Soren W. He went to doctors in Canada and America for help with his Benzo addiction, they told him the only way to get off is a “taper” where you take less and less benzos over time. It is vital you do it that way, because Benzo addiction is extremely hard to get off and can kill you if you fuck it up. Jordan (or possibly his daughter who may have kidnapped him) thought he could outsmart those doctors, so they flew to Russia, and had *literal prison doctors* put him into an 8 day long coma in order to get him off the Benzos. Now he can’t walk or type. At all.
You guys are really unfair and Peterson is clearly a genius. His book is an antidote to chaos and he characterizes chaos as feminine. The book is a guide to driving a women away and it clearly works as intended.
@@derianschmidt7252 Antifa is capable of cruelty, thus they are not victims to the cruelty of others. You cannot attack them on the basis of weakness, and only recoil because you fear them as monsters.
@G Wagon Maybe don't respond four times in a row. I aggree with you, they were like "Jordan Peterson say's this... HAHA". No arguments. This is not informative nor funny. The Jordan Peterson impression was pretty good though. Also they laughed at the idea that we need two political wings, are they radicals?
@@willknowsright9615 no, people don't do that.. but folks who are alt right or aligned with alt right should be called as such. But you agree with his professional victimhood? His latest Twitter meltdown proofs he is, right?
@@Cussy69_420 Dude, I don't really follow Peterson as much as I used to. All I can say is that in one point of my life he opened me up to existentialist philosophy and a lot of his lectures did somewhat improve my outlook on life. I don't agree with all of his work, especially his view on post-modernsim which is just mostly him demonizing those theories. With that being said, I just think its funny how people view Peterson in general: He is either the messiah to a lot of people, or the equivalent of Satan to some. Very rarely have I ever met a person who has a more or less a balanced synopsis on his beliefs. As for twitter, I don't really give a shit about it. I have never used it and quite frankly...I'm happier for it. I think it just brings out the worst in people. If he said something fucked up, I'm not going to agree to it. As for the alt-right thing......That's just another label that has been misused constantly and has lost any meaning it once had. It's similar to how people on the far right like overusing the term Cultural Marxism whenever they claim to see something that seems "woke" to them.
@@willknowsright9615 you could argue that he himself isn't alt right but he definitely was a major component of the alt right pipeline (he got me and a fuck ton of other ppl in 2016 at least, not sure if that's still the case now). either way its very clear he's always been a reactionary dipshit who's exceedingly becoming more unhinged
For anyone wondering about the search engine thing here's a quote (or an essay) I stole from Robert Rossney who works at Google and posted this on Quora (fun fact: Peterson loves Quora because he had something upvoted a lot on there). "This question is an example of what Adam Gopnik has called “the Snakes on a Plane fallacy,” which is the misapprehension that something is important because it is on the internet. But let’s take it seriously for a moment and see what’s happening. You can answer this question by examining the pages that show up in the search results. Not the images on the page, but the text. Increasingly it’s because people are asking this exact question on web sites, and illustrating the question with images that they’ve claimed get returned when they make the query. But originally - which, again, you could tell by examining the search results - it’s because so many web pages illustrating people of color in European art contain the phrase “people of color” and “european art,” and so few web pages containing European art identify the subjects with the keyword “people.” So if you search for “european art people”, you’ll get a lot of pages containing the phrase “people of color.” To test this theory, you can query “european art people -color”, which will exclude those pages that include the phrase “people of color.” Now that so many of the pages created specifically to contain people of color have dropped out of the results, you’ll get a page that’s dominated by images posted by people who are sufficiently outraged by all the black people that show up when they make a search query that their racist conspiracy-theorist friends told them about that they’re posting screenshots of their own search results, and their other racist conspiracy-theorist friends are linking to them. Once you skip past the pages posted by dumb racists who don’t understand the how the web works, what you’ll see is that pages that match the phrase “european people art,” and don’t contain “color” contain…mostly images of people from european art. On the other hand, even if you just type “european art,” you’ll get a lot more images of nonwhite people than you might expect. Why is this? Well, you can look at the search results and, again, apply some general knowledge about how Google Search works to answer this. Many of these images come from Pinterest boards that people have created to collect representations of people of color in European art. A lot of people are linking to those boards, because people of color aren’t very well represented in European art. People who are interested in finding these outliers find these pages and link to them, and the curated pages rise in the rankings. Both of these phenomena - the pages showing Google’s supposedly reverse-racist search results and the Pinterest boards above - show the impact that social links have on search results. The web is opinionated, and because it’s opinionated, indexes of web content are going to be opinionated too. This also means that if you’re actually interested in pages that discuss color - like the patch of Vermeer’s yellow that Proust wrote about, or how Van Dyck ground up lapis lazuli to make his painting of the Annunciation, a web search is going to be less useful to you, because the term “color” means “skin color” to so many people that you have to find other ways to search for color per se. (You may conclude from this that people suck.) Incidentally, while I draw a distinction between “racist conspiracy theorists who don’t understand how the web works” and “people who have uncovered representations of people of color in European art,” Google, as far as I know, does not. To the algorithm, these are just two sets of pages containing images and keywords that also have a lot of inbound links. Google does occasionally tweak its search algorithm in response to people who are deliberately gaming search results[1], but like everything that Google does that requires human intervention, they do as little of that as possible, because it’s really expensive." And there we have it. Some of it is common sense but it's nice to learn a little more if you can. 👍
An other way to verify this is to remove the European part and replace it with words that are related in some ways but have no racial links like "renaissance art" "middle age art" witch still refere to art related to Europe since these are name for European historical eras but these will give you results with white people paintings only. Edit: wasn't yet to the part of the video were they mention this
When Peterson did his rosa parks bit, the Canadian senate invited him to speak there, literally asking if they could somehow fix the bill so his concerns about free speech would be satisfied. He turned into a kettle boiling and sputtered for like 10 minutes and I assume he cried later in his hotel room
That's why I can't respect the fool. I agree there are valid concerns for freedom of speech, but when your way of trying to protect those concerns is to burst into a nonsensical rant, I have to question whether your specific speech is worth protecting.
so peterson thinks that you cannot respect yourself unless you are capable of callous indifference to or pleasure in causing pain and suffering to others. ok.
