left. The more radical positions become, the more out of touch and aggressive they tend to be. In a perfect world from my perspective, no one would be forced in any kind of lifestyle or social class. Social mobility is determined by how much work you're willing to put in, general ideas of traditional masculinity and femininity are determined by a mixture of social utility and common sense, and progress is achieved in pursuit of knowledge, understanding, and quality of life without being burdened by feelings and sociopolitical concerns (apart from basic ethical guidelines). I'm not in favor of some enforced suburban 50's utopia like you might imagine.

The world you want might not be so different from the world I want. But the method of getting there is very flawed. I'm not a traditionalist by nature, I just see some utility in it. We have to be willing to look into various viewpoints to find useful things for a successful life and better tomorrow. A single radicalized worldview is neither healthy nor much of a benefit to society.

his positions are largely meta/pre-political so right/left dichotomy more or less inapplicable. much of his philosophy is a reaction against Nazism making the nazi claim nonsensical.

>He does talk from a position of privilege
Does he come from nobility or some shit?

>I just accept the possibility that the facts may not be in favor of total racial equality. And if that's the case, we need to know how to deal with it.
we already have, equal civil rights
>I don't believe in forcing people to do anything.
good
>I'm not a traditionalist by nature, I just see some utility in it.
like what? Gender roles are sexual roles, they serve to make children, there's life beyond that.

>ridiculously assassin
asinine?

>Yeah it doesn't help when the world constantly fucking reminds them of their existential displacement. You don't help them in any way.
Trans people have it hard, no one can deny that. However, there's a common theme that comes up in this discussion we're having: we can't ignore facts in favor of feelings. The facts say that sex is determined by biology, and hormones don't change your XY chromosomes into XX chromosomes. We could also look at trans people and recognize that the vast majority do not look like women, and while that alone is not why they're not women, it does show that the treatment is not actually making them what they want to be, and is not capable of doing so. It's a clear sign that the treatment is being approached in the wrong way.

>You are a fucking idiot, is this a meme? The left hate science and the right love it?
The left very much like science, but it seems to be a distorted and, for lack of a better word, "Disneyified" version of it. Look a Bill Nye's discussion of gender: he is a self-proclaimed scientist and is widely considered to be a respected science communicator. However, he expressed a view of gender as a spectrum, which is not supported by any science, just his political opinion. There's a bias in the presentation of science in the media that makes it appear it supports leftist ideals, but it in fact does not. Just because a well-known science guy says it, doesn't mean it's true.

>just get to the point you fucking racist
The point should be obvious. We obviously see racism as a bad thing because it's not nice. But if it were to be actually a representation of the real world, would it actually be bad? The concept that racism is bad is based on the notion that it is an untrue view of the world. But there is evidence to support that it is, even if it is so often pushed back. I suppose I'll go ahead and say I'm racist, because there's no other word for it.

cont.

no, you read it.

the statement is fucking shifty, it'll give people quick stabby stab, the crazy shit cunt.

Mah fuckin man. Saw that recent interview he did with that woman on channel 4 about the wage gap and teansgenderism? Theres a moment where she's completely clutching her pearls and can't talk for a minute because she just got fed some facts.

>we can't ignore facts in favor of feelings
we can if they're not relevant

>There's a bias in the presentation of science in the media that makes it appear it supports leftist ideals
like what? You mentioned the spectrum thing, that's not science, I agree, it's social theory. Are you going to claim that climate change is a hoax?

>The concept that racism is bad is based on the notion that it is an untrue view of the world.
No it's not, it's because it bullies people based on superficial factors of people, of which they can't change.
>I suppose I'll go ahead and say I'm racist
great, I'm glad you admitted it.

cont.

I'm not basing my beliefs on biases, nor am I bigoted by nature. I just look at the facts and think, "Hmm, maybe it's true. It's an ugly truth for sure, and I'd rather it not be the case, but if it's the truth then I'll accept it". That being said, I'm not actually assuming it is true. Just that there's some evidence for it, and that it needs further research.

>we already have, equal civil rights
That's dealing with on the assumption that the races are equal. This was a purely sociopolitical development and had nothing to do with the scientific understanding of that time, or today for that matter. A good thing? It certainly seems like it, but we're always learning new things and we need to adjust our perspective accordingly.

>like what? Gender roles are sexual roles, they serve to make children, there's life beyond that.
And also that women primarily serve as caretakers, and men primary as providers. Not a universal truth, but a common behavioral pattern for humans since before civilization. It's logical to think we have evolved to these roles.

