Question for folk in cultural analysis: how are our methods of inquiry and argument different from Peterson’s? He reads a buncha stuff then impressionistically weaves them together with Jung. I think some of his critics differ from him only in chancing upon different conclusions.
-
He weaves them together uncritically and without regard for secondary literature and basic standards of intellectual responsibility. Of course, some people in cultural analysis do that too.
Aye! The qualification "some" there was non-trivial, I don't think all his critics can be charged with this by any means. Just... yeah, he's not alone in his sins, and I think people might take the fact that they merely don't share his conclusions to be exonerating.
-
-
Actually no, don't fully agree with what you said. He reads some of his sources very critically and some fawningly, with the apparent distinction between these being whether he antecedently agreed with their general thrust. Again... recognisable from elsewhere, shall we say.
-
But even in those (rare) instances when he reads critically, he seems unaware of or unconcerned with legitimate differences of opinion among experts, and grandiosely presents himself as an expert.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yes - sadly, too true.
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.