Jordan Peterson only eats beef and drinks water. It somehow cured his depresson.
150 replies, posted
What fucking video are you watching dude.
Can you state a timpstamp where he said that he's an expert on nutrition and that everyone should switch to a carnivore diet?
I still think it's funny that one of his rules for life is to be precise in your language.
we can read or watch anecdotes about fad diets anywhere, why is it not fair game to comment on the guy in this particular video?
Just like the general consensus that the earth is round
I forget what the timestamp is in the podcast but he goes over why he uses cliches and obvious axioms to preface his chapters. He says something to the amount of "no shit, they're cliche for a reason". I mean, I guess lol. I guess they resonate with most people by default so that they hook you in for the chapter.
Because a self help guru talks about this miraculous diet that cured his depression, it leaves an imprint of "wow he must really know what hes doing" to his fans. Rub two sticks in your head to see the bigger picture, or would you rather just listen only to what he says and not the issue at large.
If a celebrity started a diet telling their fans that eating ice cream nonstop for days cured their son's autism, would you not see how dangerous that can be to followers of said person. Its the same shit that happens with Dr.Oz and his asinine miracle cures that he has literally no training/knowledge in.
so, just to clarify, he can't express any opinion about things he personally experiences because his fans are dipshits?
Idk i'm not seeing the logic in criticizing that part of this all
Except he explicitly states that he is by no means an expert on nutrition and that it was something he found to work for himself through trial and error, nor does he ever once say that a carnivore diet cures depression for everyone. Your "bigger picture" is just you grasping for straws. The only message he has put out in regards to diet is that perhaps a change in diet can be beneficial to your mental health. This is already a pretty common notion that people have come to accept and has, so I don't see what you're getting at.
Yeah I think its confirmed that JBP is funded by big beef and water corporations now to advertise his diet.
I don't blame you for not wanting to watch the video tbh but he doesn't seem to imply this would work for anyone else, only that it does for himself
This can't be healthy though.
Who decides if it works for him? He himself or a doctor?
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that if you finally found a diet that doesn't make you feel like shit then that's probably a good thing. He's probably had checkups as anyone should when they change their diet.
This dude is definitely the most perplexing individual I've seen in the past couple years; at least in terms of how many times I've flip flopped on him.
I want to hate him but all I see whenever I see him is just a mild guy who likes to sit and think about shit past the point where you usually stop thinking about it; which is why most people probably see him "rambling" a lot. By reduction it makes sense the mild guy who likes to sit in safety and think would follow the more conservative rhetoric; which is why I also disagree with him on a lot of that too. Regardless of his political affiliations I just appreciate the process his brain goes through when he thinks of an idea.
He came out against the gay marriage vote in Australia because it was apparently part of the Post-Modern Neo-Marxist plot to destroy western culture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9MnM7N_k3I
He believes in the alt-right constructed conspiracy theory of Cultural Marxism, which is the idea that there is a concetrated effort by undercover communists to destroy western society through pushing for things such as gay marriage and women's rights.
Who decides who the Cultural Marxists are?
He just takes this guy's word for it that the Australian gay rights "Yes" campaign is by Cultural Marxists ("I'd be against it too if it was backed by Cultural Marxists").
There's an implication that gay marriage in Australia is probably by Cultural Marxists and an explicit license to all his fans to decide that the Yes campaign is 'Cultural Marxist' (remember this definition is fucking nebulous at best) and then his fans oppose it on the fucking basis that karl marx's ugly ghost is controlling the gays too now.
There's also his views on history, which are based entirely on his belief system which he conveys in his books (including 'Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief') and lectures (shown below).
