I think many who support Peterson have a problem with his more suspect arguments, but they overlook them because they see Peterson, for now at least, as a welcome saboteur of the orthodoxy that they so despise. When the orthodoxy is defeated, *then* they will consider the rest.
-
-
I think his broad generalizations -and he would readily concede that exceptions exist- may in part come from his 1000’s of hours of experience in clinical psychology treating 1000’s of patients both male and female. His consistent willingness for open debate is a big positive.
-
I don't know how 1000s of hours treating 1000s of patients qualifies you to make claims about the relativity of truth, or the importance of biblical allusions to understanding evolution, or about the power of marriage to prevent sexual assault (none of which has any evidence btw)
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t want to be pesky but “weird” and “bizarre” are only meaningful from a subjective point of view, not useful outside of your personal, subjective experience. Why is trying to reconcile science with archetypal mythology and religion “weird”? Unconventional yes, but weird?
-
Science and mythology are completely different domains, with different rules and purposes, and conflating the two defeats the point of either.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.