Jordan Peterson definition of God

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

They are monitored by the group.

Also, by their own self.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Self monitoring? But you just said that a monotheistic God is the chief monitor of reputations. Why bring gods into it if the Individual and the Group are doing the watching.

 

[DavisModerator]

Simon the two authors you quoted are psychologists (and one is also a linguist). They are not philosophers nor do they speak with authority in philosophy (as you alude to) nor in ethics. It’s one thing to say “I read two books about this topic by two psychologists” it is another to say that these concepts are well established in moral philosophy. That is utterly false. I studied all the main branches of moral philosophy and several very particular ones and I did go to a Catholic University so I had to study religious morality from Hebrew commentary, to Thomas Aquinas to modern theology. I have never heard those terms before except used in very different ways both outside of ethics and philosophy. I also really don’t understand what you mean by most of your definitions. You’re leaving out a lot of context and the definitions, like Peterson’s, are somewhat vague.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

It’s within the branch of moral philosophy called evolutionary ethics.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Evolutionary Ethics is a branch of modern biology, not moral philosophy. Its finding can be discussed in moral philosophy but it is researched as a scientific subject. It is an interesting area to read up on. Here are the basics.

[DavisModerator]

Simon, could you please quote an actual philosopher who has used any of those terms in a philosophical work. Name of philosopher and name of philosophical work where they clearly and unambiguously use those terms. You seem to be confusing the study of ethics in other fields with moral philosophy, which is done strictly within the confines of philosophy by PHILOSOPHERS. Biologists, psychologists and philosophers deal with ethics and morality in a VERY different way. I’ve never heard of those terms in the field of philosophy and I’d be quite interested to read it, if you can find a quote (remember, by a philosopher, someone with a graduate degree in philosophy who preferably is a professors if not who at least publishes a philosophy book via a university press or in a philosophical journal published via a university.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Here is the basics.

While morality in the normative sense is not an empirical phenomenon to be explained, there are still important questions to ask about how evolutionary theory may bear on it.

I would disagree with this.  We can find what we like or dislike morally by examining ourselves, each other, and the human race in general.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Here is the basics.

I’m normally pretty sniffy about conventional moral philosophy, but from what I can see, this seems to me pretty much on the nose.

Evolutionary ethics cuts down 100 pages of this kind of dense theorising to about 3 pages of straightforward instruction.  The real questions are, what should I do, and why?  Or rather, what do we do, what should we do, and why, to both questions?

[DavisModerator]

Simon I’ve had some time to dig around on Jordan Peterson more deeply and find specific examples. I hope you’ll reevaluate your love for the guy.

His views on LGTBQ+ and especially on transgender issues are appaling and he has said some very cruel things, directly to transgender people to make his point.

He is at times radically anti-feminist. It’s one thing to find a few arguments wrong with the general concept but trashing the very endeavor of women seeking more equality is just gross and besides his opposition to birth control for example, here is a direct quote by him:

Is it possible that young women are so outraged because they are craving infant contact in a society that makes that very difficult?

His attitudes towards sex and consent are disturbing. He seems to think that because it’s ridiculous to explicitly ask for sex at every single step of intimacy and penetration and ejaculation…that consent is a insurmountable grey area. I admit there are sometimes isolated grey areas that are difficult to resolve but in most cases ensuring consent when there is a good idea and most importantly any form of resistance or distress or negative feedback is clearly non-consent regardless if you are just kissing or doing the nasty. He uses a kind of slippery slope argument to turn consent into a vaguery when quite often there is nothing vague about it. And women in the work place:

we live in the delusion of a 13 year old adolescent girl, so as long as we maintain that level of sophistication, we’re not gonna have a real conversation about what rules should govern men and women in the workplace, so you can’t even open the damn discussion without being jumped on by, uh, you know, an array of, like, rabid harpies.

He isn’t a lovable hugable progressive voice of modest reason. Another direct quote:

The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory.

And you like this guy? Even the idea that there could be a strong independent woman in a film like Frozen was apparantly propaganda. The loaner male hero is unremarkable. The loner heroine is disgusting:

Frozen served a political purpose: to demonstrate that a woman did not need a man to be successful. Anything written to serve a political purpose (rather than to explore and create) is propaganda, not art.

You have a man-crush on a caveman.

