Manosphere Jordan Peterson - Internet Daddy Simulator, Post-modern Anti-postmodernist, Canadian Psychology Professor, Depressed, Got Hooked on Benzos

Drunk and Pour

kiwifarms.net
I just finished the podcast/youtube video. I'm drunk, and it's almost 6am.

I'm glad he isn't a vegetable. He started out speaking slow, but over time he started sounding kind of normal. This actually seemed like Peterson eventually started interviewing his daughter. One thing I noticed was he would mention Mikhaila's husband Andre, but barely mentioned his son by name or rarely mentioned his wife when it came to decisions. Mikaila seemed to be on defense. Maybe that's what it's like to be Peterson's offspring, or maybe he sees his daughter becoming a thot.

I don't know. I'm glad he isn't brain dead and getting better.
 

MirnaMinkoff

Mama, nobody sends you a turd and expects to live.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
He got on benzos because of the severe allergic reaction, at least according to the story, and couldn't sleep for about 3 weeks (doesn't mean he didn't get any sleep whatsoever, it means he couldn't get proper sleep) which on its own could lead to all kinds of issues.
News that his wife almost certainly going to die soon because of cancer caught him in that condition, already weakened and stressed.

You're being really unfair here. You aren't willing to listen to his own explanation, yet cast final judgement anyway based on preconceived notions.
No proper sleep for three whole weeks? The horror! Mother’s of newborn babies get no proper sleep for three months all the way to two years and don’t eat fistfuls of Xanax to cope. Three weeks of bad sleep ain’t shit.


Kind of reminds me of William S. Burroughs and his son being in the same room and there's this void between them.
William Burroughs actually murdered his son’s mother and they were pretty much estranged the rest of his childhood, so a huge void is to be expected

Jr didn’t drag Sr all over the place trying to cure his junkiedom while pimping diet products. Nor did they pretend to have a super close relationship that didn’t exist for a public audience.

The performative father -daughter relationship that Mahkalia and Jordan put online is creepy. I’m not saying they aren’t close or don’t have a bond, but they obviously think they have to perform a certain type of relationship for the public audience which is why it is odd and weird.
 

BrunoMattei

No I am not the Cinema Snob
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
No proper sleep for three whole weeks? The horror! Mother’s of newborn babies get no proper sleep for three months all the way to two years and don’t eat fistfuls of Xanax to cope. Three weeks of bad sleep ain’t shit.



William Burroughs actually murdered his son’s mother and they were pretty much estranged the rest of his childhood, so a huge void is to be expected

Jr didn’t drag Sr all over the place trying to cure his junkiedom while pimping diet products. Nor did they pretend to have a super close relationship that didn’t exist for a public audience.

The performative father -daughter relationship that Mahkalia and Jordan put online is creepy. I’m not saying they aren’t close or don’t have a bond, but they obviously think they have to perform a certain type of relationship for the public audience which is why it is odd and weird.
JR also alleged that one of his father's friends raped him when he visited him in Tangiers.
 

Rekkington

Obama chuckled. "You mean the chaos emeralds?"
kiwifarms.net
And struggles to find words. Not in the vague intellectual sense, he seems to have almost forgotten a lot of words.
He always did that though, even back when it started he would often pause and search for words. He was known for his pregnant pauses even when asked a question.
If there is brain damage I think it would make him think way slower or perhaps effect memory, not limit one's vocabulary.

Yeah, that end is really awkward. There's something weird about a guy thanking his daughter to have the talk with him. And there is something really strange about her relief at the end to, when she says "thank god".
I know there's a lot of shit to talk about Peterson and this situation, but this is clearly just him getting emotional thinking about the past year. He tapped his chair and paused to collect himself, he has done this in more than one video in the past. His wife is dying and he had an insane health scare and he had like 5 years straight of constant insanity, if we drill down into every pupil dilation this is just gonna be a den of spergs.
"Thank you for speaking with me" is a pleasantry guys, he's saying it to the host of a show not his actual daughter.

In terms of Maps of Meaning, you're right, and having your Magnum Opus is fine - but fuck me wouldn't it be nice if he said something new. He spent the three years of notoriety he had saying the same shit over and over again, except from when he got on stage to chat shit about the Bible.
He did say something new, that was 12 Rules for Life which, unfortunately, might end up what he is known for. But that was like a new album and he went on a big album tour. Like I said before, the real problem with Peterson is he signed on with a talent agency who manicured his image, gave him a uniform, and gave him a strategy to interface with the mainstream media. What we saw for the past, what, 4 years was a publicity campaign.

