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.
-
-
-
Replying to @atthatmatt @GodDoesnt
Mainly his weirdly postmodern view that truth is relative, his weird interspersion of scripture and allegory into evolutionary science, and his bizarre view that traditions like marriage perform crucial social roles such as preventing sexual assault.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
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?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Science and mythology are completely different domains, with different rules and purposes, and conflating the two defeats the point of either.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
From what I’ve seen he’s quite careful to keep both technically seperate, but he draws on both and see’s connections and useful overlapping lessons. One or both of you ought to invite him to do a video-web debate, I’m sure he would happily oblige.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I doubt it. I'm not popular enough. But his debate with Sam Harris gave me a thorough understanding of his approach to defending his positions.
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.