Jordan Peterson Is Canada's Most Infamous Intellectual - General

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130306]Where are you getting that rusty called peterson a nazi? Seriously, this keeps happening where someone outlines why they don't like peterson and people respond "oh, so you're calling him a 'nazi' now?" You even put 'nazi' in quotation marks like it's something you're ironically accusing him of saying despite Rusty never using the word.[/QUOTE] The thread has summarily called him a nazi mouthpiece and cover for alt right(nazi-front) propaganda.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130314]I am using 'nazi' as a catch all, which is why I put it in sub-quotes within that, so as to imply that rusty doesnt think he is a [i]actual[/i] Nazi. Basically, I am using it as a pejorative for your pejoratives.[/QUOTE] But Rusty didn't use any pejoratives. You honestly seem like you've just decided that anyone who doesn't like Peterson is only doing so because they are a stereotypical 'buthurt lib-rul sjw' (that is a pejorative) and you aren't willing to accept that they MIGHT have some actual reason behind what they believe. [editline]14th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53130316]The thread has summarily called him a nazi mouthpiece and cover for alt right(nazi-front) propaganda.[/QUOTE] Here it is again. ONE person in this thread said he unintentionally spreads nazi propaganda (which is true) because he is ignorant of a lot of issues, not that he is a nazi. Actual neo-nazi groups use the stuff that he says in order to gain some modicrum of legitimacy because he's a doctor in clinical psychology. The reality is that he has a degree in one field and (falsely) believes he has expertise in many different fields because of it. As a result, he makes various misinformed statements that lead to the things he's said being used by neo-nazi groups to back up their ideology. Why are you stripping away all context from this situation? I explained this before: [QUOTE=Zyler;53121177]I think you may be too emotionally invested in this argument. You keep talking about how you are feeling personally attacked by people labeling you and that we personally hate Jordan Peterson and think he is the most vile human being to ever exist or something similiar. Nobody has said that they hate you or Jordan Peterson. We don't hate personally hate Jordan Peterson, we think he's a 'hack' because he uses emotionally charged and manipulative language to trick people to believing misleading or outright false claims. He doesn't follow any scientific process and spins his own tricked out pseudo-psychology as fact rather than his own views/opinion on the (false) basis that his doctorate provides him expert knowledge on topics beyond his actual field of clinical psychology. He's a spin doctor who writes pseudo-scientific self-help books and spreads fraudulent conspiracy theories about western academia being filled with evil communists trying to take over the country. His work is spread by actual neo-nazi organizations because he legitmizes their beliefs and (intentionally or unintentionally) spreads their own propaganda in turn. That's why people have said he spreads nazi propaganda (because that's what he does), I don't think anyone has called him a neo-nazi. He's not a neo-nazi, he's someone neo-nazis use to form a facade of legitimacy so that they can suck more people into believing aspects of their ideology. Just because someone has a doctorate doesn't mean that the things that they say automatically have increased worth as a result. For example, Ben Carson is one of the world's leading neurosurgeons and was one of the republican candidates for the 2016 presidential primaries, but he also believes that the pyramids were build by jesus' father to serve as grain silos. A person can be knowledgable in one area and not very unknowlegable in another area. [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect]In some cases, people who have very high opinions of themselves because of their knowledge in one field may cause them to falsely believe that their knowledge carries over into other fields and then refuse the accepted scientific consensus as a result.[/url] That's how you get people like Ben Carson and Jordon Peterson.[/QUOTE] This post summarizes the situation quite nicely as well, imo: [QUOTE=Coyoteze;53121793]Y'know, I'm very torn on Jordan Peterson. On one hand he's said and preached a lot of batshit insane things about social issues and political correctness. When it comes, for instance, to the whole gender pronoun thing I feel like he's making a bigger deal out of it than it really is. It's really not that hard to be accommodating for your fellow human beings. And on the other hand I've watched a bunch of his lectures, all the way through, on areas in clinical psychology and he's a very interesting man to listen to. As someone who is deeply interested in this field of medicine it's very informative and even fun to watch him talk about all of it in a very intuitive way In my opinion, from what I've seen of him anyway, he really seems to be reaching into a field he has no awareness or actual expertise in. In strict clinical psychology he's knowledgeable and clever, but in social issues it feels like he's using that doctorate as an excuse to validate his absolutely bonkers ideas. "I'm a clinical psychologist and therefor", etc.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130319]But Rusty didn't use any pejoratives. You honestly seem like you've just decided that anyone who doesn't like Peterson is only doing so because they are a stereotypical 'buthurt lib-rul sjw' (that is a pejorative) and you aren't willing to accept that they MIGHT have some actual reason behind what they believe.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Rusty100;53130284] he is a hate filled quack, man. that's super, super clear.[/QUOTE] Maybe he didn't say nazi, but the general atmosphere is one of contempt. If by using the jokey word 'nazi' instead of 'hate-filled quack' I threw my position away, then I guess that's my bad.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130330]Maybe he didn't say nazi, but the general atmosphere is one of contempt. If by using the jokey word 'nazi' instead of 'hate-filled quack' I threw my position away, then I guess that's my bad.[/QUOTE] Why are you ignoring every single post which explains why people don't like Peterson and cherrypicking any post that calls him a mean name? Why does it even matter that people don't like Peterson? Why does that upset you so much?