@G Wagon I think your condescension is cruelty, I think that cruelty is unproductive in assisting you in achieving the end you presumably seek (making me agree with your point of view), and I think less of you for possessing that cruelty. Listen: As someone else noted, the word cruelty is definitionaly more than you seem to understand it as. You seem to think that to cruel is to be capable of standing up for oneself. But it’s more. A person can stand up for themselves without relishing in the infliction of pain (even if standing up for oneself calls for such pain). The eagerness and joyfulness associated with cruelty is patently unvirtuous, and if Peterson gets that wrong, and speaks that wrongness with such thoughtless conviction, I can only wonder what else he gets wrong. But I’m not really keen to find out so don’t bother telling me.
@G Wagon you must understand your capability of cruelty to avoid going down such paths. It's pretty fucking simple, you act like Peterson has malicious intent. He's helped my life and is fighting Marxism wherever it rears its ugly head, that's enough for me.
As a philosophy nerd, Jordan Peterson knows absolutely nothing about philosophy. Even if he did have ideas that were of themselves worthy of attention--which he doesn't--the immense intellectual disrespect he has for the most eminent philosophers of the 20th century absolutely prejudices any claim he might have to the mantle of philosophy. Academic philosophy may have 99 problems, but I'm pretty sure Jordan Peterson isn't one.
So, as a philosophy nerd you are a good authority to take it from? See, the whole idea of philosophy is that it's not something everyone experiences the same way. You'd really have to come up with examples of JP's disrespect to the philosophers of 20th century.
@@FirstnameLastname-kn5sw And that's an example of Peterson being human, he's read a lot, clearly but he can't have read everything. Even notable works like Das Kapital. At any rate, him and Zizek had a very tame, agreeable discussion. Didn't seem like either was throwing shade at the others sources and influences.
@@martinsvilands7334 wait... He said that he studied Marx, Marxism, Communism aso for decades, traveled around the world and was on a 100 shows on the internet telling people his cultural Marxism, neo Marxist stories... But then had to admit that he didn't even read Das Kapital and only read The Communist Manifesto one time decades ago and didn't think it was necessary to re read it before debating Marxism with Zizek???? That's just embarrassing, even for this dude! Same with his C16 and cake for gay couples comments, that he had to walk back and called "oopsies"
He deliberately uses word salads and convolutions to obfuscate the audience. This is so they don't realise the substance of what he's saying is simplistic.
Really? I think he's rather brilliant in his field of expertise. He has thousands of citations for his psychological research and work and his first academic book maps of meaning is a difficult read. Can you really blame him for simplifying his thoughts in video form. I think that's smart because then some of the people dragged in might get into his more sophisticated stuff.
Darestone People with expertise in one field (in my experience) can often be pretty dumb about almost everything else. They also take their knowledge about their field and think that translates to other things. It’s kinda like a different version of the Dunning-Kruger effect. And he’s not merely simplifying ideas in video form. He constantly says things he has to walk back because he hasn’t thought things through. His catch phrase is, “That’s not what I meant.”
@@rlh1984 Yes i agree to an extent. I think he can apply his psychological background to some other things and that can at times be interesting but when it comes to religion especially as it pertains to philosophy. That's where you get the majority of his less than satisfactory answers about god.
"You might say that someone who is incapable of cruelty is a higher moral being than someone who is capable of cruelty, and I would say, and this follows Jung as well, that that's incorrect, and that it's dangerously incorrect because if you are not capable of cruelty... you are absolutely a victim to anyone WHO IS... and so... part of the reason people go watch anti-heroes and villains is because there's a part of them crying out for the incorporation of the monster within them, which is what gives them strength of character and self respect, because it's impossible to respect yourself until you grow teeth!" How can anyone take this guy serious? If you look it up it's a quote of his that gets touted around
@Graeme Glebe Common sense is entirely relative, based on generalisations and becomes a useless rhetoric used by those submissive to ideology like Petersons. There is no "common sense", and generalisations like this only hurt and limit us as people. I'd argue such generalisations can lead to fascism, which, according to Peterson, if you're against, it you're just as bad as the fascists themselves, so you better not "hit back"! Just succumb to "common sense" and "order" of 'western civilization'.
As much as I love Peterson getting dunked on generally, I agree with the quote and I think it has value for some people. At one point in my life I felt like my lack of bad actions made me better than other people, but I realized I often hadn’t been stopped by my moral objection, but by fear and other reasons for inaction. Passivity isn’t morality and you do have to grow teeth to respect yourself and do good things in the world. Why do you think it’s so bad?
As is typical with JBP, the source makes far more sense than the Jeepified hot take explication. In his articulation his end goal is not "understanding" your capacity to do harm but "manning up" and doing the violence, which is a dead end without the former as all of his sources would point out.
Also, uh, understanding 'why' or 'if' your violence is appropriate are the fundamentals of a hero's journey. It's that same losing of the thread halfway down the hole they were talking about at the beginning of the clip.
weatheranddarkness I’m not sure if you’re saying the source is advocating violence or Jordan is, but as quoted by OP, violence isn’t mentioned or implied.
I don't get why this podcast was controversial. This is the second video I've watched of them, and it's very intellectual and funny. Can someone point me to some reason why some people hate this podcast? Edit: I posted this just before the Jordan Peterson Doo-Doo Ass bit, and my opinion stands. The seemingly immature humor is actually a poignant reflection of the absurdity which surrounds the phenomenon of Peterson's rise in popularity amongst impressionable and vulnerable young men.