Maps of Meaning is unironically very well written, properly researched, and extremely interesting if you're into that sort of thing. No it's not a completely new breakthrough avenue of thought, but most academic work isn't.

I wish he would get back to that stuff and mention Jung less, there's a whole universe of mythology and psychology you can delve into and explain the value of narratives on a culture. He made back on a gender disillusioned by both MRAs and Feminists and that's worth noting, but I do think it's interesting how the entire "intellectual dark web" seems silent on the issue. That's something I'd like to know more about. Peterson was arguably the star of that weird micro-movement, possibly more pop culture appeal than Sam Harris and equal to Rogan. And he's just a non-person for the past couple years.
 
Last edited:

Elescondio20

kiwifarms.net
How many weeks of insomnia would make it a reasonable excuse, exactly?



It doesn't matter if he isn't, because he's dealing with that reality.
He always did that though, even back when it started he would often pause and search for words. He was known for his pregnant pauses even when asked a question.
If there is brain damage I think it would make him think way slower or perhaps effect memory, not limit one's vocabulary.



I know there's a lot of shit to talk about Peterson and this situation, but this is clearly just him getting emotional thinking about the past year. He tapped his chair and paused to collect himself, he has done this in more than one video in the past. His wife is dying and he had an insane health scare and he had like 5 years straight of constant insanity, if we drill down into every pupil dilation this is just gonna be a den of spergs.
"Thank you for speaking with me" is a pleasantry guys, he's saying it to the host of a show not his actual daughter.



He did say something new, that was 12 Rules for Life which, unfortunately, might end up what he is known for. But that was like a new album and he went on a big album tour. Like I said before, the real problem with Peterson is he signed on with a talent agency who manicured his image, gave him a uniform, and gave him a strategy to interface with the mainstream media. What we saw for the past, what, 4 years was a publicity campaign.

Maps of Meaning is unironically very well written, properly researched, and extremely interesting if you're into that sort of thing. No it's not a completely new breakthrough avenue of thought, but most academic work isn't.

I wish he would get back to that stuff and mention Jung less, there's a whole universe of mythology and psychology you can delve into and explain the value of narratives on a culture. He made back on a gender disillusioned by both MRAs and Feminists and that's worth noting, but I do think it's interesting how the entire "intellectual dark web" seems silent on the issue. That's something I'd like to know more about. Peterson was arguably the star of that weird micro-movement, possibly more pop culture appeal than Sam Harris and equal to Rogan. And he's just a non-person for the past couple years.
That's because it wasnt a real movement , just the middle age fantasy of the Weinstein brothers....Can we talk about them for a second? those guy probably the result of extreme cuddling and parents telling them they were ultra special.... because they both act as if they were the main character of the universe... it's so cringy
 

nohull

Sorry for party ooperating.
kiwifarms.net
Also he apparently subbed Benzos for Ketamine, somewhere down the line, because the former exacerbated his anxiety. Maybe not the best idea, to swap anti anxiety meds for horse tranqs.

The good Doctor really jumped down the k-hole :stress:

Just say neigh, Doctor Peterson.

Good to hear from him though. From the horses mouth, if you will.
Ketamine is a dirty drug, which means it's extremely complex, unpredictable and can mess with a lot of stuff. What was he even thinking.
Hitchens was fucking based.

Bush was a fucking moron that was only president because nepotism, the average American is undoubly smarter than him, and I don't think the average American is particularly smart. You may find being that vulgar and arrogant based, I find it pathetic and cheap.
His daughter is pretty cute.

Neg-rate me, I give no fucks about your stickers.
But you care about this one, don't you mister Too Much Information?
1593941182471.png
 
Last edited:

Mr E. Grifter

Suits me.
kiwifarms.net

An interesting take on Peterson's benzo addiction and recovery, highlights some of the oddities of the account by Peterson of his benzo problem.
 