There's a big jump between saying stories reflect generalized thoughts and feelings of the society that made them, and arguing that the physical universe is subordinate to Jungian Archetypes and the nazis didn't commit the holocaust because they hated jews, but because they were driven against their will to reenact roles from biblical stories.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8AcmzqFdPM
His whole religious/spiritual belief system revolves around the post modernist notion of grand narratives interpreted through Jungian Meta-Archetypes. His beliefs are actually most similiar to those of the most radical postmodernists, he isn't just saying that people consciously construct narratives within society to guide their own moral principles (a la the society-wide belief in colonial america that white people were superior to black people, used to justify slavery), but that the biblical stories he was raised on literaly bend reality in such a way as to force people to conduct certain behaviours.
Supposedly, the nazis didn't actually wish to establish an ethnostate of aryan germans because they believed that the Jews were inferior, they instead were literally subconsciously re-enacting the biblical story of the Mark of Cain.
Other choice quotes include things like:
The idea that women were oppressed throughout history is an appalling theory.
I read Betty Friedan’s book because I was very curious about it, and it’s so whiny, it’s just enough to drive a modern person mad to listen to these suburban housewives from the late ’50s ensconced in their comfortable secure lives complaining about the fact that they’re bored because they don’t have enough opportunity. It’s like, Jesus, get a hobby.
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.
Frozen was propaganda, pure and simple. Beauty and the Beast (the animated version) was not.
Can men and women work together in the workplace? We just don't know
Feminists support the rights of Muslims because of their unconscious wish for brutal male domination.
I don’t think women were discriminated against, I think that’s an appalling argument.
None of these have been unfairly removed from context. Most are simply standalone things he has said and if anything they contextualise each other.
All in all, there's nothing particularly ground-breaking or scientific about what Peterson says or believes, he just wraps up evangelical conservative talking points in big words and psuedo-philosophical bullshit to sound 'intellectual'. He doesn't use big words to convey complicated ideas, he uses them to obfuscate the fact that his ideas are really no different from the sort of banal conservative beliefs such as 'traditional marriage', 'feminists/women are insane bitchy harlots' and that the rap music that the kids are listening to or whatever is hip or cool at the moment is somehow unraveling western society by undermining 'traditional values'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-Lk7gcLP8Q
omfg
Ugh, I read Jordan's book "12 Rules for Life", due to the recommendation of a classmate, but I'm getting quite sick of his nihilistic and dark world views. He always has this depressive undertone. Furthermore his verbosity is annoying to no end. Once you cut away the bullshit he presents, you realize that his ideas are obviously simple (I guess he adds all the garbage to what he says because it makes him appear more interesting; and probably to appeal to a broader audience. A simple idea doesn't sell as well, does it?)
He strikes me as a pseudo-philosopher to be honest; I feel most people would be better off learning from actual philosophy over Jordan's bizarre adventures.
I posted a link to it in my previous post, but in case you guys don't see it, I recommend The School Of Life for this. They're good at distilling a lot of literature on self-help/philosophy into simple, bite-sized chunks. They have multiple series of videos on the history of various ideas, as well as specific videos on topics like relationships, family life and work ethic.
I long for the day when I don't have to hear this guy's name or see his face ever again.
tl;dr
The motherfucker is batshit insane. And is tricking millions by mixing his pseudoscientific bullshit beliefs into what is already known as common facts.
Hold up, he's that guy who wrote The Better Angels of Our Nature didn't he? I've been meaning to read that book, I've heard it's incredible. Hmm, could've spent my time better in reading that as opposed to JP's awful writing.
Be honest, what did you want instead? Not a rhetorical question, what do you really want a thread like this to be?
You don't want derailing, which here means branching out into the wider topic of Jordan Peterson's politics. So, 5 pages of talk about beef and water is what you were expecting? That's a weird thing to ask for, given that Peterson talking about his dietary choices wouldn't get any attention was it not for the prominence he has in political discourse. Do you get what I mean? You're sorta asking us to ignore the very reason for this to be a Peterson video in the first place, and not any random nutritionist's. Are you gonna post Muhammad Ali golfing then get mad when people mention boxing?