I didn't think that was "stripping" away all context. I think zen and I are mainly disputing that point because neither of us are nazis, appreciate any element of those beliefs, but both appreciate some of what Peterson has said. You have your reasons for what you believe and think those valid, I don't think they're invalid. But I strongly believe you believe any justification either of us might share would be invalid, and by extension we're something you can call mouthpieces for propaganda you dislike. That's not a good thing, and I doubt you'd feel it was if you were on the receiving end.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130314]I am using 'nazi' as a catch all, which is why I put it in sub-quotes within that, so as to imply that rusty doesnt think he is a [I]actual[/I] Nazi. Basically, I am using it as a pejorative for your pejoratives. [/QUOTE] i don't think he's a nazi for the record. i think however there is a big reason he's praised by the alt right, and it's because he employs the same tactics they do (and shares a lot of their beliefs). the amount of people i've seen say 'i don't agree with him on EVERYTHING but i agree with him on some things' is a big indication of this for someone who says as many horrible things as he does. what he does is for every 9 horrible right wing things he says, 1 will be something agreeable or reasonable, possibly even left wing. (i hate using this dividing terminology but it's the easiest way to put it). the purpose of this is to draw people in with the agreeable stuff, and then over time, hit them with the bad shit to pull them on side. he famously refuses interviews with anyone capable. but he accepted h3h3's invitation to come on their show. think about this. he is carefully choosing his audience here, that much is clear. his target demographic is teens and young adults and he is trying to swing them over into his hate filled, misogynistic, pseudo intellectual camp. he puts on this professional, respectable intellectual exterior and sprinkles a few reasonable things into his roster, while he keeps hitting his usual (pretty disgusting imo) points. look at how massively he dodged the question of who his target audience is in the channel 4 interview. he needs to sell his books, fill the seats of his lectures and seminars and get all the web traffic and press. none of his actions are an accident. i don't respect him or anything about him or what he does, nor do i have do. i find him utterly despicable and often intentionally deceptive.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53130339]I didn't think that was "stripping" away all context. I think zen and I are mainly disputing that point because neither of us are nazis, appreciate any element of those beliefs, but both appreciate some of what Peterson has said. You have your reasons for what you believe and think those valid, I don't think they're invalid. But I strongly believe you believe any justification either of us might share would be invalid, and by extension we're something you can call mouthpieces for propaganda you dislike. That's not a good thing, and I doubt you'd feel it was if you were on the receiving end.[/QUOTE] You seem to think that because someone dislikes some of the things Peterson says that they are automatically saying everything he does and says is invalidated. In other words, you're positing that either everything Peterson does is good or none of it is. This is not true. I've explained this repeatedly in my posts as well as PMs. What's happened is that Peterson has a PHD in Clinical Psychology, which is all well and good, but he frequently crosses into areas outside of his field of expertise and makes batshit-crazy/false/misleading claims about stuff that he has no actual expertise in. That doesn't necessarily invalidate everything he's ever done or mean that he is an actual dyed-in-the-wool neo-nazi because he's expressed views/ideas/claims that have been used by neo-nazi groups to legitimize themselves. It just means that when he steps out of his field of expertise he tends to make erroneous and incorrect statements because he believes his knowledge from his field carries over into all others. As someone else pointed out, it's [url=https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Engineer%20Syndrome]engineer syndrome[/url]. You can like some aspects of what a public figure does and dislike other things. The world isn't black-and-white. Bringing it back to the whole nazi thing, you can unironically like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paintings_by_Adolf_Hitler]hitler's paintings[/url] and that doesn't mean you are a nazi.