Elescondio20

kiwifarms.net
Bret Weinstein & his wife are way more sympathetic than Eric Weinstein & Benzos Lobsterson. Bret doesn't act like he is the center of the universe, quite the opposite.
Bret: In his first rogan podcast Bret talks about how he knows how to defeat the "system" but of course he can't talk about it because the "system" will try to stop him.... i'm prettt sure he is jewish so this aint about the JQ.
Eric: He is the easiest to mock...why ? Because aparently he found the theory of everything! yes the thing scientist have been looking for since the beggining of time!
But of course he can't publish, because scientist are mean or some shit... he won't stop bragging about tho and bitching about how string theory it's postmodern on twitter
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Lemmingwise

GranDuke

kiwifarms.net
I thought for a while that Bret was okay dude, but I watched last Rogan/Bret podcast and I think that he is pretty much same as his brother, he just has better personality and is not as obnoxious.

Couple of highlights:
Rogan and Bret basically claimed that Bret correctly predicted that SJW shit is going to spread out of universities and nobody believed him, but these recent riots totally justify him. Yes Bret, nobody else has said that in last few decades, that was uniquely your take.
Then at the end they talked a bit about lab rats "problem" and how literally everyone is hiding the truth. I think it is as "suspect" as Eric's physics theory, but once again, he is way less obnoxious about it.

As for Peterson, at this point it is probably good news that he can talk and form a sentence.
 

Harbinger of Kali Yuga

Because the world is SO BAD, like diet soda.
kiwifarms.net
I thought for a while that Bret was okay dude, but I watched last Rogan/Bret podcast and I think that he is pretty much same as his brother, he just has better personality and is not as obnoxious.

Couple of highlights:
Rogan and Bret basically claimed that Bret correctly predicted that SJW shit is going to spread out of universities and nobody believed him, but these recent riots totally justify him. Yes Bret, nobody else has said that in last few decades, that was uniquely your take.
Then at the end they talked a bit about lab rats "problem" and how literally everyone is hiding the truth. I think it is as "suspect" as Eric's physics theory, but once again, he is way less obnoxious about it.

As for Peterson, at this point it is probably good news that he can talk and form a sentence.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that has the Weinsteins rub him off the wrong way. The "intellectual black hole" (a better term for "intellectual dark web") are in agreement with me with so much yet I feel zero camaraderie with them because they're such utter fart sniffers. They're a clique, and I despise cliques. The Weinsteins come off as smug fart-huffers. Just like Sam Harris. A lot of these "idea people" desperately get off on the "image" of the intellectual and try to adhere to it.

"The Intellectual Dark Web," what a fucking joke. Reminds me of "New Atheists," and that term was a dumb invention by Wired magazine as there was nothing new about them, we were just witnessing the downfall of the religious right and other than the new-kid-on-the-block Sam Harris the others (Dawkins, Hitchens, Dennett) were around a long time saying what they were saying. (Of the four Sam Harris has always been the one I like the least). Their arguments weren't new (nor did they need to be; I largely agree with them), it was just a dumb phrase. But unlike the Intellectual Black Hole, the "New Atheists" didn't style themselves as such and it was almost rightly viewed as a pejorative. The Intellectual Black Hole are just people that go on each other's podcasts and youtube channels to say the same things or react predictably. The so-called "New Atheists" sort of won in the end as they were the nail in the Religious Rights' coffin. However, by sealing away the RR a demon was unwittingly released from the bowels of hell--the Woke Left. And associated with the "New Atheists" was the burgeoning skeptic movement, not the Sargon of Akkad shit but the James Randi stuff, and the Woke Left RESOUNDINGLY destroyed that movement. Destroyed the JREF forums, took away all the wind from investigating pseudoscience and con artists and instead focused on woke politics instead, derisively calling true skepticism "bigfoot skepticism" (not wholly unmerited, a lot of members of the JREF forums got off on pointing out the obvious and debunking stuff that nobody really was ever going to believe) .

The old guard of intellectuals were so much better than the current crop. Sam Harris is a very hit or miss guy but he's nothing in comparison to Dawkins or Dennett. Now we have ramblers like the Weinsteins and people like Dave Rubin and other talking heads who may or may not be nice guys, but they just don't have a lot to say and aren't doing serious intellectual work against these people.

