Petersen has long embarrassed me as a fellow Canadian. (Tabitha Southey, on the other hand is a treasure.) Thanks for your excellent, and much needed, refutation of Petersen’s malicious, self-serving, dangerous blather.
Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! I can’t stand that smug creature. He pretends to be all in on personal responsibility but he went to Russia to get an unorthodox treatment for his benzodiazepine addiction. I guess he couldn’t personal responsibility his way out of his dependence. Dead naming Elliot Page who is a class act is infantile. His hatred of anyone who doesn’t conform to his rigid gender ideology is breathtaking. If anyone is guilty of the sin of pride, it is Peterson.
I am not familiar with Jordan Peterson, thank goodness, but have had quite enough of people proclaiming themselves to be Rational Humanists, but not exercising the time, effort, curiosity, intellectual flexibility, or compassion to actually walk in the shoes of people unlike themselves. Kareem, you are a ray of sunshine in my mornings.
OMG Kareem!! Do people actually hear what this pseudo psycho is saying? Or perhaps they believe he really has something to say. I listened for about 15 minutes and started to doze off. Seriously. One little thing floored me. He said he considers himself a competent scientist. Really? In what realm of science? So much total BS. So much rudeness. Exactly what Helen Lewis' point was. Patriarchy? Total denial. Talking over her so as to trivialize her opinions. I had never heard of him until the whole Elliott Page issue came up, looked him up & then forgot him. May he fade away into his trite infamy!!
Thank you for your wonderful writing. Perhaps your influence will be beneficial to those who feel they must have a plastic guru/cult leader to dominate their thinking and lives so they won't have to put forth the effort. And friends with Ben Shapiro? More evidence of complete irrelevance. Where do they all come from? I would much rather listen to Primus. 🤣
This made me realize how lucky I am to be a cranky old lady who doesn't follow ANYBODY on Twitter. Consequently, I had never heard of Douglas Peterson or most of the other twits who hang out there. [g] If I ever had the slightest twinge of FOMO (fear of missing out), this cured it.
America today is a subliterate society and our intellectual culture reflects this fact. Jordan Peterson is an effective provocateur who gives good youtube and twitter. However, this has nothing to do with race and your critique of Peterson also applies to Nikole Hannah Jones. Although the New York Times 1619 Project was destroyed by professional historians (none of them conservative) for its very amateurish historical errors and omissions, Jones was showered with accolades—Pulitzer, MacArthur Genius Grant etc—and pushed to the head of her class. “Hate speech” codes defined, enforced, and adjudicated by Big Tech are subjective and dubious. Who appointed Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and the plutocrats of Big Tech the 1st Amendment Czars? “Hate speech” is pure sophistry. I am 1st Amendment absolutist and also accepted the fact that with freedom comes risk. Over the past two decades, many academics and intellectuals have embraced a timid perceptions of intellectual freedom that has made comfort and safety are a priority than intellectual rigor. Most colleges and universities today are self-esteem builders where “student success” is guaranteed. Worse than this mandated, meritless success, is what passes for intellectual discourse. Jordon Peterson, Nikole Hannah Jones, Thomas Friedman, and many other prominent “intellectuals” are the bitter intellectual harvest of our subliterate age.
I love this article Kareem. Why people follow this guy is beyond me. And the comment that he makes about women, I agree is very deplorable and small-minded.
"Peterson's homespun homilies mixed with dense academic jargon lures his unsuspecting followers into junk thinking. Like Trump and all other grifters exploiting their followers for the money, they portray themselves as outsiders (millionaire outsiders) and martyrs (though they sacrifice nothing), all while telling their audience exactly what they want to hear."
That's dangerous for them--and for the country.
I couldn't agree with this statement more Kareem. It's very sad how people can be easily manipulated into thinking that Petersons way of thinking is okay. This goes to show that some of us have really loss our way. Smh
What a delight to read this, even as I fume about this buffoon's access to the world podium. I never even heard of this dude until I recently stumbled upon a conversation between him and Stephen Fry, which I thought brilliantly revealed Fry's intelligence, humour, and (despite his edge) kind world view while showing up this guy I never heard of as a complete idiot, unable to even cite a single example of anything he tried to proclaim. The comments compared their intellectual capacity favorably which made my jaw drop. My thought: "Who is this twerp, and why is he in conversation with Fry?: This guy's an idiot. And a harmful one. Once again, I agree with you totally here. Although you must admit, he has a rather nice haircut.
