Jordan Peterson - Without Religion There's No Art & Poetry (Secular Talk) - General

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aw1jtOiPzB0 I know there another Jordan Peterson related video recently. But, I give it as "bonus".

Why do people keep posting this when they get nothing but backlash? I'm pretty sure everyone wants a JP free video subforum. His bullshit shouldn't be spread around

You didn't even watch the video. The video is criticizing him. That's the opposite of spreading his 'bullshit' around.

I always found it hilarious how some religious people act like have a copyright some basic moral concept that was in their book. Like they licked "murder is bad" and now every who uses it has their cooties.

That’s how you get echo chambers

Instead of listening to some guy talk about the debate, why not go watch the actual debate? Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDbAR0CoRno

There's echochambers and then there's listening to dumbshit. I am for a nuanced discussion about the impact of religion and more on current day people even if they ascribe to atheistic standards. Again, JP is...just batting way outside of his cage and it gets near on tiring that in every thread that mentions him(and now three well done videos completely deconstructing his arguments). Honestly, JP videos should be straight up bannable because they're not even fun. We get the same number of posters, the same posts, same arguements, same tired nonsensical word salads.

I’m not defending him. Im not stating anything other than that what Rusty’s central point of his quoted post leads to echo chambers.

Although I understand what you mean and I totally respect it, this seems (to me) sort of like saying you want a group to be represented by the worst form of that group. Reminds me when people started to really push for Tudd to get banned on oldpunch and there were cries of echo chambers. Do conservatives really want Tudd of all people to represent their views and interests here? We have people like Scorpious who posts great threads that are much more conservative leaning than things I would read on my own, but I read every single one of them when he posts. Because they are interesting, they are valuable to me. Because our world through a lens I don't normally see through is a valuable thing to see, a fake reality through the lens of a recruiter to that reality like Tudd is not valuable to me, I couldn't give less of a shit. I just think people need to maybe consider that not all representations of an ideology or group are as valuable or well meaning as others. A lesson driven home by the massive harassment of Milo Yappadappalis or the marching Neo-Nazis where it all started as "just a discussion." Sometimes wanting certain people to not represent yours or others views is in no way indicative of trying to somehow ban that entire viewpoint from discussion. It can actually be beneficial.

Not really in my opinion. I think it’s a lot different having philosophical discussions compared to the facts of those topics. I don’t think Peterson is great but I do think that just considering some topics to be “done” is just naive.

I didn’t say he was? i don’t know how to make it clearer than I have. again, for you to ignore at your leisure. I’m not defending Peterson. I’m talking about that mindset as a whole. That’s it.

Peterson just seems like he's obsessed with begging the question and putting implicit reasonable doubt into every counterpoint thats made to his arguments. His most used words are probably "maybe" and "why". Not everything has to be an exercise in questioning people's deep subconscious Id.

This forum is one already in regards to politics alone.

That's generally what happens when a certain portion of a forum gets entrenched in a position that would cause their brain to melt from the sheer cognitive dissonance if they actually tried to rationally justify it. Thought judging by your posting history, this already happened a long time ago, so I don't know what your excuse is.

err, not wanting to hear from wacko sexists leads to an echo chamber? i've watched a few videos of his, he says some horrible stuff about women, i don't want to hear any more from him. that's not an echo chamber.

Peterson brings sweet fa to the table when it comes to free speech. It's the same contrived points every right leaning reactionary has about how (((the leftists))) want to change society by not letting you be a cunt to minorities.

Philosophical discussions aren't just free for alls of equally valid opposing opinions devoid of anything factual. Especially since Peterson is an aggregate author and not an original anything, for the things he says to be valid like your point says, they need to be factually and logically coherent, representing the things he's talking about properly. He should also have engaged with this source material. For example I can't just go 'Karl Marx was actually a Nazi btw I haven't read him' and expect it to be valid, thus if Peterson has been talked over maybe 100 times both here and by numerous academics and the same logical conclusions have been reached every time, maybe posting another video of him 'spreading this bullshit' is akin to posting a video about why climate change might NOT be a problem. A good chunk of these topics are actually just done.

Wow dude, I sure love videos of transphobic shitheads and literal nazis in the name of free speech and being "anti-echo chamber" shitting up my video feed. It's not an echo chamber to want my browsing experience to be free of toxic bullshit.

You know, I won't even bother defending myself. You can make whatever snap judgements, decisions, or calls about what I said that you like. You can imply anything you want. You're free to completely imagine whatever it is you want me to be, and hate that. Because frankly, you haven't read what I've said, nor understood the implications of it, and rather than ask questions or be polite, you'll be rude and authoritative about it. Why have discussions, you guys have all the answers.

It is likelier they want Peterson videos banned because every single JBP thread follows a single pattern: people disagreeing with the video > others saying its not that bad > people starting to call Peterson an ignorant shithead who enables fascists > people saying they got him all wrong > people explaining why some of the things he says are factually incorrect at worst or very misleading at best > responses are ignored for favor of other parts of the topic > the thread dies. And it seems to always be the same people in every such thread, too, always shouting past each other. What good is "discussion" when nobody has any willingness to engage opposing viewpoints and all argument is muddled in moral revulsion and bad faith?