I have a lot of problems with Jordan's outlook on the world but the crying isn't one of them. At the very least it seems like he genuinely wants to help people. Just he's a pompous, miseducated doofus in how he goes about it.
He's a Nazi. At he end of the day. I don't mean a literal Nazi, he's just convinced that 'Chaos' is any situation wherein mediocre, reasonably intelligent white men are not completely dominating society by every metric. It's laughable. Haha 😂 hot chicks are supposed to be flinging themselves at YOU man! I'd love to hear him spotting a rage bro in the gym in his Kermit voice: you've got this man! You're the only man in this room! You're a natural LEADER!!! I'm gonna cry... Hold me!!!!
I vividly remember listening to Peterson’s first appearance on Sam Harris’ podcast and thinking, “This man is talking complete nonsense and hot air.” I think it was Orwell who said only intellectuals are capable of uttering truly inane statements.
before this video begins, google has been converting their search engine to a content feed individualized to each user. this means it is becoming crappier to say *google is free" as if it's an objective library.
JP’s audience are 20 year old guys who view themselves as Max Rockatansky or Eren Yeager but in reality work at a mall kiosk next to a build a bear and go home home and do nothing but play Xbox live
I saw a video of him in which, for some reason he'd taken off his shoes. And oh! His feet were so terribly SLENDER. It made me shudder for some reason. He makes me want to check the room for exits. That tearful display that you played was just wrong and made me think about those slender feet in his semi-fuzzy navy blue socks. I cannot stop shivering.
Is a quality recording confirmed available after? This is going to be epic for samples, especially if Zizek's condition is relatively under control. It was hard to understand him in one of the more recent clips i've seen. I hope he's doing ok
That quote at the beginning (Ive watched LOADS of Daddy JayPee videos, theyre fascinatingly coded) about who's capable of cruelty is just a stand-in for his feelings about WOMEN. "They SEEM to be better than us, but they're really not." That's JayPee the Dark Professor in a nutshell, guys.
OMG I did not think of this, this is the most elaborate dogwistle ever. Holy moly. When they quoted him I wonderes: 'this is a wierd moral code, because a person incapable of cruelty is still morally right, even if this makes them the victim of the mor cruel.' *It all makes sense now.*
@@halfbloodprincess989 It's not that elaborate- t's just sneaky. It's pretty obvious to anyone with social skills ...which is very few of the american populace anymore due to toxins (Im serious about this btw) JayPee is a sneaky fuck who got dead rich offf his patreon
@@halfbloodprincess989 This man places no real value onto moral RIGHTness- as none of the right wing does. It's inherently feminine and bounding to them.They secretly loathe their own weakness, and project it onto the "Archetypal Feminine" ie Moral Codes.
Google's first big innovation of ranking based on how often a page was linked to spawned a whole industry of search engine optimisation, so _in a way_ they really are a jobs producer.
It's hilarious to me, the only one whose theories were more outlandish than Jung was Freud. I mean, they were great to lay the groundwork for Psychology and that's why they're still studied, but there's a reason their theories are pretty much discarded in modern Psychology and Psychiatry.
Peterson's no king of logic. He's read a lot of people who were and he can regurgitate their arguments but Peterson is nothing more than a Jungian and there's fundamentally nothing logical about Jung. ;)
@@sam-xw2vf Logic is the sudy of reasoning and more importantly it's about the structure of your argument rather than the content. Logic can be both inductive and deductive and both forms have assumptions and limits. Jordan Peterson can't even get basic definitions and historical context right and then heavily misrepresents the arguments of his critics. For instance, Marxists are modernist, not post modernists. Yet Person thinks others-wise despite ample evidence to the contrary. In general, Jordan Peterson is one of the best examples of what he claims to rail against. A victim of naked ideology.
@@BlackPhillip666 Jung was just a guy following the trend of the day of bilking wealthy neurotics of their cash. He was all into alchemy and salvaging religious symbols. He can probably be credited with popularizing the term, collective subconscious. Jung offered little consistency or experimental evidence for anything he said or wrote. As a scholar of various religions he was credible but as a scientist he didn't even try. At best he was a socialite, at worst he was a desperate fraud in an age il equipped to defend it's self from him. If you're interested in modern psychology look into evolutionary psychology, neurophysiology, attachment theory and early childhood development as functional starting points.
Jung not logical, Jung would agree. He was half insane. Really edgy folx who took a psych 101 class and think they "get" Jung but also take everything from Evopsych as dogma lmao. As a psychologist I can 100% assure you, the people in this field who view themselves as "logical" and "scientific" are the most dangerous ones.
Has anyone done a dive into (21:44) Ancient Egyptians worshipping the capacity to pay attention as the highest of gods? Sounds like a load of ol' lobsters.