Most scholars/intellectuals, especially public intellectuals, can be/are picked apart by their opponents on all sides/spectrums of thinking. Jordan isnt unique in receiving criticsm for being a lightweight. There are plenty of lightweights on the left such as Ibram Kendi, Nicole Hannah Jones, ny times writers, maybe even AOC. That doesn't necessarily matter. And calling Peterson the intellectual of idiots or people drawn to his content stupid bros serves nothing constructive and further brings our culture lower and lower as a battle of insults as opposed to validity of ideas/arguments. Jordan gives people an intro to ideas that challenge the ambitions and supposed virtues of contemporary society: secularism/atheism, gender equality, globalization, materialism, etc. Whether you think this is shallow or not isn't the point. There is an audience for a different way of contextualizing our confusing society and current moment. Also, to say Jordan hates women is shallow, and to cite a contentious convo, Jordan described Helen as immediately hostile upon metting her before the interview, as proof isn't very substantial and is yet another example of the pettiness of ideological disputes that are the status quo of our culture.
You hit the nail on the head and summed up more eloquently than I ever could my thoughts and feelings about grifters such and Shapiro and Peterson. Thanks as always Kareem. I love your columns! Their brand of pseudo intellectualism is all about making certain groups viewed as outsiders and they're arguments are all very reliant on hateful rhetoric, thus they aren't portraying winning arguments or intelligence, they are just pandering. Unfortunately, too many people in this world don't care about logic and only care about the people who are viewed as "strong" or morally right so they support these folks. They know the crowd that pays them and just keep piling it on via Social Media which is not always a great forum for intelligent discourse to take place in the first place. At the end of the day, they don't even want discourse.
So I paid $5 just to be able to post a slightly alternative perspective on this matter as a "subscription to comment" platform is entirely set-up to promote a potential echo-chamber effect of political ideological dialogue. I have also screenshotted this post in case it gets removed or censored as that is simply the age we live in now. I actually like early JBP as I have watched his UToronto lectures and followed his career as a controversial public intellectual. I am not so sure that others posting here have legitimately watched some of his earlier stuff, read his book or engaged with him in anything other than the "hot" topic controversies of today.
The author of this piece is entirely correct on some things and biased himself on others. I completely and utterly agree with his assessment that JBP has become radicalized with his moral crusade and fully support the criticism in this regard. However, it is ironic that you call his "followers" part of a cult (whatever that means, I mean I haven't sold my soul to him personally or signed up on a cult-mailing list). I agree and find interest in some of the things he says and disagree with others. This is the calling card of a free-thinker. The ability to dispassionately expose themselves to other perspectives and try to refrain their emotional impulse to "attack". I think the author has failed a bit here. The author also insulates himself from the possibility of debate by claiming that JBP has already failed in debate and that his viewers can't comprehend when he loses debates. This is a dishonest, manipulative approach towards the production of a social story that fits the authors own biases. Let others view the debates and I think JBP has never shied away from a debate so instead of just putting out another "woke" hit-piece on him, I would support you debating him for the sake of having you challenged as well rather than attacking from behind a subscription pay-wall.
The "woke" left themselves (not the classic Liberal left - there is a distinction here) have been shown by academics such as Lindsay, Boghossian, Pluckrose and others to follow an ideological mindset akin to a religious puritanism when it comes to moralizing issues of race, gender, etc.. The "critical" disciplines of social advocacy studies do this through the use of the Hegelian dialectic but it is a complicated matter that people are probably wanting to dismiss or call heresy on. But I think if we are being intellectually honest we need to acknowledge that the tendency towards ideology exists firmly on both sides of the socio-political aisle.
Thanks Kareem- I was once in an Uber with a young white guy driver blasting Petersen at full volume and until then hadnt realized anyone actually paid attention to his inanities. Honestly it makes me despondent about the lack of funding for good public education .. all those young minds not getting enough training to be be able to do their own critical thinking in these weird cacophonous twitter times. It only feeds the backlash that brought down roe v wade etc.
You are fully spot-on here. Under the guise of intellectual establishment (even the sweater vest!) lies a disruptive reactionist (or worse). Thank you for sharing your opinion, with which I fully agree.
Wow Kareem you out did yourself on this one
Absolutely brilliant !
