Literally everything that comes out of Jordan Peterson's mouth falls into the same category of fallacy: confounding the descriptive and the prescriptive
-
Afficher cette discussion
-
If you are constantly cherry-picking examples and moving the goalposts to support your contention that the status quo is just, then you are not actually a thinker
6 réponses 41 Retweets 302 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
Okay I do have to qualify one thing I said, I said "Literally everything" falls into the same category of error, but the dragon thing doesn't, because like dragons wut
5 réponses 10 Retweets 205 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
sarah jeong a retweeté Roderik Rolf
Right, it's some kind of a bizarre attempt at using Jung to theorize natural law, except he's failing wildly at sketching out either, to the point where I hesitate to say he's even tryinghttps://twitter.com/Roderikrolf/status/997520496324378624 …
sarah jeong ajouté,
3 réponses 14 Retweets 227 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
sarah jeong a retweeté Eric Dykstra
no one is forcing you to self roast this hard on a public websitehttps://twitter.com/Eric_Dykstra/status/997521542450839554 …
sarah jeong ajouté,
Eric Dykstra @Eric_DykstraEn réponse à @sarahjeongI would dislike JBP if the only things I knew about him were from hit pieces that try to discredit him, too. I find his lectures thought-provoking, and his work in personality and psychology is widely cited and very useful. News is by definition transient, read books instead.4 réponses 15 Retweets 435 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
sarah jeong a retweeté StubbornLights
My dude, how is Peterson useful for anything if you've taken half a semester of liberal arts classes? Aristotle is more coherent and even more astoundingly, less sexisthttps://twitter.com/StubbornLights/status/997522766059528192 …
sarah jeong ajouté,
StubbornLights @StubbornLightsEn réponse à @Eric_Dykstra @sarahjeongI can understand parts of JBP are useful. However, there's so much baggage that comes with that you're better off not looking to him as guru. She's right in that a lot of his logic is confusing prescriptive/descriptive. See also: naturalistic fallacy or is/ought problem.12 réponses 50 Retweets 509 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
I can't believe I'm now googling whether aristotle believed in dragons
10 réponses 20 Retweets 400 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
sarah jeong a retweeté CursedObject 🌚
sarah jeong ajouté,
3 réponses 2 Retweets 207 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
In other news,
@ethanchiel has finally settled the question of whether Aristotle believed in dragons*pic.twitter.com/D5QEp2X3n3
4 réponses 4 Retweets 145 j'aimeAfficher cette discussion -
En réponse à @sarahjeong @ethanchiel
Yeah, the original Greek is likely “worm”
1 réponse 0 Retweet 3 j'aime
-
-
If dragons aren't real, how could both Kanye and POTUS have dragon energy?pic.twitter.com/z3xDwaVCCO
1 réponse 0 Retweet 3 j'aime - 1 réponse de plus
Nouvelle conversation -
-
-
We see only shadows, Plato says, so surely Aristotle will not deny the existence of dragons
0 réponse 0 Retweet 0 j'aimeMerci. Twitter en tiendra compte pour améliorer votre fil. SupprimerSupprimer
-
Le chargement semble prendre du temps.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.

