Jordan Peterson thread

Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,062
Location
Leeds
What vitriol?

He's questioning that has been claimed, and doing so fairly calmly.

Why does what she's saying need to be questioned, on what basis? Why does she need to give "verifiable details"?

Putting him under the umbrella of the term "drug addict" in the next sentence, as if affording him the courtesy of distinguishing between him and a smack head would be a stretch. Then again saying he doesn't have an auto-immune disease, why? Just assuming malice and lies for no apparent reason.

Travelling to a foreign country to seek treatment is "quackery", just like patients in the UK had to seek treatment abroad because of what our Nationalised Healthcare was unable to provide? Is every case of a patient flying abroad for private treatment "quackery", or is this luxury just afforded to Jordan Peterson?

Then after previously saying his auto-immune disease "doesn't ring true", it's now imaginery, as if he's a delusional idiot and not a Doctor in Clinical Psychiatry.

Then to conclude we'll poke fun at his daughters attire, because she's wearing a vest top in a video. Pathetic.

Oh and vitriol has nothing to do with calmness, it's criticism with malice is obvious there. Like it is in most of the posts in this thread.

The first minute of this video is conveniently vague, and suspiciously absent of any verifiable details. I understand that Peterson is a drug addict; that's clear enough. But the nebulous claims about 'an extremely severe autoimmune reaction to food' do not ring true. Show me evidence backed by a professional diagnosis, or sod off.

If Peterson is genuinely sick, he will receive the best possible care at a Canadian hospital. But as @rxodium says, it sounds like he's chosen quackery, which further suggests that his alleged auto-immune problem is at best exaggerated and at worst imaginary.

On an unrelated note, why is his daughter presenting a video in her underwear? Must be for the clicks and views, I guess.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Aug 2007
Posts
28,597
Location
Auckland
Why does what she's saying need to be questioned, on what basis? Why does she need to give "verifiable details"?.

You have a think about this and tell us when you're ready.

I can provide some clues if that is useful to understanding why it's a good thing to check if what people say is generally correct or perhaps not so correct.

fake e: that you put 'verifiable details' in quotes is delicious :D
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,062
Location
Leeds
You have a think about this and tell us when you're ready.

I can provide some clues if that is useful to understanding why it's a good thing to check if what people say is generally correct or perhaps not so correct.

fake e: that you put 'verifiable details' in quotes is delicious :D

"haha you so dumb but I don't even have to explain why". Great post man. Another quality addition to your 26,222 of utter gargage.
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Aug 2007
Posts
28,597
Location
Auckland
"haha you so dumb but I don't even have to explain why". Great post man. Another quality addition to your 26,222 of utter gargage.
All of my posts are utter garbage. I agree, we're not in conflict here.

Do you think it's important for the people you admire to have truth? Are 'verifiable details' a given or a too arduous? What are the measures you are using?

e: and for clarity, I did not say 'you so dumb'.
 
Soldato
Joined
10 May 2012
Posts
10,062
Location
Leeds
All of my posts are utter garbage. I agree, we're not in conflict here.

Do you think it's important for the people you admire to have truth? Are 'verifiable details' a given or a too arduous? What are the measures you are using?

e: and for clarity, I did not say 'you so dumb'.

I think verifiable details are completely unnecessary, why does she need to provide proof, for what reason? Why not take them at their word, have we evidence of previous lies? What do they stand to gain by lying?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
24 Sep 2005
Posts
35,492
I said it before but I do like that rules for life book of his.

“Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for looking after.”

In other words, be healthy and kind to yourself.

I mean, it’s so obvious, but true.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,524
Location
Surrey
I have watched a lot of his stuff and the genral message seems to be to understand how people behave, what drives them, plan your life and take responsibility for your actions. What's not to like? I hope he makes a quick recovery.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jun 2006
Posts
12,371
Location
Not here
I said it before but I do like that rules for life book of his.

“Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for looking after.”

