Journalist Gloats Over Jordan Peterson's Troubles

[Jester13]

This just popped up on my news feed: Researchers uncover a new mindset that predicts success

 

"To succeed in modern life, people need to accomplish challenging tasks effectively. Many successful entrepreneurs, businesspeople, students, athletes and others tend to be more strategic—and hence, more effective—than others at meeting such challenges. A new study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that one important psychological factor behind their success may be a "strategic mindset."

 

 

This goes back to my recent post about JPs stance that identity politics feeds off a mindset of being an oppressed victim, which makes sense that you would be oppressed if that's how you view the world and your place in it. Imagine if someone's oppressive lens was changed to one of thinking with a strategic mindset - how can I save enough money to go to school, what financial support options are there out there to take advantage of, what kind of support while going to school can help me succeed, what skills are employers looking for that I could work on improving, etc. etc. etc. 

 

Let's use an example of two single black women in America, each with two children and three jobs to provide for their family. One of those households has the "you're getting an education no matter what" mentality whereas the other does not. What would the outcome be, do you gather, of each household? 

 

Now, I know no one has responded about free will yet, so I won't deep dive into the implications of it within the above example, but to me it's clear that mindset must be a very important factor to consider.

[BoKnows]

47 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

This just popped up on my news feed: Researchers uncover a new mindset that predicts success

 

"To succeed in modern life, people need to accomplish challenging tasks effectively. Many successful entrepreneurs, businesspeople, students, athletes and others tend to be more strategic—and hence, more effective—than others at meeting such challenges. A new study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that one important psychological factor behind their success may be a "strategic mindset."

 

 

This goes back to my recent post about JPs stance that identity politics feeds off a mindset of being an oppressed victim, which makes sense that you would be oppressed if that's how you view the world and your place in it. Imagine if someone's oppressive lens was changed to one of thinking with a strategic mindset - how can I save enough money to go to school, what financial support options are there out there to take advantage of, what kind of support while going to school can help me succeed, what skills are employers looking for that I could work on improving, etc. etc. etc. 

 

Let's use an example of two single black women in America, each with two children and three jobs to provide for their family. One of those households has the "you're getting an education no matter what" mentality whereas the other does not. What would the outcome be, do you gather, of each household? 

 

Now, I know no one has responded about free will yet, so I won't deep dive into the implications of it within the above example, but to me it's clear that mindset must be a very important factor to consider.

I don't think this is much of a surprise to us. 

 

You have two types of people in this world.

1. The person who know's what he wants and goes out and gets it.

2. The person who complains that they will never be able to achieve what they want.

Edited June 10, 2020 by BoKnows

[Chicken.]

15 minutes ago, Jester13 said:

This just popped up on my news feed: Researchers uncover a new mindset that predicts success

 

"To succeed in modern life, people need to accomplish challenging tasks effectively. Many successful entrepreneurs, businesspeople, students, athletes and others tend to be more strategic—and hence, more effective—than others at meeting such challenges. A new study published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences shows that one important psychological factor behind their success may be a "strategic mindset."

 

 

This goes back to my recent post about JPs stance that identity politics feeds off a mindset of being an oppressed victim, which makes sense that you would be oppressed if that's how you view the world and your place in it. Imagine if someone's oppressive lens was changed to one of thinking with a strategic mindset - how can I save enough money to go to school, what financial support options are there out there to take advantage of, what kind of support while going to school can help me succeed, what skills are employers looking for that I could work on improving, etc. etc. etc. 

 

Let's use an example of two single black women in America, each with two children and three jobs to provide for their family. One of those households has the "you're getting an education no matter what" mentality whereas the other does not. What would the outcome be, do you gather, of each household? 

 

Now, I know no one has responded about free will yet, so I won't deep dive into the implications of it within the above example, but to me it's clear that mindset must be a very important factor to consider.

It starts with understanding the concept of Mindfulness, for me anyway, and being able to realize that we can be aware of (and control) our thought process

 

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/topic/mindfulness/definition 

 

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/04/harvard-researchers-study-how-mindfulness-may-change-the-brain-in-depressed-patients/ 

 

and I am only quoting this piece because I thought it said Ben Shapiro everyone here would flip  

 

“Many people don’t respond to the frontline interventions,” said Benjamin Shapero, an instructor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School (HMS) and a psychologist at Massachusetts General Hospital’s (MGH) Depression Clinical and Research Program. “Individual cognitive behavioral therapy is helpful for many people; antidepressant medications help many people. But it’s also the case that many people don’t benefit from them as well. There’s a great need for alternative approaches.”

[Gurn]

43 minutes ago, BoKnows said:

You have two types of people in this world.