Next, do you not like unfounded criticism, or do you dislike any criticism? Be honest with yourself, do you not like the reception Peterson gets on FP because it isn't fair, or because it isn't positive? What you said in the thread you made 3 days ago is that you "don't care", and only "wish you could understand where the criticism stands". But here you say that you just don't want people to "go on a spiel on how they hate him" and suddenly, whether or not the criticism is backed is irrelevant? It sounds to me like you just won't accept anything that isn't sympathetic, and that's the kind of thread you hoped for with this more inoffensive video
Jordan Peterson is like as long as you say something, that can be seen as self-help advice, you are literally untouchable. Don't lie. Clean your room. Brush your teeth. Stand up for yourself. Call your parents regularly. I'm like on 5 layers of socio-political invincibility now? Alright [inhales].
GET A HOBBY OR GO BACK IN THE KITCHEN, WOMAN! ALL THOSE HUMAN RIGHTS PROTESTS ARE SO UNSIGHTLY AND UNCIVILIZED, IT'S POLITICALLY CORRECT CULTURE OUT OF CONTROL! SOCIAL REFORM IS LITERALLY SOCIALISM AND THE END OF WESTERN CULTURE AND CIVILIZED SOCIETY AS A WHOLE! POST-MODERN NEO-MARXISM!
Hold the door open for women, children and the elderly. FROZEN IS FEMINIST PROPAGANDA! Always be clear and concise with your language. IT'S BECAUSE OF WHITE MEN THAT YOU HAVE RIGHTS AT ALL, YOU INGRATES! Plan your day ahead of time. YOU DON'T GET TO HAVE AN OPINION IF YOU HAVEN'T ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING IN LIFE! Show up to appointments on time. LIFE IS UNFAIR, STOP COMPLAINING! Keep your workplace in good order.
I watched the video in the OP expecting some really ridiculous statements more like the frozen quote but a lot of the posters in this thread really are just being obnoxious, it seems like they're ranting about the thread title without having actually seen what was in the video.
Why is it so hard to realize that doing this weakens your position? There may be 100 valid reasons to shit on peterson but if you start saying "peterson is reccomend people switch to beefwater diets" and then someone watches the video and it's "i am not an expert on this, i do not reccomend this for anyone, we have not double checked our other health metrics with a professional" that someone already has a strong reason to disbelieve every other point you make. You weaken yourself, in general it's best to always criticize things while giving yourself plenty of margin of error. Go for the safe things, like that Frozen clip, because that clip demonstrates a level of real paranoia.
Barely anyone on FP likes Jordan Peterson. The only reason he has any semblance of renown is because he stirred up shit at a senate hearing about gender pronouns and became like an alt-right icon. Featuring him in a thread in any context that isn't sourced by a news article is already a declaration of war in the eyes of many users. Sure it sucks but that's what happens when you present yourself in public with spiteful, Red Scare-fueled rhetoric. You cannot dissociate Jordan Peterson from his rhetoric, you cannot in a public forum, where many people are well aware for the things he stands for, sit down and have a civil discussion about the merits of eating food in the context of the man who is known solely for abrasive politicking.
Then why did you click on a thread about him?
I mean, I long for the day when I don't have to hear or see Donald Trump again but that doesn't mean I should avoid reading anything to do with him for the next couple years.
Fair point. But Trump is a world leader and the things he says and does have ramifications for the whole world. Keeping up with him could be considered important.
This is just a guy talking about his diet and how it helped him and his daughter. He's said loads of crazy shit but this doesn't really seem worth getting so riled up over.
Sometimes it's better to just keep scrolling.
if someone a poster doesnt like is acting like an idiot whats the point of acting like a bigger idiot in response? Those posters are just making themselves look bad and then the person they dislike looks good in comparison.
If a user sees a thread like this and sees a "declaration of war" and a free pass to shitpost i don't know what to tell you, maybe they should be on the forums at all?
Nihilism, like marxism and post modernism, is a term Peterson likes to throw around as a synonym for "anything I disagree with" but the ironic thing is he actually has a lot ideologically in common with nihilism.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.