What are the legitimate criticisms against him?
I've seen several opinion pieces that seem to assume social justice and postmodernism as axioms, and completely miss all of his points.
Or, they dont bother refuting anything, because he's been refuted a thousand times over. And when go looking, I find more of the same.
So. What is wrong with any of his messages?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
theoccidentalobserver.net
twitter.com
webcache.googleusercontent.com
twitter.com
He has no real message, that's the entire problem. He doesn't actually take a stand on anything.
The only thing worse than the people who mindlessly follow his material are the people who actually think he has a political position, and then attempt to physically harm him for having a position that he doesn't even have, thus resulting in his Patreon getting flooded with unearned cash.
Well without something to refute all I have to offer is his criticism against white identity
The problem with that is that it's a catch 22, and he probably knows that, which makes him worse.
Either you collectivize and engage in the "sorts of behaviours" Peterson doesnt like, or you dont collectivize and every other group does so anyway and destroys your group
The most readily apparent analogies are nuclear disarmament and global warming (if one were to find it true). It might be admirable and better for the world, etc. for you to give up your nukes or fossil fuels or whatever, but will the other groups do so as well?
You are sacrificing yourself for nothing if you adhere to petersons philosophy
As a general criticism he is way to detailed in his analysis of what he refers to as post modernism. An understanding of genetics and brain research would reveal that it is not some doctrine of beliefs that leads some astray, it is literally in their nature to act in the way they do.
Women are hypergamous because of the electric jew or leftism or the welfare state? No apparently, a bottleneck in genetics among our ancestors reveals at some point only ~20% of men reproduced. It is not society that is shaping people, it is people shaping society. Culture is downstream from genetics, and academica like Peterson are incapable of acknowledging something that works against their existence
>His definition of Truth
Literally just an excuse to make his dumb unfounded religious believes in a an ironically Postmodern way.
>Just his word games mainly theological
He just takes his definitions from his butt hole so he can have a moment of pride cause he "won" the argument. Worse than leftists screeching how "feminism just means making women equal to men" and how "Racism=Prejudice+Power"
Hes low iq, and he takes jung seriously....
Im a psychologist too and just fucking lol at jung and freud.
Those guys were alchemists to todays scientists. Yet he quotes them as relevant today and now... Full fucking retard.
He also defends christfags and the idea of a man in the sky god being a "useful" idea...even though its not true. Retard.
I think psychologists need to raise their voices louder in order to expose this charlatan and faker
... and if that doesn't happen, people will still try to argue against his vague political position until forever
It's painfully obvious that you're just upset about the fact that Peterson doesn't support your preferred political position. You made no argument beyond that.
He isnt nazi enough