1. The person who know's what he wants and goes out and gets it.

2. The person who complains that they will never be able to achieve what they want.

7.6 billion people on the planet and you say there are two types?

Do you get out much?

[BoKnows]

1 minute ago, gurn said:

7.6 billion people on the planet and you say there are two types?

Do you get out much?

It's obviously a hyperbole.

[Jester13]

38 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

It starts with understanding the concept of Mindfulness, for me anyway, and being able to realize that we can be aware of (and control) our thought process

 

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/topic/mindfulness/definition 

 

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/04/harvard-researchers-study-how-mindfulness-may-change-the-brain-in-depressed-patients/ 

 

and I am only quoting this piece because I thought it said Ben Shapiro everyone here would flip  

 

“Many people don’t respond to the frontline interventions,” said Benjamin Shapero, an instructor in psychiatry at Harvard Medical School (HMS) and a psychologist at Massachusetts General Hospital’s (MGH) Depression Clinical and Research Program. “Individual cognitive behavioral therapy is helpful for many people; antidepressant medications help many people. But it’s also the case that many people don’t benefit from them as well. There’s a great need for alternative approaches.”

A great example that there are many ways to live a healthy and successful life, but living with a victim lens may not be one of them. 

 

In response to Ben Shapiro, he's another great example of how many people have such an inability to actually understand someone stance(s) without thinking you have to support the person in their entirety. He may come across as a smarmy weasel when he speaks, and like JP I don't agree with everything he says, but he has some interesting ideas. And what's wrong with me thinking that? Does that make me a Ben Shapiro supporter or lover? Not a chance. I like some things he says, so what? But there are many people who would label me a racist or conservative, or whatever else, merely just by mentioning his name. And this goes both ways: why can't many staunch conservatives look at social programs like universal health care and see the benefit behind it without thinking they have to become a socialist if they like the idea? You'd think they would be seasoned already at cherry picking good ideas  

[butters]

On 6/9/2020 at 11:11 PM, butters said:

I haven't looked much at the guy, so I haven't seen anything about him personally that bothers me to the extent that he deserves all of this toxicity. But I sure run into a lot of his followers online that end up being pretty reprehensible. I'm aware they don't represent all his fans. But I see enough of them that the Jordan Peterson brand is kinda tainted for me, even if I am neutralish on the guy.

Just to add on to this thought, I just got spam in my facebook feed from the vancouver local musician group. It says 

"What advice would Jordan Peterson give to a musician? Should you become a narrow specialist, or should you build a stack of complementary skills? My take on Jordan Peterson's Rule 4, applied to music:". 

All due respect to Jordan Peterson but there's no reason to inject him into a conversation about music. I said 'reprehensible' in my initial comment, and this is not an example of that. Its more just annoying. And I see weird culty things like that all the time. And its not necessarily fair to pin that on him. But it it obviously has an effect, because I find myself siding emotionally with his detractors even though I have no tangible reason to.

[Junkyard Dog]

9 hours ago, Jester13 said:

A great example that there are many ways to live a healthy and successful life, but living with a victim lens may not be one of them. 

 

In response to Ben Shapiro, he's another great example of how many people have such an inability to actually understand someone stance(s) without thinking you have to support the person in their entirety. He may come across as a smarmy weasel when he speaks, and like JP I don't agree with everything he says, but he has some interesting ideas. And what's wrong with me thinking that? Does that make me a Ben Shapiro supporter or lover? Not a chance. I like some things he says, so what? But there are many people who would label me a racist or conservative, or whatever else, merely just by mentioning his name. And this goes both ways: why can't many staunch conservatives look at social programs like universal health care and see the benefit behind it without thinking they have to become a socialist if they like the idea? You'd think they would be seasoned already at cherry picking good ideas  

Spot on. I feel the same way about both JP and Ben Shapiro.

[MystifyNCrucify]

I got to page ten and i cant handle anymore. 

 

Basically all i got was “pettersons wife has cancer and jordan is struggling with addiction but its ok he deserves it.” 

 

Good talk. Im out. 

[Red Light Racicot]

22 hours ago, Jester13 said:

From what I've heard from JP, he compares Marxist ideology to the far left of today more so from the stance of adopting the victimized/oppressive narrative, in that anyone who is financially stable, successful, or the like, is the oppressor and everyone else is a victim. This mentality arguable adds to the tribal identity politics we're seeing more and more of every year. Adding to that, it's the idea that in society there should be an equality of outcome vs. equality of opportunity. 

 

Before deciding on whether or not any of that is a correct viewpoint, it's clear that it's a set of interesting ideas to think more about. In Western society, is there really as much oppression going on as the left wants to believe, or is it their own perspective that's oppressing them?