As I said, I don't think women should be forced to be caregivers or men be forced to provide. It's a free country and we choose the lives we want. However, we should not abandon the utility of such traditions to provide a stable home and proper guidance for the next generation, as well as a means of leading a fulfilling life according to our natural behavior.

>It certainly seems like it, but we're always learning new things and we need to adjust our perspective accordingly.
What, so I can't see a black person as an equal anymore? Evil.

>And also that women primarily serve as caretakers, and men primary as providers. Not a universal truth, but a common behavioral pattern for humans since before civilization. It's logical to think we have evolved to these roles.
Have you ever met a woman, or even a man? You can't reduce humans to horseshit like this, it's nonesense.

>as well as a means of leading a fulfilling life according to our natural behavior.
It's called the free market, we find ourselves in consumerism.

>we can if they're not relevant
If there are genuine intellectual and behavioral differences between races, biological predispositions for the sexes to behave certain ways, and there is a better treatment for transgenderism, wouldn't those things be relevant and beneficial to society to know?

>like what? You mentioned the spectrum thing, that's not science, I agree, it's social theory. Are you going to claim that climate change is a hoax?
A social theory that is presented as hard science. Hence the bias.

>No it's not, it's because it bullies people based on superficial factors of people, of which they can't change.
I agree it's bad to bully people based on skin color or other superficial physical differences. That's not what my considerations on the behavioral differences of races are about. It's not about making justifications for treating people of other races badly. It's about understanding how to treat other races according to their needs, which may be different. If they are, then we need to know.

>great, I'm glad you admitted it.
The problem is the absolute lack of nuance in the word. It's essentially another word for "villain", immediately taking any other valid points out of the equation. I said it so you would stop harping on that and maybe give some consideration to what I'm actually saying.

Listened to a bunch of his interviews/interventions. He's definitely not an idiot and I like some of his viewpoints, but I don't like his tone. He's trying way too hard to sound smart. It ends up poisoning his speech, making his answers too long and far fetched to be genuine.

Every fucking time he ends up referring to religion, especially christianism, and the bible, or communism, somehow. Good intellectualism requires balance and skepticism. This guy is too close-minded and obsessed.

Couldn't agree more about the podcast with Harris. He was obviously being pushed hard on the idea of objective truth, a concept anyone should concede, but just wouldn't give it up. He kept squeezing out of it, suggesting some outlandish concept along the lines of "the truth is only true if it's good for human beings". Anyways, i love petersons views on pretty much everything besides the nature of truth and how that plays into religion. I think his interpretation of religion is beautiful and the psychologist and Jung-admirer in him has such a blast doing it, im sure. But he has defended it, i think, wrongly. I think Sam has superior ideas about religion and it's effect on society and it showed in that podcast. My same issue with Shapiro. Hes great but it irks me to hear him defend religion. Still a great thinker, though.

>wouldn't those things be relevant and beneficial to society to know?
sure, but this can be developed without commercialisation, you want to put trans people on trial for following naive science.

>It's about understanding how to treat other races according to their needs, which may be different. If they are, then we need to know.
We can see in the media that everyone is human and adapts well to the modern world, stop pretending.

>The problem is the absolute lack of nuance in the word. It's essentially another word for "villain"
are you insane, of course it's a synonym for villain, it is evil and dangerous to be racist. Your fault for calling yourself that for the consequences.

>I said it so you would stop harping on that and maybe give some consideration to what I'm actually saying.
I thought facts come before anything else?

>What, so I can't see a black person as an equal anymore? Evil.
You certainly can, and I certainly treat any black person as an equal as well.
>are you insane, of course it's a synonym for villain, it is evil and dangerous to be racist. Your fault for calling yourself that for the consequences.
You see "racist" and assume that means I'm mean to other races. I am not. I just see them as different. And they are different.
>Have you ever met a woman, or even a man?
You can't reduce humans to horseshit like this, it's nonesense.
I didn't reduce anything. I acknowledged that it's not a universal truth.

>It's called the free market, we find ourselves in consumerism.
That's surprisingly cynical. And here you are acting like I'm a soulless monster.

>sure, but this can be developed without commercialisation
I'm not sure what this means.
>you want to put trans people on trial for following naive science.
I don't have anything against trans people. My beef is primarily with the psychiatric field and how they've chosen to deal with trans people. The agenda in either case is problematic, but I don't want to see transgender people suffer.