The most interesting thing about Jordan is that despite the fact that most of us here are egalitarian/left leaning, what we think about him seems to be scattered everywhere.

[QUOTE=J!NX;53130350]The most interesting thing about Jordan is that despite the fact that most of us here are liberals/left leaning, what we think about him seems to be scattered everywhere.[/QUOTE] it's unfortunately indicative of his persuasion techniques being very effective

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130334]Why are you ignoring every single post which explains why people don't like Peterson and cherrypicking any post that calls him a mean name? Why does it even matter that people don't like Peterson? Why does that upset you so much?[/QUOTE] I am trying to reply to them, but it seems like you are the one spinning them into this view of him where nothing he says is true and does nothing but harm. If you are so keen on talking about emotions, then I could ask you the same question. The difference is I'm upset that what I see as reasonable, if not always right, is being spun into a caricature of a snake-oil salesman with a secret evil wish. [quote]I think you may be too emotionally invested in this argument. You keep talking about how you are feeling personally attacked by people labeling you and that we personally hate Jordan Peterson and think he is the most vile human being to ever exist or something similiar. Nobody has said that they hate you or Jordan Peterson. We don't hate personally hate Jordan Peterson, we think he's a 'hack' because he uses emotionally charged and manipulative language to trick people to believing [B]misleading or outright false claims[/B]. [/quote] Name 3 that are wrong beyond dispute and stated unequivocally, and give me the context in which they were spoken. [quote] He doesn't follow any scientific process and spins his own tricked out pseudo-psychology as fact rather than his own views/opinion on the (false) basis that his doctorate provides him expert knowledge on topics beyond his actual field of clinical psychology. He's a spin doctor who writes pseudo-scientific self-help books and spreads fraudulent conspiracy theories about western academia being filled with evil communists trying to take over the country.[/quote] You know the nice thing about statistical analysis? You don't need to know what is causing the trend. The man is a personality psychologist and has spent most of his career looking at the differences between people on a psychological level, men and women, and he specialized at looking at the parts of people they want to ignore (ie the parts of people that could become nazis in WW2). The man is so absolutely disgusted by totalitarianism that the fact that you treat him like a demagogue with a plan rather than someone who you disagree with is baffling. He wants all the same policies you want save a few borderline cases, and even then most of those are backed by reasonable, in my estimation, opinions. Also, if you haven't felt the death of narrative in our society, then I envy you. As it stands from my, and many other's, points of view, we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and we ought not to think of nihilism as anything but pathetic. But hey, that's a philosophical position! [quote] His work is spread by actual neo-nazi organizations because he legitmizes their beliefs and (intentionally or unintentionally) spreads their own propaganda in turn. That's why people have said he spreads nazi propaganda (because that's what he does), I don't think anyone has called him a neo-nazi. He's not a neo-nazi, he's someone neo-nazis use to form a facade of legitimacy so that they can suck more people into believing aspects of their ideology. [/quote] What neo-nazi beliefs? And, what happens if the Neo-nazis suddenly start campaigning for the environment, does that mean you shouldn't? Truth trumps ideology, and peterson shits on nazi as well as communists at every chance he gets. I don't know what you are talking about. Who knows, maybe I'm just getting brainwashed cause my tiny little brain can't handle thinking about something that might be wrong. (Is that what you think is happening with his supporters?) [quote] Just because someone has a doctorate doesn't mean that the things that they say automatically have increased worth as a result. For example, Ben Carson is one of the world's leading neurosurgeons and was one of the republican candidates for the 2016 presidential primaries, but he also believes that the pyramids were build by jesus' father to serve as grain silos. [/quote] You're right, but in cases where their field does have topics to comment on, and insofar as we are a increasingly a polyglot society, the unfortunate truth is we are going to have to have listen to smart people on a range of things and then think about them, and evaluate them for ourselves. (The horror!) [quote] A person can be knowledgable in one area and not very unknowlegable in another area. In some cases, people who have very high opinions of themselves because of their knowledge in one field may cause them to falsely believe that their knowledge carries over into other fields and then refuse the accepted scientific consensus as a result. That's how you get people like Ben Carson and Jordon Peterson.[/quote] Good thing jordan peterson never said "I'm smart so listen to me", and if he had I wouldn't have engaged his ideas any differently. The guy is just being flooded by people who agree with him, and I suppose that is bound to come with a flood that also disagrees. Then again, maybe they're all nazis, who knows? [editline]13th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Rusty100;53130357]it's unfortunately indicative of his persuasion techniques being very effective[/QUOTE] That nasty sophist!