 

Also, you can't use the term "butt load", as it's offensive language and discriminatory.

Marx was a humanist who genuinely wished to improve quality of life for everyone, but that's just the kind of thing Peterson loves to twist in order to make it seem like it is something abhorrent.

 

Labor unions, free health care, social programs... stuff we can't imagine living without. Good stuff every country on Earth has adopted to some extent. We are already living in a world that has been heavily influenced and transformed by the ideas Marx promoted.

 

It's frustrating when someone like Peterson, who has no real idea of who Marx was because its obvious he isn't familiar with his work, just goes ahead and conjures a straw man that barely applies. Worse is how he chooses to propagate such misinformation. 

 

This penchant for nonsense seems to find its way into any subject Peterson attempts to tackle, as if he has a degree in every single relevant field. It'a a really annoying habit of his.

 

For example, he claimed lobsters and humans are to a large degree behaviorally and socially identical.

 

He also claimed that Nazis were atheists when Germany at the time was 99%+ Christian.

 

He also claimed that atheists are unaware that they are actually Christians, at least the ones who don't go around raping and killing people, like some silly Presuppositionalist.

 

This list goes on for days. 

 

Quote

Also, you can't use the term "butt load", as it's offensive language and discriminatory.

I apologize. Didn't know.

Edited June 11, 2020 by Red Light Racicot

[BoKnows]

38 minutes ago, Red Light Racicot said:

Marx was a humanist who genuinely wished to improve quality of life for everyone, but that's just the kind of thing Peterson loves to twist in order to make it seem like it is something abhorrent.

 

Labor unions, free health care, social programs... stuff we can't imagine living without. Good stuff every country on Earth has adopted to some extent. We are already living in a world that has been heavily influenced and transformed by the ideas Marx promoted.

 

It's frustrating when someone like Peterson, who has no real idea of who Marx was because its obvious he isn't familiar with his work, just goes ahead and conjures a straw man that barely applies. Worse is how he chooses to propagate such misinformation. 

 

This penchant for nonsense seems to find its way into any subject Peterson attempts to tackle, as if he has a degree in every single relevant field. It'a a really annoying habit of his.

 

For example, he claimed lobsters and humans are to a large degree behaviorally and socially identical.

 

He also claimed that Nazis were atheists when Germany at the time was 99%+ Christian.

 

He also claimed that atheists are unaware that they are actually Christians, at least the ones who don't go around raping and killing people, like some silly Presuppositionalist.

 

This list goes on for days. 

 

I apologize. Didn't know.

We live in a mixed economy.  I don't see a world where there's no free market.

 

I really did like Peterson's point on altruism.  Socialism, and communism require everyone to be altruistic all the time.  That's basically impossible to achieve.  Think about all the relationships you've ever had.  Count the amount of times that you, or the other person were not willing to compromise.  If people can't compromise all the time with their friends, family, and significant others how can a country of 37Million+  people make sacrifices, and compromises?  I find it very unlikely that people Halifax will be willing to make sacrifices for people in Vancouver, and vice versa.  Human nature takes over.

[Timbermen]

1 hour ago, Red Light Racicot said:

Marx was a humanist who genuinely wished to improve quality of life for everyone, but that's just the kind of thing Peterson loves to twist in order to make it seem like it is something abhorrent.

 

Labor unions, free health care, social programs... stuff we can't imagine living without. Good stuff every country on Earth has adopted to some extent. We are already living in a world that has been heavily influenced and transformed by the ideas Marx promoted.

 

It's frustrating when someone like Peterson, who has no real idea of who Marx was because its obvious he isn't familiar with his work, just goes ahead and conjures a straw man that barely applies. Worse is how he chooses to propagate such misinformation. 

 

This penchant for nonsense seems to find its way into any subject Peterson attempts to tackle, as if he has a degree in every single relevant field. It'a a really annoying habit of his.

 

For example, he claimed lobsters and humans are to a large degree behaviorally and socially identical.

 

He also claimed that Nazis were atheists when Germany at the time was 99%+ Christian.

 

He also claimed that atheists are unaware that they are actually Christians, at least the ones who don't go around raping and killing people, like some silly Presuppositionalist.

 

This list goes on for days. 

 

I apologize. Didn't know.

Marx wasn't even Russian, he was German. He was such a humanist about 100 million died for his failed ideology. If by humanist you mean who has the most mega death stats, yea ok, he wins by a long shot.