In other words, be healthy and kind to yourself.

I mean, it’s so obvious, but true.

I'm going through his audio book right now. I'm enjoying it :)
 
Caporegime
Joined
29 Dec 2007
Posts
31,991
Location
Adelaide, South Australia
Why is he on benzos? Is it due to his apparent depression?

Most likely, although I have to question why he's taking a dangerous amphetamine instead of a safe and reliable SSRI.

They don't owe you anything.

That's true, and I don't owe them my credulity.

Why does what she's saying need to be questioned, on what basis? Why does she need to give "verifiable details"?

Whenever someone rejects science based medicine in favour of quackery, their claims and motivations should be questioned. Why? Because it's important to know why they're rejecting science in favour of magical thinking.

Putting him under the umbrella of the term "drug addict" in the next sentence, as if affording him the courtesy of distinguishing between him and a smack head would be a stretch.

A drug addict is a drug addict; an alcoholic is an alcoholic. Why sugar coat it, as if there's some kind of more respectable way to be a drug addict? My own grandfather was an upper middle class film producer with a law degree, but he was also an alcoholic, and I have no hesitation in calling him one.

Then again saying he doesn't have an auto-immune disease, why? Just assuming malice and lies for no apparent reason.

I didn't say he doesn't have an auto-immune disease. I simply questioned if he does.

Travelling to a foreign country to seek treatment is "quackery"

That's not what I said.

Then after previously saying his auto-immune disease "doesn't ring true", it's now imaginery, as if he's a delusional idiot and not a Doctor in Clinical Psychiatry.

While it's true that Peterson is a Dr in Clinical Psychology (albeit a Jungian, which is pretty laughable in the 21st century) this does not mean he cannot also be delusional at best, or dishonest at worst. It's also possible he's just a hypochondriac who is not coping with the effects of stress and anxiety.

Whatever the case, it seems that somewhere along the line, Peterson has lost his capacity to practice what he preaches.

Then to conclude we'll poke fun at his daughters attire, because she's wearing a vest top in a video. Pathetic.

It's not a vest top, it's lingerie.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,700
Given everything he’s been through with his daughter, his wife’s terminal cancer and the none-stop public presence that he’s had over the last few years (good and bad), I find it hard to blame him for turning to anti-depressants to help him through.

He must have known the potential side effects which makes it all the more tragic. Some of the stories on Reddit from people who have tried to taper themselves off Benzos are horrendous — I can’t imagine what JP and his family are going through.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,091
Location
London, UK
Very spiritually sick man. Uses intellectual arrogance to try and make himself look important, similar to Richard Dawkins.

What? I'm not a particular fan of some of the stuff he says and his religious views but where do you get that he's very sick spiritually from? And Richard Dawkins is famous because of his intellect, what he done with it and his ability to communicate that. I'm guessing you don't like what he has to say either. Lots of people enjoy what he has to say both in his books and in his lectures much like JP. I'd much prefer to see Dawkins or Sam Harris though.

On his health issues I do wonder why the hell he was going near benzos? They are very much a short term drug for extreme anxiety and highly addictive. Coming off those is worse than the original problem. Horrific anxiety/panic attacks and seizures are just two of a list of terrible withdrawal symptoms.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Oct 2007
Posts
12,091
Location
London, UK
Travelling to a foreign country to seek treatment is "quackery", just like patients in the UK had to seek treatment abroad because of what our Nationalised Healthcare was unable to provide? Is every case of a patient flying abroad for private treatment "quackery", or is this luxury just afforded to Jordan Peterson?
.

From what I could find the ultra rapid detoxification has been banned in the US because of both how dangerous it is and because studies have shown it is no better than a standard detox in regards to people completing the drug addiction treatment. Pretty sure its banned in the UK as well for the same reasons. So it is "quackery".

Just curious but why are you biting so hard on this? Is it because of who posted the comment or because who it was about?
 
Back
Top Bottom