Peterson, Harris, etc....

BD said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?
 
Pogue Mahone said:
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?
Click to expand...

How else could you learn to think for yourself?
 
Cascarino said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
I think his logic is that Peterson is playing 3D chess. Giving conflicting, nonsensical advice in order to force his acolytes to think for themselves. I mean, it’s obviously bollox but you have to admire his creativity.
Click to expand...

I actually really love that :lol:
 
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.
 
Moved To Differently said:
List one way you would teach someone to think for themself.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Carolina Red said:
- 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.
Click to expand...

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?
 
Moved To Differently said:
:lol: An image out of context? And don't pictures equal a thousand words?
Click to expand...

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

Moved To Differently said:
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?
Click to expand...

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
 
Cascarino said:
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
Click to expand...

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?
 
Moved To Differently said:
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?
Click to expand...

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
 
Moved To Differently said:
Okay, teach it to me.
Click to expand...
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.
Moved To Differently said:
Man was inspiring to create the term 'God'. If you name my painting did you draw it?
Click to expand...
Yeah… because man didn’t understand where the sun went at night. Solid.
 
Carolina Red said:
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.
Click to expand...

Have you been to the dark side of the moon?
 
Moved To Differently said:
consciousness
Click to expand...
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.
 
Moved To Differently said:
Not thinking were we?
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Invictus
dumbo said:
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.
Click to expand...
That blew my mind a little. I think I'll leave it there for tonight. Many thanks.
 
dumbo said:
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.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
dumbo said:
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.
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Moved To Differently said:
Are you a robot?
Click to expand...

I'm actually enjoying your posts in this thread, and think you add some liveliness to it, but I don't think you know what some words mean
You replied to a list of bullet points and described it as verbose
You asked how one would learn to think for oneself, which by definition is "form opinions and make decisions", but it then became apparent you were talking about consciousness
I used the words systems and framework, which could be applied to a massive range of things, from an ant colony to the Vatican, and you seem to think these descriptors are exclusive to robots.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to discourage your posting at all. You're the mvp of the thread and it stops it from devolving into a discussion about how much of a weirdo JP is (a big one), but I honestly don't know if you're trolling half the time or if you're just an unusual fellow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.