>We can see in the media that everyone is human and adapts well to the modern world, stop pretending.
And then when I stop looking at the media and take a look at the real world, I see a great deal of social dissonance and disillusionment. Something's not working.

>I thought facts come before anything else?
I can't argue entirely on that level with someone who doesn't feel the same way about that. You're unwilling to discuss these issues with me on the same level, so I'm trying to discuss them on yours.

>I see a great deal of social dissonance and disillusionment. Something's not working.
MUST BE THE BLACKS, no other explanation.

>I am not. I just see them as different. And they are different.
I think the word "racialist" is more appropriate to you then.

>And here you are acting like I'm a soulless monster.
We represent ourselves in capitalism, the freer the market the freer the people.

>The agenda in either case is problematic
agenda?

>My same issue with Shapiro. Hes great but it irks me to hear him defend religion. Still a great thinker, though.

I don't really even mind that Shapiro is religious because he usually argues his points without ever bringing his faith into the conversation. When he does talk about it he seems to be following the good aspects of his religion in how important he sees his family and he strongly holds to his convictions in a way that I can respect even if I don't always agree with him.

>MUST BE THE BLACKS, no other explanation.
There certainly is a lot of disillusionment in black communities, but that wasn't my point. Just in a general sense, the way we go about in society these days doesn't seem to contribute well to general happiness.

>I think the word "racialist" is more appropriate to you then.
It certainly sounds better, but I worry about a trend of just changing the words slightly to avoid the negative connotations rather than dealing with the negative connotations of the original words. It would have to do for now.

>We represent ourselves in capitalism, the freer the market the freer the people.
Don't have much to say here, I'm not really discussion economics.

>agenda?
Every minority group has an agenda, an interest in promoting their cause, creating protections, and achieving representation. This makes sense, and isn't necessarily a bad thing. But there are bad sides to it, too.

When interest groups like these influence other groups which should be more objective, it becomes seriously problematic. The field of psychology has been twisted to this agenda and that damages its ability to properly care for patients. The trans community ironically damages itself by imposing its conceptions of their condition on psychology, simply by causing enormous outcry whenever research doesn't conform to those conceptions. No one wants to offend minority groups, which gives them enormous social power. If there was research that provided insurmountable evidence that transitioning is ultimately harmful and provides avenues for other solutions that fix the mind rather than change the body, the outcry would be great enough to bury that research regardless of its validity. And well... some research has found these things, and unsurprisingly been entirely condemned by the trans community.

It's not that the trans community wants bad things for society or themselves. They are simply acting on their behalf as they understand it.

He's a genius, maybe one of the most important spokesmen of our time

Were you dropped on your head at birth?
Jesus, I've never heard a statement so obviously wrong and blatantly ignorant

How about you learn who the man is before you sput nonsense like that?

national socialists like him because he tells them to clean their bedrooms

i have no opinion on the matter

>He's a genius, maybe one of the most important spokesmen of our time
stop trolling

he's willing to put up with retarded radical feminists and the like so in most of his debates he has the high ground but that's mainly because he's reasonable and rational. when it comes to his own theories on hierarchy and the like he's way off.

Pretty smart on some subjects but fucking retarded when he brings up religion/communism into arguments

this is the only post in this thread that isn't retarded

I'm sold that postmodernism is a ridiculous radical reductive way of interpretation that does willingly ignore context and various variables. It's like having and issue with single issue voters.

>radical reductive way of interpretation that does willingly ignore context and various variables.
What?

>Quality bait

Were in agreement there. I was wrong to say that it irks me to hear him defend religion. He never uses religion as a defense and doesn't argue that it should be enforced in any way by the government. What i should've specified was the exact conversation i was talking about between sam and ben on the recent live podcast. Even then, I don't, at all, dislike Ben and i doubt he would've ever brought it up if not for Sam bringing it up first (obviously everyone was waiting to hear that conversation). I guess it's an area I'll just have to disagree with him on. I guess it bothers me a bit to see such a sharp, witty thinker still hold those beliefs. I think it's probably something he grew up with and just learned to defend. They end up arguing past each other when discussing morality being derived from religion or evolving with our social standards. Hopefully another conversation could bring that to the forefront. I don't expect any conversions lol but it's just so great to hear influential minds come together like that.

>Hopefully another conversation could bring that to the forefront.

It would be nice if Harris, Peterson, and Shapiro could really see just how much common ground they share, but it does kind of feel like every time they get to discussing religion they tend to dig their heels in and not want to give an inch to the other side.