[QUOTE=Rusty100;53130357]it's unfortunately indicative of his persuasion techniques being very effective[/QUOTE] So because I don't think he's a nazi mouth piece I'm a weak willed easily persuaded person Okay I guess if I just go with you I'm not? Right?

[QUOTE=Rusty100;53130342]i don't think he's a nazi for the record. i think however there is a big reason he's praised by the alt right, and it's because he employs the same tactics they do (and shares a lot of their beliefs).[/quote] Shitposting and not being okay with PC culture being unbridled? [quote] the amount of people i've seen say 'i don't agree with him on EVERYTHING but i agree with him on some things' is a big indication of this for someone who says as many horrible things as he does. [/quote] The worst thing I've seen him do is post someone's fb profile who was also publicly shitting on him. I don't think he has done it since, but frankly, okay, that's a bad thing about him. [quote] what he does is for every 9 horrible right wing things he says, 1 will be something agreeable or reasonable, possibly even left wing. (i hate using this dividing terminology but it's the easiest way to put it). the purpose of this is to draw people in with the agreeable stuff, and then over time, hit them with the bad shit to pull them on side. [/quote] Well damn, he must say a LOT of bad shit then. [quote] he famously refuses interviews with anyone capable.[/quote] Citation please. Who tried to debate him? Who was this capable beast of a person? Did he vet the channel 4 reporter too? [quote] but he accepted h3h3's invitation to come on their show. think about this. he is carefully choosing his audience here, that much is clear. his target demographic is teens and young adults and he is trying to swing them over into his hate filled, misogynistic, pseudo intellectual camp. he puts on this professional, respectable intellectual exterior and sprinkles a few reasonable things into his roster, while he keeps hitting his usual (pretty disgusting imo) points. look at how massively he dodged the question of who his target audience is in the channel 4 interview. he needs to sell his books, fill the seats of his lectures and seminars and get all the web traffic and press. none of his actions are an accident. i don't respect him or anything about him or what he does, nor do i have do. i find him utterly despicable and often intentionally deceptive.[/QUOTE] Dodged the question? What do you expect him to do? I think he answered it pretty fine. You literally are painting him as Machiavelli right now, and that's so wrong, in my opinion, that it boggles my mind. Again, maybe I've just been peterson'd and can't use my temporal lobe any more, how would I know?

