Is this guy a meme or is he worth listening to?

Is this guy a meme or is he worth listening to?

Other urls found in this thread:

nationalreview.com/2017/10/math-racist-university-illinois-professor/
washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/09/07/evangelicals-fear-muslims-atheists-fear-christians-how-americans-mistrust-each-other/
link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1005390515242
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxons#Culture
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

literally both

give him the gift of reddit gold on r/jordanpeterson

Unless you're devoid of common sense then he's the guy you should go up to l.

He's certainly worth listening to, but stay skeptical.

If you’re a fatherless man child then sure.

>clean your room, dress nice, shower every day, have humble confidence

There, but that should be common knowledge.

Make sure to buy his $10 personality quiz that is the same as any free personality quiz around, and his $4000 carpet to shit on

And also the Past, Present, and future planning programs that are basically just a diary.

His advice is practical if not a little self evident at times. A lot of what he says is pragmatic and worth listening to if you're in a place of hopelessness or depression. Watching his full lectures won't be worth the time unless you have an interest in biblical metaphysics and archetypes or clinical psychology/ psychotherapy. Bite size philosophy on YouTube has a compendium of short and relatively insightful extracts from his lectures

His psychology and "clean your room" ideas are great. Unsure of his politics. He seems to voice left wing opinions as well as right wing ones.

If you spend a lot of time on Sup Forums, you should probably listen to him

Yield to your social better, pleb

You'd think so....but I think it's becoming less so. One of his points is that we seem to have thrown the 'baby out with the bathwater' in terms of being more religiously aetheist as a societey- We're not teaching good 'ways to live' to our young pups. It's a diet of 'Rights' and no responsibilities....so yeah, man babies abound.

>He seems to voice left wing opinions as well as right wing ones.
It's almost as if he doesn't subscribe to identity politics or something.

...

That's actually one of the biggest bones that I have to pick with him. His defense of religion as a meta-story and condemnation of atheism as removing moral basis really doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

Yea the fact that he has a set of opinions outside of an ideology is something I respect. However he has some questionable stances, specifically the fact that he seems to be a climate change denier.

people listen to what he has to say because of his memedom, much like reveiwbrah

Well, there's more blue haired trannies in California than in traditional Chrisitan homes.

The way he takes meaning from biblical stories is really interesting. But yea the idea that you need to be religious to have morals is just dumb as fuck

I personally love JP, and his appearances on the JRE and h3h3 are incredibly interesting. Very likable guy

I don't know what specific comments you're referring to, but there is a middle ground on climate that I think most people probably fall into, that the fringe climate activists would call 'denialism'.

makeup is sexualizing the workplace maybe it should be banned. just a thought not an opinion- guy who fought bravely for the freedom from being fined for not saying zir (the first timr they tried to make people say something as opposed to not saying something)

Climate change is a fact.

man-caused climate change is not.

this

All he says are self-evident truths. But apparently you're not even allowed to say those anymore. Which is why people are defending him so hard.

Soon, they'll be telling you that you're not allowed to say that 2 and 2 make 4.

>His defense of religion as a meta-story and condemnation of atheism as removing moral basis really doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
But much of religion IS a meta-story. That is undeniable.
As far as atheism removing morality, I don't think that's really his point.

'Traditional' Christian homes have their fair share of issues.

Math is a social construct you pos.
nationalreview.com/2017/10/math-racist-university-illinois-professor/

If you're unsure, and asking, then you're an impressionable enough child that everyone you think is worth listening to, will also be a meme.

You are behaving as all young children do, unsure of where you and your ideas belong, and defaulting to a herd animal to defer risk and responsibility, seeking out guidance and leadership.

Good luck to you.
I guess.

Better than parents who smoke weed with their kids and teach their kids its ok to go out and fuck everything with a heartbeat

I found it interesting myself. I grew up in a religious family (not hyper religious, just went to Church) and then moved away from that in my teens. The concept of 'higher order' are still something that I think about (indeed, it's one of lifes biggest questions) but I''m uncomfortable with the modern 'lovey' concept of Jesus etc.
For me, having the ability to lead a good life, even if it's based in the teachings/meta stories of the bible, is still a good way to move society forward- Like the middle ground between religious fervour and people that don't even THINK about a higher order or moral framework.

that is gayest thing i've ever read

>But much of religion IS a meta-story.
Except that it is also a system of belief and the two 'modes' are hopelessly interconnected.
>As far as atheism removing morality, I don't think that's really his point.
It effectively is. He makes arguments along the same lines as presuppositionalists: that without God we have no reason to not behave selfishly and atheists are merely borrowing from a religious worldview.