His opinions on the following topics are considered highly conservative if not extreme:

• Sexual education
• Gay marriage
• Climate change
• War on drugs

He is also a free speech hypocrite. He gets angry that he is driven off campus for coming to speak (because of his extremist and anti-progressive views which, of course, he should be angry about) and yet sues for anti-defamation when people do something as simple as paraphrase what his actual views are. He says some pretty vicious and mean things about women, LGTB, atheists and progressives and yet gets utterly hysterical online when someone says something that hurts his feelings.

I can only imagine that you very very selectively watch videos by him and read a very narrow set of his text…because your denial of his sexism, misogyny, homophobia and conservativism is baffling.

 

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

The only thing I have any strong feelings about is this:

The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory.

He also seems to deny that the Patriarchy exists.  I would disagree with him about those things, and probably a few others.  That’s it.  Apart from that, he stands up to any and every orthodoxy.  I think he lives in a bit of distorted bubble (the US university culture wars) that colours his thinking.

I still appreciate someone who goes their own way and gets people thinking.  He’s not out to provoke for its own sake, like the Alt-Right.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory.

I would not be paying much attention or assigning much value to any of the utterances of someone who could make such a statement.

[PopeBeanieModerator]

If I were formulating a world view for publication, I wouldn’t mind snagging ideas from a source of ideas even if other ideas of that source were repulsive. It’s even possible to glean good ideas from Jesus, and whether or not they’re ideas that actually came from a real Jesus or from a writer of fiction about Jesus. Just not sure I’d be happy about citing any specific source of the wisdom.

You have a man-crush on a caveman.

But those are fightin’ words! Well, in spite of (or emphasized by) the fact that the paragraphing is awesome! 🙂

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

I wouldn’t mind snagging ideas from a source of ideas even if other ideas of that source were repulsive.

I don’t mind that I disagree with Jordan Peterson on a number of issues.  His takeaway message, that he is famous for, apart from battling the regressive Left, is to get young men to stop acting like losers.  He’s right to use lobsters as a model for what it is like to be at the bottom of a hierarchy – it’s kind of fatal if someone feels like they are low-status.

So, it’s OK to disagree with someone that one likes in general.  At least Dr Peterson makes people think about important issues.

[_Robert_Participant]

He is a youtube rockstar for a reason. He is not apologizing for owning a penis. If we really want some transfer of power you have to expect young non gender-fluid, straight white males are going to become disillusioned. They are being branded as video game playing, toxic rapists who exist in their tiny backyards drinking beer while ‘manning’ the BBQ. JP is right there playing Jesus. The media, commercials and movies are loaded with superhero females and black/brown knights, super smart kids and pets. The bad guys are always white guys and the one good white guy is a wimpy momma’s boy. That’s all fine and good  if that is the way we are gonna do this, the pendulum must swing I guess if we are to truly head  towards some utopia-like society. I don’t recall European men being portrayed like this as they are ahead of the US in making progress…well there was that Mr Bean guy, LOL.

Last week  I saw a lady with a flat tire standing there at the light, seemingly helpless. My impulse was to help her, but then I came to my senses. I actually like the idea that I don’t have the extra burden to “man-up” all the time. I think we need a remake “The Titanic” so that all the strong brave women and children can help the men into lifeboats. There will be a price to pay as “chivalry” fades away.

 

[PopeBeanieModerator]

_Robert_ wrote:

There will be a price to pay as “chivalry” fades away.

Hopefully we’ll gain perspective that’s not based purely on cultural traditions, other than a tradition to care more about people in need. (Speaking of which the Jesus character can be portrayed as having that sentiment, too, albeit unfortunately mixed in there is also some conservation of tradition just for the sake of tradition.)

So when driving, I carry a tire plug kit and hope one day I’ll find someone stranded who could use a plug, and I’m more likely going to feel like helping a female, because our genetic-evolutionary past puts female muscle mass on a bell curve at lower mass on the horizontal scale than male muscle mass, and tire plugging usually requires a lot of arm muscle. And experience in plugging helps, too, of which I’ve had plenty. (I can plug a tire in fifteen minutes sometimes, including the time it takes to jack up the vehicle, find the leak with soapy water if necessary, and lower the vehicle.)

Not trying to sound macho here. I tend to hate “macho” when it’s acted out seriously, but like making fun of it. Just sayin’. I mean, they call me Beanie, right? 🙂

[Author]

Posts