Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Anything that does not fit into the above categories, but is related to psychology, including discussion of public and media perceptions of psychology, satire related to psychology, etc.
Contrarian
Posts: 95
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 11:13 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by Contrarian » Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:18 pm

lakeland wrote:
Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:57 am
Contrarian wrote:
Thu Jul 04, 2019 9:42 pm
He's full of beef.
Con! A very on brand post for you. Hope everything is going well.
I mean, he literally only eats beef.... and he seems to create a lot of beef. The archetype of the cow features heavily in his life. Unsurprisingly he also chats bulls**t.

I'm well Lakeland. I miss the good old days of chat Xx

User avatar
workingmama
Team Member
Posts: 1470
Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:54 pm
Location: UK

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by workingmama » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:25 am

Punkgirluk wrote:
Fri Jun 07, 2019 12:47 am

I don’t think however (and here I am in agreement with Miriam) that getting into an ideological debate is the way forward. There was a recent paper (I think by Reicher et al but I would need to check) on extremism which clearly showed that challenging people with extreme views on the basis of ideology or evidence was ineffective at best and potentially counterproductive.
When I challenge someone on their ideology, behavior, sexism, whatever, I'm not challenging them with the belief that I'll alter their views, I'm doing it for the bystanders, for the lurkers, for the quiet folks watching from the audience. The debate is the forum not to change the opposition's mind, but to give a different viewpoint, to protest, to make sure my side is heard. IMO.
Fail, fail again, fail better.

User avatar
miriam
Site Admin
Posts: 7832
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: Bucks
Contact:

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by miriam » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:24 pm

workingmama wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:25 am
When I challenge someone on their ideology, behavior, sexism, whatever, I'm not challenging them with the belief that I'll alter their views, I'm doing it for the bystanders, for the lurkers, for the quiet folks watching from the audience. The debate is the forum not to change the opposition's mind, but to give a different viewpoint, to protest, to make sure my side is heard. IMO.
Very much this.

Although occasionally people with strong beliefs do find a means to question them. I'm mindful of people like Megan Phelps, who left the Westboro Baptist Church due to debate on Twitter and her message that we need to engage with those with abhorrent views, with questions and without an assumption of negative intent. So I genuinely admire anyone that can do that. The difficulty for me is that such beliefs are so numerous, so vocal and so toxic to engage with on social media, that it is easy to run out of energy or to feel like those conversations have a negative impact on your mood or quality of life. Which is why I don't have as much energy to invest in such debate any more.

Plus we are really quite a protected bubble here, as it is a professional networking site, and our guidance has been set up to make the space feel inclusive for anyone with an interest in our profession. It probably isn't the place to raise potentially offensive beliefs for debate, except for threads like this where there is a psychology element. I wouldn't allow sexism, racism or other overt prejudice to be expressed here, for example.
Miriam

See my blog at http://clinpsyeye.wordpress.com

Punkgirluk
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by Punkgirluk » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:41 pm

Thank you Workingmama. That is a very useful alternative way of thinking about contentious issues that hadn’t occurred to me previously (despite now seeming really quite obvious 🤔). I will think more on this but I can see that considering it like this may help to prevent that “I’m banging my head on a brick wall here....” feeling which I so often get debating on social media and which often ends with me just giving up in despair!

PinkFreud19
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat May 18, 2019 3:08 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by PinkFreud19 » Thu Jul 11, 2019 9:25 am

Punkgirluk wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:41 pm
Thank you Workingmama. That is a very useful alternative way of thinking about contentious issues that hadn’t occurred to me previously (despite now seeming really quite obvious 🤔). I will think more on this but I can see that considering it like this may help to prevent that “I’m banging my head on a brick wall here....” feeling which I so often get debating on social media and which often ends with me just giving up in despair!
Just a little anecdote to add to this. I subscribe to the BBC on Youtube, and I'm not sure if anyone here has noticed, but the BBC YouTube comments section is a cesspit of the far-right (and I do not use the term far-right lightly). Any BBC videos about feminism are not just received with critical comments, but comments that are disturbingly misogynistic in nature, with implications that women do not deserve equal rights.

So anyway, there was a comments section about Brexit that particularly annoyed me; it was a fair and balanced video from the BBC about how much the UK actually pays into the EU. The comments were the usual splurge of "the BBC are a propaganda machine for remain" and "the EU are oppressive neoliberalists". I decided to make a comment to challenge some of these irrational ideas. To my surprise, I noticed several months later that my comment had been the most liked comment on the video, despite many of the second and third most liked comments being the normal right-wing drivel. Even amongst crucibles of far-right nonsense, my ideas were still able to spread and resonate and hold others to account.

mastermiaow
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 6:36 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by mastermiaow » Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:11 pm