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130362]I am trying to reply to them, but it seems like you are the one spinning them into this view of him where nothing he says is true and does nothing but harm. If you are so keen on talking about emotions, then I could ask you the same question. The difference is I'm upset that what I see as reasonable, if not always right, is being spun into a caricature of a snake-oil salesman with a secret evil wish. [/QUOTE] How the heck are you reading this from my posts? I'm saying the exact opposite of that, have you actually read anything I've posted or what? [QUOTE=Zyler;53130348]You seem to think that because someone dislikes some of the things Peterson says that they are automatically saying everything he does and says is invalidated. In other words, [b]you're positing that either everything Peterson does is good or none of it is. This is not true.[/b] I've explained this repeatedly in my posts as well as PMs. What's happened is that Peterson has a PHD in Clinical Psychology, which is all well and good, but he frequently crosses into areas outside of his field of expertise and makes batshit-crazy/false/misleading claims about stuff that he has no actual expertise in. That doesn't necessarily invalidate everything he's ever done or mean that he is an actual dyed-in-the-wool neo-nazi because he's expressed views/ideas/claims that have been used by neo-nazi groups to legitimize themselves. It just means that when he steps out of his field of expertise he tends to make erroneous and incorrect statements because he believes his knowledge from his field carries over into all others. As someone else pointed out, it's [url=https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Engineer%20Syndrome]engineer syndrome[/url]. [b]You can like some aspects of what a public figure does and dislike other things. The world isn't black-and-white.[/b] Bringing it back to the whole nazi thing, [b]you can unironically like [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paintings_by_Adolf_Hitler]hitler's paintings[/url] and that doesn't mean you are a nazi.[/b][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Zyler;53121177]I think you may be too emotionally invested in this argument. You keep talking about how you are feeling personally attacked by people labeling you and that we personally hate Jordan Peterson and think he is the most vile human being to ever exist or something similiar. [b]Nobody has said that they hate you or Jordan Peterson. We don't hate personally hate Jordan Peterson[/b], we think he's a 'hack' because he uses emotionally charged and manipulative language to trick people to believing misleading or outright false claims. He doesn't follow any scientific process and spins his own tricked out pseudo-psychology as fact rather than his own views/opinion on the (false) basis that his doctorate provides him expert knowledge on topics beyond his actual field of clinical psychology. He's a spin doctor who writes pseudo-scientific self-help books and spreads fraudulent conspiracy theories about western academia being filled with evil communists trying to take over the country. His work is spread by actual neo-nazi organizations because he legitmizes their beliefs and (intentionally or unintentionally) spreads their own propaganda in turn. That's why people have said he spreads nazi propaganda (because that's what he does), [b]I don't think anyone has called him a neo-nazi. He's not a neo-nazi, he's someone neo-nazis use to form a facade of legitimacy so that they can suck more people into believing aspects of their ideology.[/b] Just because someone has a doctorate doesn't mean that the things that they say automatically have increased worth as a result. For example, Ben Carson is one of the world's leading neurosurgeons and was one of the republican candidates for the 2016 presidential primaries, but he also believes that the pyramids were build by jesus' father to serve as grain silos. A person can be knowledgable in one area and not very unknowlegable in another area. [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect]In some cases, people who have very high opinions of themselves because of their knowledge in one field may cause them to falsely believe that their knowledge carries over into other fields and then refuse the accepted scientific consensus as a result.[/url] That's how you get people like Ben Carson and Jordon Peterson.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130371]How the heck are you reading this from my posts? I'm saying the exact opposite of that, have you actually read anything I've posted or what?[/QUOTE] You've been [I]arguing[/I] the exact opposite, and judging from Rusty's tirade above, you're wrong. [editline]sigh[/editline] Oh, my bad, you're not calling him a nazi-chauvinist-....whatever, you're calling him that AND that he has the equivalent of a painting that's nice. Do you not see how that's not any better? "I'm not saying X is only bad! I mean, look at hitler!"

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130373]You've been [I]arguing[/I] the exact opposite, and judging from Rusty's tirade above, you're wrong.[/QUOTE] Give me some examples, where am I saying "Nothing Peterson is true and he does nothing but harm"? [editline]14th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130373]You've been [I]arguing[/I] the exact opposite, and judging from Rusty's tirade above, you're wrong. [editline]sigh[/editline] Oh, my bad, you're not calling him a nazi-chauvinist-....whatever, you're calling him that AND that he has the equivalent of a painting that's nice. Do you not see how that's not any better? "I'm not saying X is only bad! I mean, look at hitler!"[/QUOTE] What the actual heck are you talking about? I didn't bring up hitler because I was comparing him to hitler. [b]I'm saying I can like hitler's paintings and that doesn't make me a nazi.[/b] I'm saying Peterson IS NOT a nazi. He's not a nazi-chauvinist. Let me say it one more time, [b]Peterson IS NOT a Nazi[/b], I have never stated he is a Nazi. Stop putting words into my mouth. I keep saying the world is not black-and-white, and you keep saying "you're telling me the world is black-and-white".