I think it is a mistake to dismiss Jungian theory, psychology and philosophy. It is true that Jung was easily appropriated in the past. Such as hippies dancing in the woods waiting for the dawning of the Age of Aquarius and other weird appropriations. But these are merely appropriations. The real aspects of Jungian theory are well founded in psychology and some aspects now have scientific backing such as the Freudian Jungian emphasis on transference. And the idea of reclaiming the shadow is a really important idea as well. I don’t particularly like Peterson’s appropriation because he neglects to talk about the underlying idea of archetypes and uses Jungian ideas as mystification for his political ideas. It would be like using Chomsky’s idea of universal language theory and then claiming that English is the best universal language. Jung himself took great pains to make a distinction between Völkergedanken (Folk ideas) from Elementargedanken (elementary ideas). The same idea is parallel to Chomsky’s theory. The abstract grammatical mechanisms are not the same as the mechanics of a specific language merely a variation. A similar idea is put fourth by George Lakoff. There are basic metaphorical Schemas that have various applications in different languages. I would also add that I was deeply afraid of Peterson’s appropriation. Largely because I saw it as a powerful conservative tool, we will see if it gains more ground but has had an effect already. Jungian therapist themselves have a habit of being socially apolitical because their role essentially transcends politics. But most Jungians that I have met are left and liberal. But as for as politics is concerned psychology itself is a very powerful tool. In the past Marcuse married Marxism with Freudian psychology. And Paul Goodman a left pacifist activist created Gestalt therapy with Fritz Pearls who was trained by Reich. Marcuse and Goodman were powerful figures in the 1960‘s left movement and helped make a few progressive sweeping changes and transformations of thinking. I think the left will wither without a much better psychological or philosophical vision. What the Left has now is an irrational fragile and divisive identity based politics which recreates a new tribal factionalism which can easily be usurped by neoliberalism and does not truly unify people toward common ends. The left will loose if it can not respond with its own psychological philosophical understanding. Gabor is a Marxist psychologist who is offering a little bit of this. If you have ever had to work in a group and resolve group conflict towards positive ends you will know what I am talking about. Right now the left has the old idea of creating cooperatives, if there is no sophisticated group psychology married to personal individuating development the Left will fail miserably with this idea. It will merely become a pipe dream. Instead many on the Left revert to merely rational cynicism which obviously hasn’t worked very well. It offers virtually nothing in the face of real human concerns and necessities.
TFW you accidentally create a right wing personality cult on a year long benzo binge
*wakes up as the reactionary dad of thousands of lost ignorant young men online*
Damn I was on one
I also get very angry and racist on benzos, last time I made my wife cry in Starbucks, so I haven't taken them in five years. True story.
Wait till you hear about the latest update to his benzo binge
@@1967sluggy what happened?
Soren W. He went to doctors in Canada and America for help with his Benzo addiction, they told him the only way to get off is a “taper” where you take less and less benzos over time. It is vital you do it that way, because Benzo addiction is extremely hard to get off and can kill you if you fuck it up.
Jordan (or possibly his daughter who may have kidnapped him) thought he could outsmart those doctors, so they flew to Russia, and had *literal prison doctors* put him into an 8 day long coma in order to get him off the Benzos.
Now he can’t walk or type. At all.
You guys are really unfair and Peterson is clearly a genius. His book is an antidote to chaos and he characterizes chaos as feminine. The book is a guide to driving a women away and it clearly works as intended.
You know its a cult when you can't distinguish between real or troll
Lol great point. I dont follow peterson so i shud be good right.
Peterson turned me into a chaos lesbian
i mean misogyny is a skill, but competance isn't praiseworthy in itself because actions aren't neutral.
@@catgirlforeskin
Chaos Lesbian is my favorite band.
The pregnant Naruto bit is probably one of my favorite Chapo jokes.
I THINK TO MYSELF, WHAT A LOGICAL WORRRRRLD
Jerk City avatar on fucking point
I see ads of Hominem
@@Alex-ok9iu Ad Absurdum too!
@@whensomethingcriesagain Just because someone posts a swastika, doesnt mean they hate jews!
Not enough vibrato on trumpet tho
felix's jordan peterson impression makes me laugh every single time he should do it every episode
fuckin kermit man
yesh prz
JP's approach to google is the same as a stoner folding a dollar bill until they make a picture of the twin towers
I'm in tears at "I see Ads of Hominem"
I giggled but then he said “ad absurdum too.” Then I lost it.
The first clip of Peterson is actually a great defense of Antifa.
Not really.
derian schmidt yes really
@@ianwamsley2595 Explain it to me.
@@ianwamsley2595 I'm waiting...
@@derianschmidt7252 Antifa is capable of cruelty, thus they are not victims to the cruelty of others. You cannot attack them on the basis of weakness, and only recoil because you fear them as monsters.
"Virtue busting"
I'm saving this
"I think to myself... what, a logical woooorld.
I see ads... of, hominem
Ad absurdum tooooo"
@G Wagon Perhaps this just wasn't your scene.
@G Wagon
Maybe don't respond four times in a row. I aggree with you, they were like "Jordan Peterson say's this... HAHA". No arguments. This is not informative nor funny. The Jordan Peterson impression was pretty good though.
Also they laughed at the idea that we need two political wings, are they radicals?
He's such a professional victim. Ironic, as everything alt-right is.
How exactly is Peterson alt-right? Do you commonly call anything you don't like Altright?
@@willknowsright9615 no, people don't do that.. but folks who are alt right or aligned with alt right should be called as such.
But you agree with his professional victimhood? His latest Twitter meltdown proofs he is, right?
@@willknowsright9615 is it worth splitting the hair between alt-right and christian conservative who hates transpeople
@@Cussy69_420 Dude, I don't really follow Peterson as much as I used to. All I can say is that in one point of my life he opened me up to existentialist philosophy
and a lot of his lectures did somewhat improve my outlook on life. I don't agree with all of his work, especially his view on post-modernsim which is just mostly him demonizing those theories. With that being said, I just think its funny how people view Peterson in general: He is either the messiah to a lot of people, or the equivalent of Satan to some. Very rarely have I ever met a person who has a more or less a balanced synopsis on his beliefs.
As for twitter, I don't really give a shit about it. I have never used it and quite frankly...I'm happier for it. I think it just brings out the worst in people. If he said something
fucked up, I'm not going to agree to it.
As for the alt-right thing......That's just another label that has been misused constantly and has lost any meaning it once had. It's similar to how people on the far right
like overusing the term Cultural Marxism whenever they claim to see something that seems "woke" to them.
@@willknowsright9615 you could argue that he himself isn't alt right but he definitely was a major component of the alt right pipeline (he got me and a fuck ton of other ppl in 2016 at least, not sure if that's still the case now). either way its very clear he's always been a reactionary dipshit who's exceedingly becoming more unhinged
I didn't notice when they put the actual clip of his speech in because their Kermit the frog impression is too close to reality.
"Alright, it's been a long hard day of logic" 🤣🤣
He actually believes there is no such thing as passive cruelty. No wonder simple folk love this guy.
