You give him too much credit. I saw his comments weeks ago regarding this very stance on JBP. "Any" is exactly what he meant.
-
-
Replying to @AnglerFishLure
No. He meant what he was very careful to say.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @AnglerFishLure
I see. It doesn't matter what people actually say very clearly and explicitly. We just mindread them & insist we know what they really mean. I'm sure you'd be fine with people doing this to you. You want a white ethnostate in which homosexuality is illegal & women have no rights
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @AnglerFishLure
I don't see how that's fundamentally different than what James did in the essay. He paints the audience as a monolith & interprets their motivations, then asserts that they're being duped rather than expressing a philosophical difference. So you should understand the annoyance.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @_Baloo_The_Bear
Well, I don't think he paints them as a monolith. The piece begins by setting out the attractive and interesting features of Peterson & his approach and then looks at how this has escalated into something approaching a movement.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @_Baloo_The_Bear
It is OK to say we think those who think his approach worthwhile are mistaken. He can be criticised just like everyone else. It is fine to think people have been taken in by a wrongheaded religion, political position, set of ideas etc even if this is a philosophical difference
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
OK but if you acknowledge the philosophical difference it seems to me you have a duty to engage with it on a deeper level than just assuming it's wrong, paticularly if you're attempting to occupy a position of objectivity.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @_Baloo_The_Bear
Not all essays have to be about this tho. This one isn't. Its about a phenomenon. It responds to Douglas Murray's discussion of the phenomenon. This is what James does. He wrote a book about the psychological draw of religion & used the same knowledge here.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
People said then that he should have actually argued why God isn't real but they just have to deal with it. It's also interesting to look at psychological phenomena.
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.