It should be posted with the tagline:
“Kareem slam dunks Jordan Peterson’s brain”
Petersen has long embarrassed me as a fellow Canadian. (Tabitha Southey, on the other hand is a treasure.) Thanks for your excellent, and much needed, refutation of Petersen’s malicious, self-serving, dangerous blather.
Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! I can’t stand that smug creature. He pretends to be all in on personal responsibility but he went to Russia to get an unorthodox treatment for his benzodiazepine addiction. I guess he couldn’t personal responsibility his way out of his dependence. Dead naming Elliot Page who is a class act is infantile. His hatred of anyone who doesn’t conform to his rigid gender ideology is breathtaking. If anyone is guilty of the sin of pride, it is Peterson.
"They think because they can’t understand what he’s saying, he must be really smart." Dead on.
I am not familiar with Jordan Peterson, thank goodness, but have had quite enough of people proclaiming themselves to be Rational Humanists, but not exercising the time, effort, curiosity, intellectual flexibility, or compassion to actually walk in the shoes of people unlike themselves. Kareem, you are a ray of sunshine in my mornings.
OMG Kareem!! Do people actually hear what this pseudo psycho is saying? Or perhaps they believe he really has something to say. I listened for about 15 minutes and started to doze off. Seriously. One little thing floored me. He said he considers himself a competent scientist. Really? In what realm of science? So much total BS. So much rudeness. Exactly what Helen Lewis' point was. Patriarchy? Total denial. Talking over her so as to trivialize her opinions. I had never heard of him until the whole Elliott Page issue came up, looked him up & then forgot him. May he fade away into his trite infamy!!
Thank you for your wonderful writing. Perhaps your influence will be beneficial to those who feel they must have a plastic guru/cult leader to dominate their thinking and lives so they won't have to put forth the effort. And friends with Ben Shapiro? More evidence of complete irrelevance. Where do they all come from? I would much rather listen to Primus. 🤣
This made me realize how lucky I am to be a cranky old lady who doesn't follow ANYBODY on Twitter. Consequently, I had never heard of Douglas Peterson or most of the other twits who hang out there. [g] If I ever had the slightest twinge of FOMO (fear of missing out), this cured it.
America today is a subliterate society and our intellectual culture reflects this fact. Jordan Peterson is an effective provocateur who gives good youtube and twitter. However, this has nothing to do with race and your critique of Peterson also applies to Nikole Hannah Jones. Although the New York Times 1619 Project was destroyed by professional historians (none of them conservative) for its very amateurish historical errors and omissions, Jones was showered with accolades—Pulitzer, MacArthur Genius Grant etc—and pushed to the head of her class. “Hate speech” codes defined, enforced, and adjudicated by Big Tech are subjective and dubious. Who appointed Jack Dorsey, Mark Zuckerberg, and the plutocrats of Big Tech the 1st Amendment Czars? “Hate speech” is pure sophistry. I am 1st Amendment absolutist and also accepted the fact that with freedom comes risk. Over the past two decades, many academics and intellectuals have embraced a timid perceptions of intellectual freedom that has made comfort and safety are a priority than intellectual rigor. Most colleges and universities today are self-esteem builders where “student success” is guaranteed. Worse than this mandated, meritless success, is what passes for intellectual discourse. Jordon Peterson, Nikole Hannah Jones, Thomas Friedman, and many other prominent “intellectuals” are the bitter intellectual harvest of our subliterate age.
I love this article Kareem. Why people follow this guy is beyond me. And the comment that he makes about women, I agree is very deplorable and small-minded.
"Peterson's homespun homilies mixed with dense academic jargon lures his unsuspecting followers into junk thinking. Like Trump and all other grifters exploiting their followers for the money, they portray themselves as outsiders (millionaire outsiders) and martyrs (though they sacrifice nothing), all while telling their audience exactly what they want to hear."
That's dangerous for them--and for the country.
I couldn't agree with this statement more Kareem. It's very sad how people can be easily manipulated into thinking that Petersons way of thinking is okay. This goes to show that some of us have really loss our way. Smh
Terrific insight, Kareem. You keep bringing it and I really appreciate it!
What a delight to read this, even as I fume about this buffoon's access to the world podium. I never even heard of this dude until I recently stumbled upon a conversation between him and Stephen Fry, which I thought brilliantly revealed Fry's intelligence, humour, and (despite his edge) kind world view while showing up this guy I never heard of as a complete idiot, unable to even cite a single example of anything he tried to proclaim. The comments compared their intellectual capacity favorably which made my jaw drop. My thought: "Who is this twerp, and why is he in conversation with Fry?: This guy's an idiot. And a harmful one. Once again, I agree with you totally here. Although you must admit, he has a rather nice haircut.