I wouldn't necessarily agree.

I knew you would like it. kek

The issue I have there is that the moderately religious enable and protect the fanatically religious.

How would either of those things be conductive to raising healthy and successful children?

so you're saying, women aren't intelligent enough to do math?

Religious fanaticism is a small fraction in the US. The real danger is Islam.

The issue is that you claimed traditional Christian homes were better.

he gives off the scent of working through personal demons
total implosion possible

This.

It's a small fraction in the US, yet they still manage to cause harm. The last time I checked, Islam was also a religion, and even moderate Christians serve to enable and protect them.

No, that's not what I got out of what I read.
He talks of bible stories being a distillation of stories which have recorded 'ethical' lessons throughout the development of society. They are interwoven but I think he stops short of saying 'God'* created morality.
* insofar as he seems to be saying that the concept of 'God' is the meta-story of the meta-stories?

To clarify I meant they were better than a typical snowflake factory home in California.

What significant harm has religious fundamentalism caused in the US?

>Islam was also a religion, and even moderate Christians serve to enable and protect them.

Was talking of the US specifically, a traditional culturally Christian nation. I don't know where you got your stats on the second part, but it's usually the atheist privilege checkers that defend Islam.

Well it is what I've gotten out of what I've heard him say in lectures.
>They are interwoven but I think he stops short of saying 'God'* created morality.
He doesn't, but he does say pretty expressly that atheism offers no rational reason for why we shouldn't behave in a stereotypically selfish manner, the implication being that theism does.

treading the same path as joseph campbell then

At the highest levels, I genuinely don't think they do. Women as a group have a narrower IQ distribution, so they have less cognitive outliers on the more intelligent end of the spectrum, and I think this is where our innovative mathematicians and scientists emerge from. Women can't into higher order levels of abstract calculation

>What significant harm has religious fundamentalism caused in the US?
Direct abuse of children as well as adults, slowing scientific and societal progress, and violation of the separation of church and state come immediately to mind.
>I don't know where you got your stats on the second part
Christianity defends faith as a virtue. As a result, it cannot properly condemn Islam, and in fact works to enable Islamic extremism (ex. the Christian response to death threats made on cartoonists being that cartoonists shouldn't have made the cartoons).
> it's usually the atheist privilege checkers that defend Islam.
Where did you get your stats for this?

Theism dictates morality through threat of punishment. It is not the individual that says "I will not do this because it is wrong." It is the more along the lines of the individual saying " I will not do this because I will be punished for it."

>Direct abuse of children as well as adults, slowing scientific and societal progress, and violation of the separation of church and state come immediately to mind.

not correlated to Christian homes and not even a statistical significance

>Christianity defends faith as a virtue. As a result, it cannot properly condemn Islam

yes it can. faith in their faith, not any others. We're talking real-world pragmatic effects, not logical coherence.


>Where did you get your stats for this?

i admit it's anecdotal data i've observed in mainly media. Maybe there's a poll that shows atheist support for Islam vs Christian support for Islam, but a quik google gave me this article. Atehists seem to be confined in their opposition more so to Christanity.

washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/09/07/evangelicals-fear-muslims-atheists-fear-christians-how-americans-mistrust-each-other/

based as fuck

I think you're putting the cart before the horse. He's not saying religion gives the ethics, it's more like the ethics birth the religions. In that sense, atheism IS different, because it's not like anything else. It's not born out of meaningful archetypal stories that teach important social lessons.
That's not to say that you can't buy into the mythology and meanings (and ethical extensions), yet still not believe in a deity.

Most theists aren't going to agree with you, and any state can dictate the same morality through threats of punishment.

Indeed. But to add a finer point to that, it's the threat of punishment even when the perpertrator knows he won't get caught (due to omnipresence of God).
It's that concept of 'even if you can get away with it with me/society etc, God still sees and knows....so don't do it'

So? the end result is people less likely to commit immoral acts

That is true, but it does not change the fact. Outside of the corruption of states, which is often very prevalent, most dictates of right and wrong are from a social agreement that individuals will agree to not do certain things as they do not want those things to be done to them i.e. I will agree not to murder others and prevent the murder of others so as I am not murdered and others will prevent me being murdered.

