Why does Jow Forums hate this man?

Why does Jow Forums hate this man?

Attached: peterson.jpg (1200x1799, 239K)

They jump on the intellectual bandwagon of opinions and conform to the group mentality because they can not think for themselves.

He has some shitty cures for anxiety disorders but he's fighting for the right cause and if he doesn't like commies, he's on the good side.

He is cool. I agree with most of what he says, but not everything.

They don't

sage and hide

Jow Forums prefers wallowing in their filthy rooms

boring and obvious life advice designed to appeal to people who had bad/absent parents and think that low EQ makes them intelligent

if you actually read the comments of a jp video closely you will realize how dysfunctionally anti-social his core audience actually is

If you actually read the comments of an Jow Forums thread closely you will realize how dysfunctionally anti-social the core audience actually is.

because he's a retarded fraud who says the most obvious shit and people pretend he's smart

Attached: jpet.png (600x679, 493K)

things he says are really obvious and you have to be a 50 iq American to find what he says intriguing

There's more dignified ways of coping with an absent father figure than giving him money or watching him

lmao is this unironic??
Peterson -> Harvard -> Leary -> CIA -> Mkultra
the fuck, you can connect an enormous amount of people to a specific university, not to mention that leary and peterson worked at harvard decades apart

is this really the kind of infographic that 'redpills' Jow Forumstards?

Wait, there's literaly no singnificant info about Peterson on this image
I wonder who could be behind this post...

Does it?

That's literally the definition of every single of Peterson's fanboy ever.

Me > Mom > Her Dad > CIA > Leary > Harvard > Peterson

wow it all makes sense

I have nothing against the guy, but his advice is nothing profound and can easily be taught from any decent parent. His fanboys are free to believe he is some prophet who turned their lives around and that's fine, but I don't get the hype. He only exists in his current state because he rode his media wave from the free speech and anti-trans shit and knows his lifestyle is far better than being a professor at UofT.

Some things are ridiculous yes, but the UN part is significant.
The only thing he does is attack shitlibbery (nothing original, everybody knows it's bullcrap) and repeat well known self-improvement methods. He gathers people around him who are just starting to get annoyed at leftist policies and feeds them with his race-denialist individualism nonsense. The textbook gatekeeper.

Oh, right, the [[[free thinker]]] infographic

The "manosphere". Men in their 30s and 40s still swearing by self-help junk as the "best books they've ever read". A thousand years of "red-pillers" could pass and they would still be floundering in a sea of retarded terminology, self-pity, resentful mockery and defeatism, or weak, pathetic resolutions to start change at an individual level by putting into practice some self-help guru's silly top 10. But if you want to learn anything truly intellectual YOU HAVE TO PICK UP REAL BOOKS. BOOKS THAT ONLY LAST FOR 5 OR 10 YEARS ARE NOT REAL. IF YOU DON'T PICK UP THE GIANTS YOU WILL NEVER MAKE ANY PROGRESS IN THE INTELLECTUAL SENSE, EVEN IF YOU ARE CAPABLE OF IT. But if you are not drawn to the giants you are not capable of it anyway. And obviously none of them are.

Another great aphorism:
. Why I have nothing but contempt for self-help authors, especially those who focus on "success", "happiness" and the like. I don't mind the specialized ones so much ("How to get ripped", "How to prepare for exams", "How to build a business", etc. etc.), so long as they know what they are talking about. Those are fine for what they are. But the success and happiness ones are terrible. For firstly, these are philosophical issues that geniuses have been discussing for millennia (as opposed to "how to learn to skateboard", which they haven't). Why would you even go to nobodies for these answers? And then these answers are either outright stupid, or at best dumbed down misinterpretations of what the great thinkers have said, which the self-help author has usually heard third- or fourth-hand (i.e. he has not read the original thinker but merely someone else who has read him, etc.) In the best of cases they tell you how to be MEDIOCRE. I.e. the titles should be "How to Have Mediocre Success in Life", "How to Attain the Happiness of the Mediocre", etc. All their advice is useless to me. I would have utterly failed in all my goals if I had followed their success blueprints, and I would be miserable if I listened to their advice on how to be "happy".

What sort of advice do they give? Sleep early, cut off bad friends, focus on your goals, make notes to yourself, etc. etc., all of which I've broken countless times in my life, and still break on a daily basis. Is there any book of this kind that advises you to take your dad's jeep with your friend because you are bored and drive it through shop windows in the early hours of the morning every weekend for kicks? But that's how I got to where I am today, by doing whatever the fuck I felt like doing at any given moment.
If you want to learn how to focus, you don't learn how to focus by "learning how to focus", or by following stupid little advice like making a to-do list and waking up early in the morning to fulfill it. You know how I learned how to focus? By studying mathematics. Biology. Chemistry. Etc. I.e. by going to school.
You know how I learned to "be active"? By joining a basketball team. By taking up swimming and snowboarding.
Wanting to focus by learning how to focus is for degenerates who've never tried doing anything worthwhile in their lives, or for disadvantaged kids who grow up in an environment that doesn't offer physics classes or snowboarding. If you haven't already learned how to "focus" by the time you hit 18 (and indeed, be a master of it) you never will, no matter how many self-help books you read. All the "success stories" are below mediocre people. Neurotics, depressed men, drug addicts, for whom so much as holding a job is an achievement, etc. Utter losers. In whose cases the books are INDEED helpful — I am not knocking the positive steps these people have made in their lives or anything — good for them, but their titles are misleading. They'd have to be "How to be Moderately Successful if you are a Complete Loser", not how to be successful full stop.
tl;dr self-help books are for losers and I'd rather spend all day masturbating (i.e. doing the opposite of what they teach)

Peterson doesn't really say anything extraordinary but nor does he claim to. Its his fans that are fanatical about him.
I see these leftys writing a fucking thesis on why x thing he says is wrong I'm just here like who gives a shit

people here would rather blame others for their misfortune instead of taking responsibility for their own actions

evolutionary psychology can be a hard thing to come to terms with if you are invested in the deluge of modernity

From what I've seen of him he gives me the impression of someone who is like a greedy version of Joseph Campbell watered-down for STEMfags. It's an awkward sight, but at least it makes him moneyz.

He's meh at best but his fanbase is outright retarded.