To everyone on the left concerned about men finding @jordanbpeterson appealing - what's *your* answer?
Do you have something to say to young men besides labelling them the enemy and pathologizing them?
Once you figure this out, a healthy debate will ensue.
-
-
Jordan Peterson cites evidence in all the vids I've seen. What, in particular, r u referring to? What videos of his have you watched? Curious. Seems 2 me, he's all about evidence
-
See discussion with Sam Harris and Joe Rogan. Also Maps of Meaning, particularly this bit:pic.twitter.com/nc6tZitcSO
-
It's not a smear that he regards truth pragmatically rather than by evidence. He's quite open and consistent about it.
-
Can you provide a clear example why this is a problem?
-
If you don't already see a problem with claiming things to be true if they are untrue but helpful in some way, no, it is very unlikely that I'll ever be able to convince to value objective reality.
-
You might see the problem with epistemological pragmatism when used by people you disagree with. eg JP showed feminist claims about wage gaps to be objectively false but epistemological pragmatism would say that if it works out in women's favour to claim them to be true, they are
-
I think that's an oversimplification of epistemological pragmatism
-
Can u elaborate, if u have the time?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I don't disagree. It goes back to his concept of truth. I want to listen to a 3 hour conversation between him and Peter Boghossian. Who can make it happen, Helen? Pangburn philosophy, Joe Rogan, Sam Harris, Intelligence Squared, the PSU young Republicans?
-
Would love to see this. He makes important points and could do something positive, but that leads some to swallow everything he says whole. He's often debated by idiots that mischaracterize him, leaving every reasonable person to defend him. And honest debate would be great.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
He’s consistent in deferring to the evidence and using mythology be it the Bible or other forms to present moral stories is not making the case for irrationalism.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That would seem to be far from his intent.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
He doesn't disregard, in fact he emphasises, the necessity of rationality and evidence within the framework of material truth, he just claims material truth is embedded in some wider 'moral' truth
-
If tomorrow's engineers and scientists believed material reality was embedded in something transcendent but were otherwise completely capable and competent of designing and building machines that improved people's lives I don't see why that would be a problem
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I find it silly that we sit around attempting to ponder whether god exists or not. If you concede that there exists systems too vast and too complex for humans to grok them... Which is about as self-evident as it gets ... Then you've already conceded defeat.
-
You would then attempting to make a retort akin to something like: Yes I know Im just now shaping tools into pointed edges for hunting ... but let me BE
@elonmusk . Its just... its a screamingly vacuous sentiment to try and back up. Like no. We have hard-limits to cognition.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ability to self inspect, truly judge one's own action, is the highest form of rationality anyone can think of. And I think Dr Peterson is invoking the exact phenomenon en mass
Thanks. 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.