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130376]Give me some examples, where am I saying "Nothing Peterson is true and he does nothing but harm"?[/QUOTE] Well, maybe it's my bad. I said you were [i]arguing[/i] that the view (my opponents view) presented is "some-good some bad, whatever, everyone makes mistakes man", but I am saying you are failing in arguing that that is your position because on several times you went way past that. You didn't say he has no redeem qualities, you're right. You said he must have some, cause EVEN HITLER painted some things that can be enjoyed. In that context, do you not see how it seems like you're just painting him as a nazi with a paintbrush?

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130383]Well, maybe it's my bad. I said you were [i]arguing[/i] that the view (my opponents view) presented is "some-good some bad, whatever, everyone makes mistakes man", but I am saying you are failing in arguing that that is your position because on several times you went way past that. You didn't say he has no redeem qualities, you're right. You said he must have some, cause EVEN HITLER painted a few things. In that context, do you not see how it seems like you're just painting him as a nazi with a paintbrush?[/QUOTE] No, I don't see that. Because my argument has always been that Peterson is not a nazi. Noone in this thread has called Peterson a nazi.

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130386]No, I don't see that. Because my argument has always been that Peterson is not a nazi. Noone in this thread has called Peterson a nazi.[/QUOTE] ugh, again. 'nazi' / (Insert string of -ist words here)

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130387]ugh, again. 'nazi'[/QUOTE] I said he's NOT a nazi. It's like you just see the word nazi and your mind blocks out the entire rest of the post. [QUOTE]/ (Insert string of -ist words here)[/QUOTE] What '-ist' words?

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130387]ugh, again. 'nazi' / (Insert string of -ist words here)[/QUOTE] man what are you even arguing here? Any negative things we call him means we're low key calling him a nazi?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53130368]So because I don't think he's a nazi mouth piece I'm a weak willed easily persuaded person Okay I guess if I just go with you I'm not? Right?[/QUOTE] I mean I don't totally agree with Rusty but I see where he's coming from more than the people bringing the word Nazi as a "catch all" into this argument It's very clear that yes, Peterson thinks about who he can argue against. He's clearly smarter than most people, and knows how peoples emotions work. He doesn't argue with people smart enough to defend themselves on the same level as he can, and instead goes for easy, safe routes. As far as I can tell he would sooner argue with a complete idiot or someone who he can control a conversation with.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;53130390]man what are you even arguing here? Any negative things we call him means we're low key calling him a nazi?[/QUOTE] No. I guess it's my turn to type the word nazi in bold. [b] I AM NOT SAYING YOU ARE CALLING HIM A LITERAL NAZI[/b] I am using the word nazi, in this thread, as a way to mock the long list of (-ist) word accusations that seemingly collect together like a snowball in such discussions.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53130368]So because I don't think he's a nazi mouth piece I'm a weak willed easily persuaded person Okay I guess if I just go with you I'm not? Right?[/QUOTE] You keep interpreting every person's post as if they're trying to insult you.

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130389] What '-ist' words?[/QUOTE] Chauvinist, mysoginist, sexist, , oh my bad, I forgot the -phobe family. Do you really want me to go through this thread and pick out everyone of these you guys have said so far? I know the first three were used, and the -phobe family is implicit in your opinions on how what he thinks about trans people.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130396]No. I guess it's my turn to type the word nazi in bold. [b] I AM NOT SAYING YOU ARE CALLING HIM A LITERAL NAZI[/b] I am using the word nazi, in this thread, as a way to mock the long list of (-ist) word accusations that seemingly collect together like a snowball in such discussions.[/QUOTE] When did I make a long list of -ist word accusations?