Ignorance is the root of all evil, unless you make a career out of defending it in which case it becomes a virtue
For anyone wondering about the search engine thing here's a quote (or an essay) I stole from Robert Rossney who works at Google and posted this on Quora (fun fact: Peterson loves Quora because he had something upvoted a lot on there).
"This question is an example of what Adam Gopnik has called “the Snakes on a Plane fallacy,” which is the misapprehension that something is important because it is on the internet. But let’s take it seriously for a moment and see what’s happening.
You can answer this question by examining the pages that show up in the search results. Not the images on the page, but the text.
Increasingly it’s because people are asking this exact question on web sites, and illustrating the question with images that they’ve claimed get returned when they make the query.
But originally - which, again, you could tell by examining the search results - it’s because so many web pages illustrating people of color in European art contain the phrase “people of color” and “european art,” and so few web pages containing European art identify the subjects with the keyword “people.” So if you search for “european art people”, you’ll get a lot of pages containing the phrase “people of color.”
To test this theory, you can query “european art people -color”, which will exclude those pages that include the phrase “people of color.”
Now that so many of the pages created specifically to contain people of color have dropped out of the results, you’ll get a page that’s dominated by images posted by people who are sufficiently outraged by all the black people that show up when they make a search query that their racist conspiracy-theorist friends told them about that they’re posting screenshots of their own search results, and their other racist conspiracy-theorist friends are linking to them.
Once you skip past the pages posted by dumb racists who don’t understand the how the web works, what you’ll see is that pages that match the phrase “european people art,” and don’t contain “color” contain…mostly images of people from european art.
On the other hand, even if you just type “european art,” you’ll get a lot more images of nonwhite people than you might expect. Why is this?
Well, you can look at the search results and, again, apply some general knowledge about how Google Search works to answer this. Many of these images come from Pinterest boards that people have created to collect representations of people of color in European art. A lot of people are linking to those boards, because people of color aren’t very well represented in European art. People who are interested in finding these outliers find these pages and link to them, and the curated pages rise in the rankings.
Both of these phenomena - the pages showing Google’s supposedly reverse-racist search results and the Pinterest boards above - show the impact that social links have on search results. The web is opinionated, and because it’s opinionated, indexes of web content are going to be opinionated too. This also means that if you’re actually interested in pages that discuss color - like the patch of Vermeer’s yellow that Proust wrote about, or how Van Dyck ground up lapis lazuli to make his painting of the Annunciation, a web search is going to be less useful to you, because the term “color” means “skin color” to so many people that you have to find other ways to search for color per se. (You may conclude from this that people suck.)
Incidentally, while I draw a distinction between “racist conspiracy theorists who don’t understand how the web works” and “people who have uncovered representations of people of color in European art,” Google, as far as I know, does not. To the algorithm, these are just two sets of pages containing images and keywords that also have a lot of inbound links. Google does occasionally tweak its search algorithm in response to people who are deliberately gaming search results[1], but like everything that Google does that requires human intervention, they do as little of that as possible, because it’s really expensive."
And there we have it. Some of it is common sense but it's nice to learn a little more if you can. 👍
An other way to verify this is to remove the European part and replace it with words that are related in some ways but have no racial links like "renaissance art" "middle age art" witch still refere to art related to Europe since these are name for European historical eras but these will give you results with white people paintings only.
Edit: wasn't yet to the part of the video were they mention this
Cheers! Good to get a technical explanation
Peterson's accent is NOT from Ontario. He's from Alberta; the Texas of Canada.
It's always good to see you guys take down Kermit the Fraud
@@sam-xw2vf I'm sure they look back every time they reverse out of their driveways.
@@fuzzydunlop7928 🤷🏾♂️
I see what you did there. You must be a hoot at the parties you claim to go to
When Peterson did his rosa parks bit, the Canadian senate invited him to speak there, literally asking if they could somehow fix the bill so his concerns about free speech would be satisfied. He turned into a kettle boiling and sputtered for like 10 minutes and I assume he cried later in his hotel room
That's why I can't respect the fool. I agree there are valid concerns for freedom of speech, but when your way of trying to protect those concerns is to burst into a nonsensical rant, I have to question whether your specific speech is worth protecting.
The philosopher-king of the hill
Asger HB - “that boy ain’t right...”
Hot shit, umami
so peterson thinks that you cannot respect yourself unless you are capable of callous indifference to or pleasure in causing pain and suffering to others.
ok.
@G Wagon I think your condescension is cruelty, I think that cruelty is unproductive in assisting you in achieving the end you presumably seek (making me agree with your point of view), and I think less of you for possessing that cruelty.
Listen:
As someone else noted, the word cruelty is definitionaly more than you seem to understand it as. You seem to think that to cruel is to be capable of standing up for oneself. But it’s more. A person can stand up for themselves without relishing in the infliction of pain (even if standing up for oneself calls for such pain). The eagerness and joyfulness associated with cruelty is patently unvirtuous, and if Peterson gets that wrong, and speaks that wrongness with such thoughtless conviction, I can only wonder what else he gets wrong. But I’m not really keen to find out so don’t bother telling me.
@G Wagon Just happened upon this video. I read this comment chain and you come across as insecure, awkward, and lacking in self-awareness.
@G Wagon Yes you're clearly not mad at all ^_^
@G Wagon What is wrong with you?
@G Wagon you must understand your capability of cruelty to avoid going down such paths. It's pretty fucking simple, you act like Peterson has malicious intent. He's helped my life and is fighting Marxism wherever it rears its ugly head, that's enough for me.