Wow, an interesting conversation on Sup Forums

>not correlated to Christian homes
It's more than correlated, it's caused.
>not even a statistical significance
You could say the same for Islam, as Muslim apologists do all the time.
>yes it can.
No, it cannot, because it cannot attack the root enabler, which is faith itself. If you cannot condemn faith in general, you cannot properly condemn Islam.
>We're talking real-world pragmatic effects
Yes, we are. Christianity can't do the job.
>Atehists seem to be confined in their opposition more so to Christanity.
For good reason, Christianity is the majority religion where most atheists live. Christians have actual political power whereas Muslims don't. It's a more immediate local danger than Islam, which may be a larger global danger.

He dares to speak truth in an empire of lies. So yes he is worth a listen

He's both bucko, but the biggest meme of all is his cult following despite him telling people to think for themselves

so you're saying meme's aren't worth listening to?

I’m an atheist too but he’s right the dumb masses need a strong belief system to preserve their culture

America needs Christianity to preserve Anglo Saxon culture and values just as Saudi Arabia needs Islam, horrible as their culture is. The issue is immigration and mixing of cultures

Is a culture that requires Christianity or Islam in order to be preserved worth preserving?

See this is where 'baby vs the bathwater' bit comes back in.....

He gives a fuck, listen to him if you want too

Both.

>link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1005390515242

2/10 for making me reply

/thread

He's worth listening too.
He might save the world.

That faggot who made Pepe the frog is suing people for using it now.

I am not sure if I would agree with this. What cultural aspects does any religion preserve other than the religion itself?

demonstratively false.

Except in this case the baby might not be something we want to keep around if it can only survive in the bathwater.

This is not the case. A man child WOULD benefit from him, but maps of meaning is not common sense life advice, it is a journey through the history of being and truth.

I...just told you. In America Christianity preserves European and Anglo-Saxon culture and values.

It's babby's first philosophy study come on

/thread

Yes you did, but what, other than European Christianity, does the religion preserve? You gave no examples of those cultures that cannot or are not preserved outside of the religion.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxons#Culture

some of the stuff he says is good, but most of the time he just blathers and babbles about bullshit. i read his latest book and it's the same thing, sprinkles of good advice mixed into a tub of crap

>He seems to voice left wing opinions as well as right wing ones.
>implying most right wing arguments arent based on willful ignorance and tribalism

>implying tribalism isn't an inseparable component of human nature

That shows that religion is a part of the culture, but does not support your position that the culture is dependent on the religion. Would the food and music of that region cease to exist or be appreciated absent the religion?

Using a 5 syllable word doesn't make your assumption more valid

Man made Co2 is a drop of water on a hot plate. Non-significant.

If you are an aspie you might enjoy him

food and music is low on the "things that matter in a culture" scale. But yes.
Just take a look at how culturally western South Korea is compared to other countries in the region, or even Japan. more than a quarter of SK is now Christian.

Who************

he is a good walmart version pseudo intellectual
for people who like to drink cheap wine and pat themselves on the back

...

Culturally speaking music is a hugely influential tool and representation of the time in many ways. That's kind of what all art really is many ways.

Which proves the inverse to your argument. Those regions have adopted cultural aspects though they are not predominantly Christian. Those that practice other religions in those regions have adopted western cultural aspects and are preserving them. I am not arguing that Christianity has not contributed to culture, I am arguing against your assertion that Christianity is necessary for the continued survival of the cultural aspect other than the specific Christian representation in the culture. Basically, Christianity does not preserve the culture, it preserves Christianity within the culture.

It does preserve it, though. We don't live in a vacuum. If Christianity dies, it will just be replaced by another, and the culture will be slowly changed and replaced too. It'd be nice if we could just tip our fedoras and ride into fantasy future land and do away with all religion while keeping traditional morality, laws, and individual freedom, but it's not feasible.

That was my point it is a contributing factor but is not a necessity. The religion only preserves what is apart of the religion. As you said if another religion comes in it will push out the existing religion but it will adopt and maintain cultural aspects that it can use in support of itself. A prime example of this is how Christianity adopted St. Nicholas and the Christmas traditions which were originally part of the existing pagan religion. I agree that there are many aspects of culture that are created and inspired by religion, but they are not dependent on the religion for their continued existence. A religion is, however, dependent on it's cultural representation and expression for its existence.

>implying overcoming tribalism isn't a goal worth achieving

What a joke.

You would cease to be human then.

>buttoning the top button with no tie

who the fuck cares about this knob tbr

>lets like just put our minds into robots and go live and space and stuff dude"

JBP is a liberal SJW cuck