[QUOTE=J!NX;53130392]I mean I don't totally agree with Rusty but I see where he's coming from more than the people bringing the word Nazi as a "catch all" into this argument It's very clear that yes, Peterson thinks about who he can argue against. He's clearly smarter than most people, and knows how peoples emotions work. He doesn't argue with people smart enough to defend themselves on the same level as he can, and instead goes for easy, safe routes. As far as I can tell he would sooner argue with a complete idiot or someone who he can control a conversation with.[/QUOTE] Again, did I miss this page of the discussion? Who is this champion of debate that he shot down? His side of the story is basically the exact opposite. Does he pick the TV anchors who interview him?

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130399]Chauvinist, mysoginist, sexist, , oh my bad, I forgot the -phobe family. Do you really want me to go through this thread and pick out everyone of these you guys have said so far? I know the first three were used, and the -phobe family is implicit in your opinions on how what he thinks about trans people.[/QUOTE] What are you actually arguing? What's your point? Before you were arguing that we were calling him a nazi, so that completely invalidates any argument people might have against Peterson. Now you're arguing that we were calling him an -ist word, so that completely invalidates any argument people might have against Peterson? [editline]14th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130401]Again, did I miss this page of the discussion? Who is this champion of debate that he shot down? His side of the story is basically the exact opposite. Does he pick the TV anchors who interview him?[/QUOTE] What are you talking about? There's words being typed on your keyboard but I cannot understand what is being typed. I'm not insulting you here, I actually cannot understand anything you are saying.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130396]No. I guess it's my turn to type the word nazi in bold. [B] I AM NOT SAYING YOU ARE CALLING HIM A LITERAL NAZI[/B] I am using the word nazi, in this thread, as a way to mock the long list of (-ist) word accusations that seemingly collect together like a snowball in such discussions.[/QUOTE] you're being ridiculous. you're the biggest proponent of the word right now, but you keep saying you're doing it as a joke? maybe just back up a bit. you can be racist and mysogenist without being a Nazi. I haven't even seen any racism from him, which mind you I could be forgetting considering how much you're pushing the Nazi comparison joke. I'm saying I think he's a bad person I find personally disgusting. But your weird Nazi "joke" is the only thing that might make me reconsider that he might be one considering how off hand and defensive it comes across.

[QUOTE=Zyler;53130403]What are you actually arguing? What's your point? Before you were arguing that we were calling him a nazi, so that completely invalidates any argument people might have against Peterson. Now you're arguing that we were calling him an -ist word, so that completely invalidates any argument people might have against Peterson? [editline]14th February 2018[/editline] What are you talking about?[/QUOTE] Sigh..... it really did go completely by you didn't it. Let me spell it out: I am, no, WAS, using the word 'nazi' to be a shorthand version of referring to the various severe accusations you have laid against him that lie in the realm of "snake-oil-hack-chauvinist-etc." Since I didn't want to write a 25 letter word every time I referred to them, I replaced them with the pejorative 'nazi'. I am, and always was, arguing that you are being FAR too harsh on him since you are putting him in the same basket as 'nazis/snake-oil-hack-chauvinist-etc.'s

Zenreon, this seems to be a really personal issue for you. Maybe you should take a step back and explain what your beliefs are regarding this topic and we'll try to explain what/if we have any issues with it. It seems like there's a lot of people talking over each other right now and perhaps we should attempt to alleviate this. [editline]14th February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Zenreon117;53130406]Sigh..... it really did go completely by you didn't it. Let me spell it out: I am, no, WAS, using the word 'nazi' to be a shorthand version of referring the the various severe accusations you have laid against him that lie in the realm of "snake-oil-hack-chauvinist-etc." Since I didn't want to write a 25 letter word every time I referred to them, I replaced them with the pejorative 'nazi'. I am, and always was, arguing that you are being FAR too harsh on him since you are putting him in the same basket as 'nazis/snake-oil-hack-chauvinist-etc.'s[/QUOTE] Can you quote the specific posts that you feel are being too harsh and why you feel that they are being so? Also, can you stop using words to mean other words and just use the actual word itself. Like, don't say "you're calling him a nazi" when you mean "You're calling him an -ist", it's just confusing for us. It'll be quicker to write a 25-letter word than to write several multi-paragraph posts just to clear up the confusion.