[Timbermen]

Canada vs Commie's

 

 

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Timbermen

[The Lock]

22 minutes ago, Timbermen said:

Marx wasn't even Russian, he was German. He was such a humanist about 100 million died for his failed ideology. If by humanist you mean who has the most mega death stats, yea ok, he wins by a long shot.

That's not his fault though. It's the fault of the people who used his ideology for greed purposes, just like how Trump attempts to take every advantage he can over the US's government problems.

 

People are greedy.

[The Lock]

Random thought of the day: Isn't it amazing how we can determine that most stars have planets around them, determine the distances, make educated guesses even on the composition of such planets...

 

... but when it comes to governing ourselves, we might as well just play Russian Roulette?

[Master Mind]

6 hours ago, MystifyNCrucify said:

I got to page ten and i cant handle anymore. 

 

Basically all i got was “pettersons wife has cancer and jordan is struggling with addiction but its ok he deserves it.” 

 

Good talk. Im out. 

Thankfully it was only a small select few who took that stance. Some of whom choosing to run when the questions get tough.

 

I think most here would agree that celebrating Peterson's hardships is taking the very low road.

[Wilbur]

21 minutes ago, The Lock said:

That's not his fault though. It's the fault of the people who used his ideology for greed purposes, just like how Trump attempts to take every advantage he can over the US's government problems.

 

People are greedy.

And this is why Capitalism has its limits.  And why you need both elements of Capitalism and Socialism in society to keep each system in check.  The tricky part is there probably will never be a perfect equilibrium for what amount of each a society needs.  As times change, that equilibrium will change.

[Master Mind]

8 hours ago, butters said:

Just to add on to this thought, I just got spam in my facebook feed from the vancouver local musician group. It says 

"What advice would Jordan Peterson give to a musician? Should you become a narrow specialist, or should you build a stack of complementary skills? My take on Jordan Peterson's Rule 4, applied to music:". 

All due respect to Jordan Peterson but there's no reason to inject him into a conversation about music. I said 'reprehensible' in my initial comment, and this is not an example of that. Its more just annoying. And I see weird culty things like that all the time. And its not necessarily fair to pin that on him. But it it obviously has an effect, because I find myself siding emotionally with his detractors even though I have no tangible reason to.

Yeah, there's going to be a lot of his fans that are annoying like that. But there's plenty of good people that listen to him too.

 

It's like that with anyone though. There will always be a portion of a fan base that make you roll your eyes.

 

While not a perfect example, but one we've all seen:

Quote

Burrows, do we really need him?

 

[BoKnows]

7 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

And this is why Capitalism has its limits.  And why you need both elements of Capitalism and Socialism in society to keep each system in check.  The tricky part is there probably will never be a perfect equilibrium for what amount of each a society needs.  As times change, that equilibrium will change.

I agree that implementing social systems is good.  The government has to choose which ones to pick and choose from though.  I'm all in for universal healthcare, but free post secondary I'll pass on that.

 

A country can't eliminate a bottom to top economy as well, that would be detrimental in my opinion.

[Timbermen]

12 hours ago, butters said:

Just to add on to this thought, I just got spam in my facebook feed from the vancouver local musician group. It says 

"What advice would Jordan Peterson give to a musician? Should you become a narrow specialist, or should you build a stack of complementary skills? My take on Jordan Peterson's Rule 4, applied to music:". 

All due respect to Jordan Peterson but there's no reason to inject him into a conversation about music. I said 'reprehensible' in my initial comment, and this is not an example of that. Its more just annoying. And I see weird culty things like that all the time. And its not necessarily fair to pin that on him. But it it obviously has an effect, because I find myself siding emotionally with his detractors even though I have no tangible reason to.

I had no idea what Peterson was about 2 months ago. I heard of him, like every one else in the world, when he did a World tour of interviews to promote his book, 12 steps, a few years ago. The reason i had to look into it more was because the first thing i heard, was that he was currently one of the world's most famous intellects from Canada. Then it turned out he's from western canada. then all of the sudden he was an 'Alt Right Nazi'. 

During his tour, the C-16 debacle happened and thats the timeline of the first couple interviews i saw. Realized, he's no fascist, they're painting him as one because they misinterpret why he opposes that bill. I just started watching these weeks ago. Not a cult that i know of, he has tons of youtube followers because he has over 150 hours of lectures online. Thats a lot of content. Sounds like that music group is just mentioning a local celebrity.

I definately don't agree with every thing he's said and like some things. He must have the record for DESTROYING interviewers, as thats in al ot of the youtube titles. I think thats why journalists like Beyerstein and others are going after him. They can't sit down and interview him and get away without being DESTROYED so they write an attack piece. I'd like to see Beyerstein sit down and interview him so he can defend himself.

 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Timbermen