A very thorough look at the clarity, reason & epistemological concerns many people otherwise inclined to be sympathetic to at least some of Dr Peterson's views have raised & an explanation of why It is so frustrating & often fruitless to raise them.https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/03/the-intellectual-we-deserve …
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
>First, take some extremely obvious platitude or truism. Make sure it actually does contain some insight, though it can be rather vague. Many philosophers and public intellectuals, historically. >It does help if you are male and Caucasian. Casual -isms detract from your point.
1 reply 2 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
>If it’s so “obvious” that he can be written off as a charlatan, why do so many people respect his intellect? Motivational speakers need not be especially original-- merely memorable. I do not see anything fundamentally different about, e.g., Frankl's "Man's Search for Meaning".
2 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
The litmus test of utility in such a niche predominantly hinges on efficacy for the reader, not subjective perceptions of originality by ideologically-blinkered critics.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
>“archetypes” that have developed over... our species’ evolution. >by studying myths, we can see values and frameworks shared across cultures, and can therefore understand the structures that guide us. Yes, common in comparative literature/religion, cultural anthropology, etc.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
>But here I am already giving Peterson’s work a more coherent summary than it actually deserves. ... according to whom? The summary is clearly accurate given even the most cursory reading; it is entirely deserved.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
>says many things that either are true or “feel kind of true,” and does so in a way that makes the reader feel stupid for not really understanding. It discussed consistency and prioritization in ethical systems, privately and socially constructed, with suitable emotional depth.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
To me, this was reminiscent of an expansion of a well-known aphorism-- "man cannot remake himself without suffering, for he is both the marble and the sculptor," attributed to Nobel laureate Alexis Carrel. Not especially original, but certainly inspirational to many people.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
>a wondrous maze, fascinating precisely because of its often splendid lack of intelligibility. I find it entirely intelligible. Abstract, open-ended, certainly, though less so than e.g. Heidegger. For genuine unintelligibility, consider e.g. Derrida, Deleuze/Guattari, etc.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @__ice9 @HPluckrose
>making the reader feel deeply inferior and in awe of the writer’s towering knowledge, knowledge that must exist on a level so much higher than that of ordinary mortals that we are incapable of even beginning to appreciate it No. Merely exhortation to greater commitment to life.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
OK, I'm going to leave the conversation here. You disagree with the piece but I have work to do so perhaps you could start a conversation by posting your points of disagreement generally rather than to me?
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Some aspects thereof, yes. Others showed a lack of relevant background knowledge. Still others were defensible, but seemed irrelevant or nonspecific to Peterson in particular. They are here; sufficient. Running commentary between builds and tests. Have a nice morning.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.