Most scholars/intellectuals, especially public intellectuals, can be/are picked apart by their opponents on all sides/spectrums of thinking. Jordan isnt unique in receiving criticsm for being a lightweight. There are plenty of lightweights on the left such as Ibram Kendi, Nicole Hannah Jones, ny times writers, maybe even AOC. That doesn't necessarily matter. And calling Peterson the intellectual of idiots or people drawn to his content stupid bros serves nothing constructive and further brings our culture lower and lower as a battle of insults as opposed to validity of ideas/arguments. Jordan gives people an intro to ideas that challenge the ambitions and supposed virtues of contemporary society: secularism/atheism, gender equality, globalization, materialism, etc. Whether you think this is shallow or not isn't the point. There is an audience for a different way of contextualizing our confusing society and current moment. Also, to say Jordan hates women is shallow, and to cite a contentious convo, Jordan described Helen as immediately hostile upon metting her before the interview, as proof isn't very substantial and is yet another example of the pettiness of ideological disputes that are the status quo of our culture.
You hit the nail on the head and summed up more eloquently than I ever could my thoughts and feelings about grifters such and Shapiro and Peterson. Thanks as always Kareem. I love your columns! Their brand of pseudo intellectualism is all about making certain groups viewed as outsiders and they're arguments are all very reliant on hateful rhetoric, thus they aren't portraying winning arguments or intelligence, they are just pandering. Unfortunately, too many people in this world don't care about logic and only care about the people who are viewed as "strong" or morally right so they support these folks. They know the crowd that pays them and just keep piling it on via Social Media which is not always a great forum for intelligent discourse to take place in the first place. At the end of the day, they don't even want discourse.
So I paid $5 just to be able to post a slightly alternative perspective on this matter as a "subscription to comment" platform is entirely set-up to promote a potential echo-chamber effect of political ideological dialogue. I have also screenshotted this post in case it gets removed or censored as that is simply the age we live in now. I actually like early JBP as I have watched his UToronto lectures and followed his career as a controversial public intellectual. I am not so sure that others posting here have legitimately watched some of his earlier stuff, read his book or engaged with him in anything other than the "hot" topic controversies of today.
The author of this piece is entirely correct on some things and biased himself on others. I completely and utterly agree with his assessment that JBP has become radicalized with his moral crusade and fully support the criticism in this regard. However, it is ironic that you call his "followers" part of a cult (whatever that means, I mean I haven't sold my soul to him personally or signed up on a cult-mailing list). I agree and find interest in some of the things he says and disagree with others. This is the calling card of a free-thinker. The ability to dispassionately expose themselves to other perspectives and try to refrain their emotional impulse to "attack". I think the author has failed a bit here. The author also insulates himself from the possibility of debate by claiming that JBP has already failed in debate and that his viewers can't comprehend when he loses debates. This is a dishonest, manipulative approach towards the production of a social story that fits the authors own biases. Let others view the debates and I think JBP has never shied away from a debate so instead of just putting out another "woke" hit-piece on him, I would support you debating him for the sake of having you challenged as well rather than attacking from behind a subscription pay-wall.
The "woke" left themselves (not the classic Liberal left - there is a distinction here) have been shown by academics such as Lindsay, Boghossian, Pluckrose and others to follow an ideological mindset akin to a religious puritanism when it comes to moralizing issues of race, gender, etc.. The "critical" disciplines of social advocacy studies do this through the use of the Hegelian dialectic but it is a complicated matter that people are probably wanting to dismiss or call heresy on. But I think if we are being intellectually honest we need to acknowledge that the tendency towards ideology exists firmly on both sides of the socio-political aisle.
Thanks Kareem- I was once in an Uber with a young white guy driver blasting Petersen at full volume and until then hadnt realized anyone actually paid attention to his inanities. Honestly it makes me despondent about the lack of funding for good public education .. all those young minds not getting enough training to be be able to do their own critical thinking in these weird cacophonous twitter times. It only feeds the backlash that brought down roe v wade etc.
You are fully spot-on here. Under the guise of intellectual establishment (even the sweater vest!) lies a disruptive reactionist (or worse). Thank you for sharing your opinion, with which I fully agree.