Which Book Are You Reading Now? Volume XII

[Lexicus]

Jordan Peterson's whole schtick is that it's urgent to keep Western Civilization's tradition of critical inquiry intact by shutting down all critical inquiry.

 

[Mouthwash]

But you evidently bought his book.

I don't think people who hold Incorrect Views are heretics. And he is very intelligent when he isn't talking about Western civilization (which is most of the time).

Besides, I thought it would be useful to actually read a book that everyone is going to judge but very few will read themselves.

 

[Lexicus]

I think he is a charlatan who preys on young insecure men looking for some affirmation

 

[Mouthwash]

He's helped far more people than Noam Chomsky ever has.

EDIT: Telling them to take responsibility for themselves, set their lives in order before judging others, treat women with respect, etc don't seem like very flattering things to me. Black/female identity politics is all about how the privileged outgroup can't ever reach their level of victimhood. Sounds a lot more affirming, no?

 

[Lexicus]

h i g h l y r e l e v a n t

 

[Kyriakos]

h i g h l y r e l e v a n t

Zizek is also a sign of the (stupid) times, yes. Much like 99,99% of everything else.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Um, how's that? I disagree with him on a lot of stuff.



You mean Jung? What would you recommend?

he appeals to ethnonationalists/self declared rationalists/neocons/nouvelle droite/people looking for a father figure

note: I am not saying you are all of these, only rly the first two

a good starting point for jung is his autobiography or the red book

peterson isn't stupid, he just refuses to understand what postmodernism is, gets caught in too many traps, offers no tangible solutions besides basic self-help stuff and essentially gives you a reductionist summary of nietzsche and jung, in which case I must ask myself: "why am I not reading nietzsche or jung", especially since the former is a master of prose

he also treats his own philosophy as a product and caters to his newly found fanbase, which is never a good sign. at least he took a decisive stance against antisemitism, but that still does not mean that many alt-righters tacitly believe he is "ONE OF US"

clean your room, bucko!

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Zizek is also a sign of the (stupid) times, yes. Much like 99,99% of everything else.

the thing with those lacanians is that you can never tell if they're being intentionally stupid to mess with you or if they just had a massive brainfart

zizek talks very seriously about highly critical topics (like the practice of anal fisting... I'll leave out the quote from his book lest I get banned)

but other serious topics he approaces with a good portion of irony, like telling his critics they'll end up in a gulag and that stalinism is due for a revival

 

[Lexicus]

peterson isn't stupid, he just refuses to understand what postmodernism is, gets caught in too many traps, offers no tangible solutions besides basic self-help stuff and essentially gives you a reductionist summary of nietzsche and jung, in which case I must ask myself: "why am I not reading nietzsche or jung", especially since the former is a master of prose

The amount of postmodern stuff I've read in Nietzsche makes me consistently puzzled that Peterson appeals to him as part of a tradition inherently opposed to postmodernism.

 

[Kyriakos]

the thing with those lacanians is that you can never tell if they're being intentionally stupid to mess with you or if they just had a massive brainfart

zizek talks very seriously about highly critical topics (like the practice of anal fisting... I'll leave out the quote from his book lest I get banned)

but other serious topics he approaces with a good portion of irony, like telling his critics they'll end up in a gulag and that stalinism is due for a revival

While i haven't read Lacan, i noticed he is very popular with all pseudo-intellectuals and usually half-wits

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Western civilisation officially cancelled.

It was cancelled 80 years ago and then rebooted.
Now the nerds are fighting over what is still canon.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

The amount of postmodern stuff I've read in Nietzsche makes me consistently puzzled that Peterson appeals to him as part of a tradition inherently opposed to postmodernism.

Peterson is stuck in this mindset emblematic for alt-right trodlytes where he thinks that postmodernists are a coherent group who self-identify as such, with a united agenda who act in unity to bring forward a certain goal, insted of postmodernism being but a vague label that can be applied to almost any philosophical position, any piece of art after the second world war, without the auteur ever agreeing on that

really, one only has to look at the different definitions of postmodernism in architecture, literature, the visual arts and philosophy to realize that a multitude of innovative movements who have some traits in common are shoehorned into this grand narrative that they never really belonged to in the first place. almost nothing is coherent about postmodernism, it's a dumb buzzword that is mostly used as an empty shell in art criticism or as a signifier of political alliance/rivalry on a societal level

While i haven't read Lacan, i noticed he is very popular with all pseudo-intellectuals and usually half-wits

the same is true for all the big obscurantist/mysticist thinkers like evola, derrida, hegel, jung and so forth. that doesn't mean that they are more or less profound than analytical thinkers, it just means that one has to invest a lot of time into them to get something out of their reading. this is the prime reason I prefer reading prose stylists such as nietzsche, camus and some of the orientalists. I mostly like reading as an activity, not necessarily with a goal I am striving toward. Reading for readings' sake. Though it is sometimes fun to decypher a particularly hard text.

 

[Lexicus]

Peterson is stuck in this mindset emblematic for alt-right trodlytes where he thinks that postmodernists are a coherent group who self-identify as such, with a united agenda who act in unity to bring forward a certain goal, insted of postmodernism being but a vague label that can be applied to almost any philosophical position, any piece of art after the second world war, without the auteur ever agreeing on that

really, one only has to look at the different definitions of postmodernism in architecture, literature, the visual arts and philosophy to realize that a multitude of innovative movements who have some traits in common are shoehorned into this grand narrative that they never really belonged to in the first place. almost nothing is coherent about postmodernism, it's a dumb buzzword that is mostly used as an empty shell in art criticism or as a signifier of political alliance/rivalry on a societal level

I think it's better seen as a period in intellectual/cultural history rather than some sort of philosophical movement or worldview.

 

[Mouthwash]

he appeals to ethnonationalists/self declared rationalists/neocons/nouvelle droite/people looking for a father figure

note: I am not saying you are all of these, only rly the first two

I'm not a rationalist. I have a very low opinion of our ability to get at truth.

peterson isn't stupid, he just refuses to understand what postmodernism is, gets caught in too many traps, offers no tangible solutions besides basic self-help stuff

You're glossing over the point that he has actually helped people, though. I'm a lot less concerned with logic and rigor than I am about how his ideas affect the world.

at least he took a decisive stance against antisemitism, but that still does not mean that many alt-righters tacitly believe he is "ONE OF US"

Other than him not toeing the progressive line on transgenderism and human sexual dimorphism, I've seen zero indication that he has anything to do with the 'alt-right.'

Does Steven Pinker cater to racists as well? Their beliefs about IQ and male/female psychology are pretty standard in the field of psychology.

 

[Lexicus]

I has actually helped people, though.

So did Nazism. So did the Manson Family. So have any number of cults and things people generally agreed were a bad idea.

 

[Mouthwash]

If anyone is confused about why there's backlash against 'arrogant liberals in a bubble,' just look at Lex's and Kyrakios's posts here.

 

[Lexicus]

If anyone is confused about why there's backlash against 'arrogant liberals in a bubble,' just look at Lex's and Kyrakios's posts here.

What, you mean the snowflakes react poorly to people saying mean things about stuff they like?

 

[Traitorfish]

He's helped far more people than Noam Chomsky ever has.

Chomsky is a linguist with a sideline in political commentary, it's not really clear that "helping people", in the sense implied by a self-help book, was ever his intention.

I think it's better seen as a period in intellectual/cultural history rather than some sort of philosophical movement or worldview.

I suppose it's easy to forget that postmodernism is comprised of both "post" and "modernism"; the term is intended to describe what happens after modernism, rather than it's bigger, better replacement, as if it was some sort of Modernism 2.0.

If anyone is confused about why there's backlash against 'arrogant liberals in a bubble,' just look at Lex's and Kyrakios's posts here.

The first sentence of Peterson's Wikipedia page describes hime as a Canadian, a psychologist, a cultural critic, and a professor.

So I have to ask: which of those words do you imagine is going to be the big selling point in Trump Country?

 

[Mouthwash]

What, you mean the snowflakes react poorly to people saying mean things about stuff they like?

No, I mean liberals engaging in lowbrow mockery while acting as though they've pulled off an incredibly witty 'gotcha' moment. Vox, being helpful for once, explains here.

Chomsky is a linguist with a sideline in political commentary, it's not really clear that "helping people", in the sense implied by a self-help book, was ever his intention.

I assumed his books are intended to help victims of US imperialism and corporate oppression by explaining how they operate. Is that not correct?

The first sentence of Peterson's Wikipedia page describes hime as a Canadian, a psychologist, a cultural critic, and a professor.

So I have to ask: which of those words do you imagine is going to be the big selling point in Trump Country?

I think the question is, which of those words will be most likely to get him called a Nazi in Intersectionality Country?

 

[Lexicus]

No, I mean liberals engaging in lowbrow mockery while acting as though they've pulled off an incredibly witty 'gotcha' moment. Vox, being helpful for once, explains here.

Can you point to specific posts of mine in this thread that you believe exhibit the "smug style"?

Is that not correct?

No