Guys it's not kermit the frog. It's kermit the fraud catch up with the memes
wtf Chapo people know Naruto? I'm sold, let's eat the rich
il bring the guillotine you bring the bbq sauce mate
u better Believe It
As a philosophy nerd, Jordan Peterson knows absolutely nothing about philosophy. Even if he did have ideas that were of themselves worthy of attention--which he doesn't--the immense intellectual disrespect he has for the most eminent philosophers of the 20th century absolutely prejudices any claim he might have to the mantle of philosophy. Academic philosophy may have 99 problems, but I'm pretty sure Jordan Peterson isn't one.
So, as a philosophy nerd you are a good authority to take it from?
See, the whole idea of philosophy is that it's not something everyone experiences the same way.
You'd really have to come up with examples of JP's disrespect to the philosophers of 20th century.
@@martinsvilands7334 Peterson tried to discuss Marx with Slavoj Zizek but then had to admit he's never actually read Das Kapital!!!!!
@@FirstnameLastname-kn5sw And that's an example of Peterson being human, he's read a lot, clearly but he can't have read everything. Even notable works like Das Kapital.
At any rate, him and Zizek had a very tame, agreeable discussion. Didn't seem like either was throwing shade at the others sources and influences.
@@martinsvilands7334 wait... He said that he studied Marx, Marxism, Communism aso for decades, traveled around the world and was on a 100 shows on the internet telling people his cultural Marxism, neo Marxist stories... But then had to admit that he didn't even read Das Kapital and only read The Communist Manifesto one time decades ago and didn't think it was necessary to re read it before debating Marxism with Zizek????
That's just embarrassing, even for this dude! Same with his C16 and cake for gay couples comments, that he had to walk back and called "oopsies"
"Virtue Busting" has to be the most hilarious thing I have heard in a while. @6:58
"Society is like a bird, it only flies away. It does know where its home is, it doesn't know where its soul is."
It’s like fuckin pearl jam lyrics😂😂😂
@@aidangreenlaw7826 dont disrespect eddie vedder like that
He deliberately uses word salads and convolutions to obfuscate the audience. This is so they don't realise the substance of what he's saying is simplistic.
Like you?
@@hg-yg4xh yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
@@hg-yg4xh Eggs Salads, amirite?
If he's a logic nerd, he's really failed because his entire ideology is a fallacy.
can you break it down for us?
More like the Dork Professor
I’m sure Jordan Peterson isn’t dumb, it’s just he knows the political education of his fan base consists of watching SJW cringe compilations.
Really? I think he's rather brilliant in his field of expertise. He has thousands of citations for his psychological research and work and his first academic book maps of meaning is a difficult read. Can you really blame him for simplifying his thoughts in video form. I think that's smart because then some of the people dragged in might get into his more sophisticated stuff.
Darestone
People with expertise in one field (in my experience) can often be pretty dumb about almost everything else. They also take their knowledge about their field and think that translates to other things. It’s kinda like a different version of the Dunning-Kruger effect. And he’s not merely simplifying ideas in video form. He constantly says things he has to walk back because he hasn’t thought things through. His catch phrase is, “That’s not what I meant.”
@@rlh1984 Yes i agree to an extent. I think he can apply his psychological background to some other things and that can at times be interesting but when it comes to religion especially as it pertains to philosophy. That's where you get the majority of his less than satisfactory answers about god.
Oh, dear gawd. "Especially regarding the Haulocaust." 4 words that let you know who that guy is.
"You might say that someone who is incapable of cruelty is a higher moral being than someone who is capable of cruelty, and I would say, and this follows Jung as well, that that's incorrect, and that it's dangerously incorrect because if you are not capable of cruelty... you are absolutely a victim to anyone WHO IS... and so... part of the reason people go watch anti-heroes and villains is because there's a part of them crying out for the incorporation of the monster within them, which is what gives them strength of character and self respect, because it's impossible to respect yourself until you grow teeth!"
How can anyone take this guy serious? If you look it up it's a quote of his that gets touted around
@Graeme Glebe Common sense is entirely relative, based on generalisations and becomes a useless rhetoric used by those submissive to ideology like Petersons. There is no "common sense", and generalisations like this only hurt and limit us as people. I'd argue such generalisations can lead to fascism, which, according to Peterson, if you're against, it you're just as bad as the fascists themselves, so you better not "hit back"! Just succumb to "common sense" and "order" of 'western civilization'.
As much as I love Peterson getting dunked on generally, I agree with the quote and I think it has value for some people. At one point in my life I felt like my lack of bad actions made me better than other people, but I realized I often hadn’t been stopped by my moral objection, but by fear and other reasons for inaction. Passivity isn’t morality and you do have to grow teeth to respect yourself and do good things in the world.
Why do you think it’s so bad?
As is typical with JBP, the source makes far more sense than the Jeepified hot take explication. In his articulation his end goal is not "understanding" your capacity to do harm but "manning up" and doing the violence, which is a dead end without the former as all of his sources would point out.
Also, uh, understanding 'why' or 'if' your violence is appropriate are the fundamentals of a hero's journey. It's that same losing of the thread halfway down the hole they were talking about at the beginning of the clip.
weatheranddarkness I’m not sure if you’re saying the source is advocating violence or Jordan is, but as quoted by OP, violence isn’t mentioned or implied.
Jordan Peterson doesn't understand ANYTHING: marathon.
Googled "bikini".. A sea of white chicks in bikinis with about 3 black chicks randomly dropped in.
Ok, but did you try "Western bikini people?"
@Flux Incapacitator close, the best would be Garfield hentai
Did you virtue bust?
I don't get why this podcast was controversial. This is the second video I've watched of them, and it's very intellectual and funny. Can someone point me to some reason why some people hate this podcast?
Edit: I posted this just before the Jordan Peterson Doo-Doo Ass bit, and my opinion stands. The seemingly immature humor is actually a poignant reflection of the absurdity which surrounds the phenomenon of Peterson's rise in popularity amongst impressionable and vulnerable young men.
Too many people identify too strongly with their chosen representatives. An attack on them is a direct attack on the self.
Conservatives exist and are overdramatic. That's why it's controversial.