Yeah lets not post anything related to someone who most of the people of this forum consider to be wrong. Not even a video talking about why he's wrong. That Contrapoint's video posted in this section? It should be removed as well. Or at the very least nothing should be discussed about his ideas other than calling him some name and dismissing everything he said. And then you're gonna stumble into people who agree with JP here and be shocked how can they do that even though the only "rebuttal" that these people have ever heard to JP was calls for bans/removal/quarantine/avoidance of him while calling him a name (alt-right daddy or something). You can't get rid of bad ideas by making them taboo.

I think we can add, 'And then the people tired of this shit try to stop it and fail.'

I wasn't being an ass...at least I think. Because I got what you mean. The idea that we shouldn't immediately discard something because the majority opinion of it is "it's bad and we don't do that here." Which I agree with 100% I think maybe my posts are a bit long, sorry. I was trying to inject a little nuance into that and say sometimes there seems to be an important difference between people not liking something en masse, and people not liking a representation of something, and between left and right wing sources it's not fairly arbitrated here. If someone kept posting videos of some talking head saying how we need anarchy because government is useless and all forms of organized structure lead to evil men taking over our will they would be laughed out of the section, but that wouldn't be a creation of a right wing echo chamber. If people want to post their views, they should post reasonable versions of them I guess is what I'm saying. Not somewhat extreme, baity, real life flamewar bullshit. If a left leaning poster was posting this kind of thing repeatedly they would either be banned by now or told to stop with no worry of "echo chambers", we only seem to do that with these awful sources for some reason. If people want their views to be respected, they should get some views worth respecting.

I'm pretty sure people have made some pretty decent rebuttals to JP beyond what you've said here though. As I understand it, though his work on psychology is decent but he tries to go outside his area of expertise and ends up saying things that make him look at the very least a bit silly sometimes. I don't know if there's any rebuttal to that argument, and I will admit that I haven't paid enough attention to this whole kerfluffle to actually be sure how quality that argument is, but it seems to be a bit more reasonable than just BAN THIS FASCIST FILTH, no? I don't think JP videos should be banned in this section though. Especially because the last two videos or so were rebuttals to some of the things he's said anyways. I think that discussion and argument is better than a ban in most cases anyways. Usually the better ideas win out so long as there are people willing to argue on both sides.

I never said there haven't been rebuttals of him though. And the fact that there were good rebuttals of him in the past him doesn't change anything regarding banning the topic now. Has every single person here saw those rebuttals? What if someone new joins but doesn't know who JP is? He's not going to search months back to look for threads where people rebut his arguments, he's going to read the topic at hand. There was a point I didn't know who JP is and I'm glad I've read the topics and watched videos here where people called him out on his arguments. If the only response to him that I've read would be "just ban the people who post this alt-right mouthpiece already" I'd be less likely to take their side, right?

You don't have to, just don't click on the thread, boom problem solved

You use of the word 'ever' made me believe otherwise, so I'm sorry if I misunderstood you. Regardless, I'm glad you acknowledge that people do make arguments against him besides just yelling for him to be banned, and that there's credence to those arguments. As for the rest of your post, I don't think we're really in disagreement, though I would make the point that this very thread is capped with a video rebuttal to JP. So presuming that someone is willing to consume all the content in the thread, they would see arguments beyond simply 'ban this sick filth', even if a few posters are being a bit irritable.

I watched this debate because of Matt Dillahunty, though. And, it actually shed some light on Jordan Peterson's character that I was unaware of. I wasn't even aware he considered himself a christian. So I disagree, especially when this is a case of him clearly being terrible in a discussion, this shouldn't be called 'spreading his bullshit' because it's the opposite. If you successfully encouraged everyone to stop posting any videos with Peterson in it, some people might remain unaware of 'his bullshit', and might as a result actually come to support him through viewing videos elsewhere that are favorable of him, just because you're tired of seeing him. Also, Dillahunty has a video of his personal comments after the debate; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LjYovTo4uc

I really fail to see what banning Jordan Peterson videos would accomplish. It's not like they're his videos, the past few Peterson threads posted in this section were of people criticising him. You're effectively asking for a ban on even discussion of Peterson. It'd be like banning Trump videos because Trump's an idiot. I mean sure, he might well be, but he doesn't have control over every video discussing him and as such videos discussing him can have value, largely through criticism of him. If you're bored of the discussion just don't post in the thread and it'll drop off the front page all the sooner for it. I really don't believe the concentration of Jordan Peterson threads have reached a point that you can't reasonably be expected to ignore it.

Peterson makes me uncomfortable sometimes. He is a psychology professor, not a political philosopher (doesn't excuse him of his bullshit understanding of bill C-16).