KalEl wrote:
Thu Jul 04, 2019 12:22 pm
I actually quite like Jordan. To me, he seems like quite a decent chap, trying to do the right thing, and that is quite admirable. He certainly seems more honorable than some Clinical Psychologists I have worked with in the past, and continue to meet to this day. I certainly don't agree with everything he says, but there are some things he discusses that I do agree with like the debate around the authenticity of the gender pay gap, the (Canadian) government's right to forcing compelled speech, the devolution of feminism and the MeToo movement, and the emerging crises facing young men in society. I think these are important things to be considered, and there is some evidence to support them as well. He may not be everyone's cup of tea, but that does not mean we should judge him so harshly, discard his points of view and paint him as a member of the alt-right just because they're different.
I came across this thread recently. I completely agree with above. I have read "12 rules for life" and found it very helpful. I wanted to go to see him talk but unfortunately his show was cancelled.
I wonder how many of JP's critics on this thread have read this book? I think he has injected some much needed balance into the cultural discourse e.g. around equality of outcome vs outcome of opportunity, identity politics, compelled speech. How figures such as Kanye West or Peter Thiel have been attacked for not towing the 'party line'. I think his statements on chaos being synonymous with the feminine and order synonymous with masculine have been completely misrepresented on this thread. He is talking about archetypes here not that women are chaotic or that men are ordered. This is one of many examples that I have read on this thread where people do not seem to have made the effort to understand the concepts he is articulating. His criticism of compelled speech was that he objected to government legislation mandating how he should address somebody.
I agree with this emphasis on personal responsibility. That does not mean that there are not systemic inequalities in societies, Peterson's point is that in our western liberal democratic societies there is a much greater emphasis on hierarchies of competence and that is something we should be grateful for. I don't agree with everything he says and agree that at times he comes across as very angry and could do with some advice on PR. The youtube of him in a Fedora was one example. But I have really appreciated how he has helped me question such concepts as "white privilege" and 'patriarchy'. Concepts that I see bandied about as though they are given truths and that anyone who questions them is a fascist or racist or ignorant or all of the above I would be interested to know where those who want to throw JP into some fascist dustbin would stop - Joanna Williams perhaps?
Link removed, anything to do with Spiked is hate speech as far as I'm concerned.
Jonathan Haidt? Steven Pinker? All the above are saying many of the same things as JP but in a more diplomatic way.
I wanted to write this as I was so appalled by some of the vitriolic comments comparing JP to Nazis, abusive parents, racists etc and to support others who have poked their heads above the parapet.
Last edited by miriam on Wed Jan 01, 2020 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
miriam
Site Admin
Posts: 7832
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:20 pm
Location: Bucks
Contact:

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by miriam » Wed Jan 01, 2020 6:24 pm

mastermiaow wrote:
Tue Dec 31, 2019 12:11 pm
compelled speech
...
His criticism of compelled speech was that he objected to government legislation mandating how he should address somebody.
"Compelled Speech" Is a straw man created to justify bigotry. I read the actual legislation concerned from start to finish and listened to his speeches about it and read his first articles about it. He was never told in legislation how to address somebody as he claims. An update to Canadian civil law included a slightly expanded definition that would identify intentional and recurrent dead-naming and misgendering as a form of hate speech. The intentionally misleading position of objecting to the risk of being imprisoned (false) for using the wrong pronouns accidentally (false) garnered him a following of online noisemakers distressed about the loss of their privilege as white men, who gave him an extraordinary level of income to expand upon his facile opinions to fit with their pre-existing worldview.

And his own descriptions of his parenting are abusive - and I say that as an expert witness on child abuse who has heard and read his own words about his parenting. I don't think we need to comment on JP beyond that.

Patriarchy and white privilege are given truths. To pretend otherwise is like starting a discussion about the height of a tree by challenging the idea that triangles exist and then expecting to be walked through pythagorus before considering it legit that anyone uses the distance from the base and angle of view to calculate the height. Getting you (and others who misunderstood the concepts in the first place) to question them is the goal of very malign forces, who think that progress is bad and want to turn the clock back to the days where white men were important simply for being white men. It is utterly repugnant. I find it as offensive as antisemitism and I will not have these views propagated on a forum I fund.
Miriam

See my blog at http://clinpsyeye.wordpress.com

lingua_franca
Posts: 931
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:29 pm

Re: Jordan Peterson - why do practitioners not like him?

Post by lingua_franca » Fri Jan 03, 2020 3:28 am

miriam wrote:
Wed Jan 01, 2020 6:24 pm
Patriarchy and white privilege are given truths. To pretend otherwise is like starting a discussion about the height of a tree by challenging the idea that triangles exist and then expecting to be walked through pythagorus before considering it legit that anyone uses the distance from the base and angle of view to calculate the height. Getting you (and others who misunderstood the concepts in the first place) to question them is the goal of very malign forces, who think that progress is bad and want to turn the clock back to the days where white men were important simply for being white men. It is utterly repugnant. I find it as offensive as antisemitism and I will not have these views propagated on a forum I fund.
Thank you for saying this, Miriam.

Mastermiaow, I see from your previous posts that you're a current trainee. At the moment I'm seeing a CP for treatment for PTSD and I'm extremely grateful that she is based in a third-sector women's organisation that runs on feminist principles. It would be impossible for me to engage in therapy with someone who believes that patriarchy is a 'concept' that is being 'bandied out', as opposed to a very real thing that not only fed into the violence I experienced, but that taught me for years that I was somehow to blame/that said violence wasn't that bad. I've spent years policing what I say and don't say in relation to this, because of fear that it would affect my professional standing and colleagues' judgements of my competence, that it would cause people to blame me or to wonder what I'd done to deserve it, and so on. This sort of self-policing is a common experience for anyone in an ethnic minority group too. And then Jordan Peterson picks up his megaphone and starts braying about being silenced. The irony.
"Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
"Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
Piglet was comforted by this.
- A.A. Milne.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests