Can you give me an example of this?
Peterson, Harris, etc....
- Thread starter prath92
- Start date
And what's the difference between fiction and non-fiction?
Jordan Pererson is so enlightened that he has graduated to communicating exclusively in meaningless word salad. He'll probably have to go back and redact his own rule about precise speech, but that's a consequence he's willing to face. After all, his fans will think he's a genius no matter what he says, or how he says it.
The article linked above. When he was talking to Joe Rogan about the environment and how the environment means everything. I'm sure I could find more.
I'm sure you're aware of the definition I'm using, so why not just tell me why I'm mis-defining them?
I was hoping for an article. I think it's fairer to accuse a person of communicating incoherently in text rather than speech because it's not the easiest thing in the world to get to the precise meaning of what it is you want to get across, especially if you're also thinking in real time and not just reusing cliched ideas. That's how you have an earnest conversation with someone and develop your position rather than just argue your point to the death. You wouldn't accuse someone with a learning difficulty of 'word salad' would you?
Also that's genuinely not what I'm doing. I'm trying to gauge how you see the distinction between the two. I myself increasingly can't be sure what the difference is between art and reality.
He just did
Using the strict definition of “word salad” as used in psychiatric assessments, Peterson’s musings wouldn’t qualify.
They are, however, ridiculously pompous and unnecessarily verbose. The exact opposite of “being precise in your speech”. When your guru consistently does the exact opposite to what he’s telling you to do, that’s not good, is it?
They are, however, ridiculously pompous and unnecessarily verbose. The exact opposite of “being precise in your speech”. When your guru consistently does the exact opposite to what he’s telling you to do, that’s not good, is it?
How else could you learn to think for yourself?
Not sure if this is a serious question?
There are, obviously, many many ways to learn to think for yourself without listening to nonsensical ramblings from a guru who doesn’t practice what he preaches.
I bet his room is filthy as well.
List one way you would teach someone to think for themself.
Are we being masterfully trolled?
How about I kick things off by listing ways I wouldn’t teach someone to think for themself?
1. Being a hypocrite.
I’m not sure what you’re getting at, the point was the hypocritical nature of JP. How is that some sort of pathway to independent thinking?
I think his logic is that Peterson is playing 3D chess. Giving conflicting, nonsensical advice that he doesn’t follow himself, in order to force his acolytes to think for themselves. I mean, it’s obviously bollox but you have to admire his creativity.
Why is he now having a crack at Environmental Economics in a far-right comic? He should stick to his own field of study, i.e. Pinocchio and lobsters as mapable models for human diagnostics. Get back in the rock pools with Ariel and them old timer. Stupid fecking cnut.
- Creating and testing hypotheses
- Analyzing arguments for bias
- Creating arguments based on deductive reasoning
- Pulling relevant info for a prompt from reading passages
Etc.
None of that requires being a Kermit the Frog voiced hypocrite.
I think you should be more appreciative of what's going on here. By telling you that Peterson is a hypocritical cnut, you're taught to independently think for yourself that he's great, actually.
That's photoshopped right?
iirc it’s real but he was in the middle of moving. Still hilarious
An image out of context? And don't pictures equal a thousand words?I guess Peterson's not the only one guilty of verbosity. At the very least he usually has a point at the end of it. You just won't admit you don't know the answer to the question. And the reason I believe that to be true, is because I don't actually think you can teach a person to think for themself. The power of consciousness is a product of divinity. God is greater than a man.
You won't even ask me what I mean by 'think'. There's no absolute truth on what that means as far as I know. You just tried to answer a question you could not have understood. Not thinking were we?
I literally do. I gave you an exact the answer to the question. It’s like.. my actual fecking job to teach critical thinking.
Highly doubtful, considering man invented god.
I think he was telling the truth this time about the picture (he said it was undergoing renovations), but it's important to note the bloke's a real grifter and lies for fun, so you never know
He used bullet points and was blatantly concise in his post, how could that be described as verbose?
I'm not going to get into the god stuff, if that's your view then cool. But earlier in the thread you said listening to JP was a way to learn to think for yourself
Okay, teach it to me.
Man was inspiring to create the term 'God'. If you name my painting did you draw it?
He could have just said "I don't know" which would have been the truth. Since we started philosophising we've been trying to 'define' consciousness, he just claimed to know exactly what it is and how to give it to a person. That doesn't seem strange to you?
When he gets technical, he's verbose. When he uses basic language you mock him. How does a person win?
You asked how he would teach someone to think for themselves, and he answered by giving a few systems that provide the framework to come to a conclusion. I think maybe you were thinking about consciousness and Carolina was understandably thinking of critical thinking, but if that's the case how would listening to Jordan Peterson give someone 'consciousness', which was what initiated the conversation
Are you a robot?
I can’t teach it to you over a post on a forum, but I can tell you how it is done, and I did. Besides that, you already said you think it is impossible to do and is “from god”, whatever that means, so forgive me for not wasting my time.
Yeah… because man didn’t understand where the sun went at night. Solid.
Have you been to the dark side of the moon?
awareness of one's self as self. distinctly meta in nature and somewhat "virtual".
what do you mean by "think"?
he gave you a good example. examining text for bias. that means reading against the grain for subjective arguments, or other selves, and constructing an objective picture from it via synthesis and deduction.
I am a fan of Pink Floyd.
I'm acute, my other half says so?
What do you even mean by we?
Are you talking about The Royal we, or are you alluding to some spurious collective? Are you even aware of the grand pantheistic unity of all things to each other, residing within their cosmological stasis? Where ex nihilo nihil fit, and all lie rigid within a crustacean shell.
That went right over my head , I'm sorry.