Bruised egos
God, I despise Peterson so much. He misrepresents every person and idea he talks about.
Everything he says is like "ok, why are you telling me this?"
What a doof. One can use violence without cruelty.
Just as one can be terribly cruel without ever using violence.
I like how hypermasculine his philosophy is, yet he cries like a baby on stage or in videos a disturbing number of times.
You okay jordan?
I have a lot of problems with Jordan's outlook on the world but the crying isn't one of them. At the very least it seems like he genuinely wants to help people. Just he's a pompous, miseducated doofus in how he goes about it.
@Skippy the Alien he even cried over pinocchio...
He's a Nazi. At he end of the day. I don't mean a literal Nazi, he's just convinced that 'Chaos' is any situation wherein mediocre, reasonably intelligent white men are not completely dominating society by every metric. It's laughable. Haha 😂 hot chicks are supposed to be flinging themselves at YOU man! I'd love to hear him spotting a rage bro in the gym in his Kermit voice: you've got this man! You're the only man in this room! You're a natural LEADER!!! I'm gonna cry... Hold me!!!!
Maybe he's meat and benzo diet...
Can you imagine having a paper graded by JP? How's UofT allowing this guy to issue grades?
He isn’t teaching this year. But I’m more concerned about Harvard having hired him.
Wait what? What interest could they possibly have in him?
Peterson did post doctoral research and teaching at Harvard over 20 years ago. He was never a full professor in Cambridge, though.
I vividly remember listening to Peterson’s first appearance on Sam Harris’ podcast and thinking, “This man is talking complete nonsense and hot air.” I think it was Orwell who said only intellectuals are capable of uttering truly inane statements.
all i hear when i hear JP talk is an abstract pragerU video
At last someone recognized Ontario.
I am tired of the "Toronto, Canada" tag.
As if anyone says "Dallas, United States".
Canada is all one place
There is a Toronto, Ohio. FYI...
before this video begins, google has been converting their search engine to a content feed individualized to each user. this means it is becoming crappier to say *google is free" as if it's an objective library.
JP’s audience are 20 year old guys who view themselves as Max Rockatansky or Eren Yeager but in reality work at a mall kiosk next to a build a bear and go home home and do nothing but play Xbox live
you mean chapo fans?
Damn, Peterson really does sound like Kermit the Frog!
Jordan and Rod should compare browser histories.
I saw a video of him in which, for some reason he'd taken off his shoes. And oh! His feet were so terribly SLENDER. It made me shudder for some reason. He makes me want to check the room for exits. That tearful display that you played was just wrong and made me think about those slender feet in his semi-fuzzy navy blue socks. I cannot stop shivering.
Suzy Q 😂😂😂
Pin this comment!
@@hayleygullett I know, right? Eeesh....
Is he still snorting benzos? I dunno if sober Peterson is going to be better or worse
Chapo trap house - into the peterson-verse.
Art by haplogroup, rofl.
"Everybody is silent... like they are now..." Um... I think think the word professor Peterson should have used was aghast.
felix does such a great jordan peterson voice lmao
Lobster Fucc Boi vs. Zizek, anyone going?
Yo!
I’m not paying $700 for it.
Is a quality recording confirmed available after? This is going to be epic for samples, especially if Zizek's condition is relatively under control. It was hard to understand him in one of the more recent clips i've seen. I hope he's doing ok
It takes me so long to tell where the impression ends and the real jay piss begins
WHY ELSE WOULD WE HAVE A NATIONAL/STATE BIRD OMG IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW
0:40 Toronto based psychologist and psychotic Jordan Peterson
get down in those salt mines, bucko
Private companies are supposed to be the guarantors of freedom? Wow. Talk about your Dunning-Kruger effect.
That quote at the beginning (Ive watched LOADS of Daddy JayPee videos, theyre fascinatingly coded) about who's capable of cruelty is just a stand-in for his feelings about WOMEN. "They SEEM to be better than us, but they're really not."
That's JayPee the Dark Professor in a nutshell, guys.
OMG I did not think of this, this is the most elaborate dogwistle ever. Holy moly. When they quoted him I wonderes: 'this is a wierd moral code, because a person incapable of cruelty is still morally right, even if this makes them the victim of the mor cruel.' *It all makes sense now.*
@@halfbloodprincess989 It's not that elaborate- t's just sneaky. It's pretty obvious to anyone with social skills ...which is very few of the american populace anymore due to toxins (Im serious about this btw) JayPee is a sneaky fuck who got dead rich offf his patreon
@@halfbloodprincess989 This man places no real value onto moral RIGHTness- as none of the right wing does. It's inherently feminine and bounding to them.They secretly loathe their own weakness, and project it onto the "Archetypal Feminine" ie Moral Codes.
Frozen had politics? 🤔🤨
Wow, what a deep thinker Peterson is.
I learned something today on how google works. Nice podcast.
Google's first big innovation of ranking based on how often a page was linked to spawned a whole industry of search engine optimisation, so _in a way_ they really are a jobs producer.
It's hilarious to me, the only one whose theories were more outlandish than Jung was Freud. I mean, they were great to lay the groundwork for Psychology and that's why they're still studied, but there's a reason their theories are pretty much discarded in modern Psychology and Psychiatry.
matt's impression just sounds like bane lmfao
The JP jokes and impersonations are fucking hilarious. Critiques are spot on as well.
22:49 the way felix says "of course we can" made me lose my shit for some reason
here's my advice for hyper-intellectual jordan peterson fans: stop it.
@@sam-xw2vf No really, you should stop it. You are commenting on multiple posts in the same thread saying basically nothing. Get some sleep.
@sam you need to get off UA-cam and make your bed bucko
Get some help.
Google JBPWave and understand nihilism
Peterson IS Darkwing Duck
Finally good clips
When they played that clip at the end I was convinced it was still Felix speaking...
Bordon Beterson totally Bowned
really upset that virtue busting never caught on as a phrase
Felix is a genius. A fucking treasure. Love
And I think to myself...what a logical world. I see ads of hominem, ad absurdum too...
Peterson's no king of logic. He's read a lot of people who were and he can regurgitate their arguments but Peterson is nothing more than a Jungian and there's fundamentally nothing logical about Jung. ;)
@@sam-xw2vf Logic is the sudy of reasoning and more importantly it's about the structure of your argument rather than the content.
Logic can be both inductive and deductive and both forms have assumptions and limits.
Jordan Peterson can't even get basic definitions and historical context right and then heavily misrepresents the arguments of his critics.
For instance, Marxists are modernist, not post modernists. Yet Person thinks others-wise despite ample evidence to the contrary.
In general, Jordan Peterson is one of the best examples of what he claims to rail against. A victim of naked ideology.
Stuck at being a Jungian, looking to level up. Who or what is next?
Asking for a friend.
@@BlackPhillip666 Jung was just a guy following the trend of the day of bilking wealthy neurotics of their cash.
He was all into alchemy and salvaging religious symbols.
He can probably be credited with popularizing the term, collective subconscious.
Jung offered little consistency or experimental evidence for anything he said or wrote.
As a scholar of various religions he was credible but as a scientist he didn't even try. At best he was a socialite, at worst he was a desperate fraud in an age il equipped to defend it's self from him.
If you're interested in modern psychology look into evolutionary psychology, neurophysiology, attachment theory and early childhood development as functional starting points.
Jungian psych is one step above believing in magic.
Jung not logical, Jung would agree. He was half insane. Really edgy folx who took a psych 101 class and think they "get" Jung but also take everything from Evopsych as dogma lmao. As a psychologist I can 100% assure you, the people in this field who view themselves as "logical" and "scientific" are the most dangerous ones.
Has anyone done a dive into (21:44) Ancient Egyptians worshipping the capacity to pay attention as the highest of gods? Sounds like a load of ol' lobsters.
I See Peterson Has Never Read The White Paper On Google's Search & Web Indexing Functions...
It all makes sense now
*Jordan Peterson ....... the Philosopher for disaffected young•men with messy rooms*
Dan 3•Arrows
Jordan Peterson talking about pregnant naruto is the greatest
It’s harrowing sometimes, listening to Felix ramble in search of a punchline
i wonder what his alprazolam level was in that clip.....
Jordan peterson is a benzo addict
A classic
Jordan=kermet+mickey
Professor of logic you say? I bet Jordan Peterson doesn't own a doghouse.
Jordan peterson fans have no problem with parody
#Chapo needs to cover Jordan Peterson VapeWave/Lofi hip hop
sex music to my ears. Real late night sesame street hours.
haha holy fuck that first quote
But lobsters _don't have_ shoulders.
I think it is a mistake to dismiss Jungian theory, psychology and philosophy.
It is true that Jung was easily appropriated in the past. Such as hippies dancing in the woods waiting for the dawning of the Age of Aquarius and other weird appropriations. But these are merely appropriations.
The real aspects of Jungian theory are well founded in psychology and some aspects now have scientific backing such as the Freudian Jungian emphasis on transference.
And the idea of reclaiming the shadow is a really important idea as well.
I don’t particularly like Peterson’s appropriation because he neglects to talk about the underlying idea of archetypes and uses Jungian ideas as mystification for his political ideas.
It would be like using Chomsky’s idea of universal language theory and then claiming that English is the best universal language.
Jung himself took great pains to make a distinction between Völkergedanken (Folk ideas) from Elementargedanken (elementary ideas).
The same idea is parallel to Chomsky’s theory. The abstract grammatical mechanisms are not the same as the mechanics of a specific language merely a variation.
A similar idea is put fourth by George Lakoff. There are basic metaphorical Schemas that have various applications in different languages.
I would also add that I was deeply afraid of Peterson’s appropriation. Largely because I saw it as a powerful conservative tool, we will see if it gains more ground but has had an effect already.
Jungian therapist themselves have a habit of being socially apolitical because their role essentially transcends politics. But most Jungians that I have met are left and liberal.
But as for as politics is concerned psychology itself is a very powerful tool. In the past Marcuse married Marxism with Freudian psychology. And Paul Goodman a left pacifist activist created Gestalt therapy with Fritz Pearls who was trained by Reich. Marcuse and Goodman were powerful figures in the 1960‘s left movement and helped make a few progressive sweeping changes and transformations of thinking.
I think the left will wither without a much better psychological or philosophical vision. What the Left has now is an irrational fragile and divisive identity based politics which recreates a new tribal factionalism which can easily be usurped by neoliberalism and does not truly unify people toward common ends.
The left will loose if it can not respond with its own psychological philosophical understanding. Gabor is a Marxist psychologist who is offering a little bit of this.
If you have ever had to work in a group and resolve group conflict towards positive ends you will know what I am talking about.
Right now the left has the old idea of creating cooperatives, if there is no sophisticated group psychology married to personal individuating development the Left will fail miserably with this idea. It will merely become a pipe dream.
Instead many on the Left revert to merely rational cynicism which obviously hasn’t worked very well.
It offers virtually nothing in the face of real human concerns and necessities.
Jung was a hack
Matthew kopp thanks for writing that really appreciate it.
"I don't want people to have doo doo ass" -JBP, probably
There's a lot more they don't understand. Like how to use their brains.
oh gawwwd, dr orrin amitay is one of those "doctors" who shills for TERF arguments.
I lmao'd at the mpreg naruto joke
Don't hate me cuz I'm logical
Anyone else get a trump ad before the video started???
I did too. UA-cam completely panders to the right wing.
peterson turned me into vlad dracul
Iraqi dinar
trying to grasp what this channel is about. I don't get it
The Rosa Parks or pro nouns...? I just...i cant... (Head explodes)