Now, back to JBP. How is that relevant? I disagree on JBP's intellectual outlook. Psychology as a field is actually pretty mysterious to people looking in from the outside, and that's why there are so many misconceptions about it, and often times it's psychology's own fault. Yes, psychology is a science, and yes, a lot of it is bad science for various reasons; ethical concerns in experimental protocols, bad theories, bad statistics, even politics, and so on, and people like JBP contribute to the public perception that psychology is claptrap. JBP adheres to the psychodynamic/psychoanalytic school of psychology, and it's kind of remarkable JBP even exists; out of all psychologists to become famous the way he has, one of the few remaining psychoanalytic psychologists gets the spotlight. For the uninitiated, that's the Freudian-based school of psychology. Modern psychology sort of lacks a school, or at least when contrasted to past schools of psychology it's called "cognitive-behavioral psychology," or maybe there's also "biological psychology", though psychological instruction frequently sucks and these schools really aren't mutually exclusive at all anymore. But anyway, modern psychology owes a lot to the John Watson and BF Skinner behaviorism, and though you will be taught that cognitive psychology overthrew behaviorism, in reality cognitive psychology is in many ways just an elaboration, clarification, extension, and and revision of behaviorism to be less strict and adhere less to the dogmas of the now dead philosophical movement of Logical Positivism.

I bring all this up because one accusation against JBP I keep seeing about him bothers me: he's not a grifter and he's not a con man. I'm familiar with a lot of his ideas. His arguments on religion actually adhere to some unnamed-school of religious thinking I used to run into back in my internet atheism adventures; the Stephen J. Gouldian Non-Overlapping Magisteria-type of argument where "religion" and "god" are given such wishy-washy incoherent definitions where discussion is impossible. It's not deliberately intellectually dishonest, it's just muddled thinking, I've seen JBP criticize Dawkins about Dawkins attacking a caricature of God that nobody believes, but in fact if you have read Dawkins's books (JBP clearly hadn't before speaking) Dawkins repeatedly addresses exactly this and has rightly defined god as a "creative divine intelligence" (or something of the sort). Since JBP is unable to provide a definition of what god is, I think he should stop the discussion there. His thinking is merely muddled. But it's all tied up in his "metaphor-this, meaning-that" psychodynamic-inspired worldview. You have to sort of understand some of the literary tradition behind some of the psychoanalytic type of thinking to see where JBP is coming from. That doesn't make it any less bogus, but JBP is not just running his mouth out of nothing for the sake of it.

It's true he tried to make a name for himself, but if you've watched him talk and interact with others, he's personable and authentic to himself (yeah, that's some gay phrasing, I know) and the dude is clearly just a depressed man that is lonely, blackpilled, and probably wanting an intellectual legacy to survive him after he goes so he can be remembered. Compare to the SJW woke left whom are almost all grifters by definition--they talk about vulnerability and weakness but only show their fangs and claws to other people and never actually demonstrate real emotional weakness to other people, because they're soulless sociopaths. JBP starts crying when he thinks about the hell horror that is coming. We've all laughed at the screenshots but I've cried like that too because I'm also depressed and I see the same dark omens he does. I may not really respect a lot of his intellectual program, but I can oppose JBP without thinking too ill of the man himself. Unlike his opponents he actually acts human.

Being familiar with the background of JBP's thinking and ideas I can't believe he's merely tried to make a buck and aggrandize himself.

Anyway this rant got longer than I expected so I'm spoilering it.
 

StraightShooter2

kiwifarms.net
This guy's videos are boring and unoriginal, and he seems to be a prime magnet for spergs.

If people are interested in any of the "topics", they should just read a book (e.x. the entire works of Carl Jung are available as ebooks or in online libraries) instead of watching this cash-cow; but his target audience are ADHD people who don't want to read anything longer than the title of a Youtube video.
 

Nathan Higgers

You can call me Nate.
kiwifarms.net
This guy's videos are boring and unoriginal, and he seems to be a prime magnet for spergs.

If people are interested in any of the "topics", they should just read a book (e.x. the entire works of Carl Jung are available as ebooks or in online libraries) instead of watching this cash-cow; but his target audience are ADHD people who don't want to read anything longer than the title of a Youtube video.
Not sure which of his videos you're referring to, but the videos of his university lectures are quite good.
Sure, you can learn lots of things by just reading books, there is just that slight problem of some topics being a bit too complex and hence needing someone to explain them to you... You know, basically the whole reason people go to school and whatnot.
 

CapeKnight

kiwifarms.net
I've got a question regarding Peterson's fascination with Jung for those who are more familiar with that particular subject, but why is it that people like Peterson are drawn to Jungian thinking, and why was it discarded in modern Psychology? I know it's been relegated more towards being useful in terms of literary tools and what not, but what exactly about it isn't applicable in the field itself? Is it because it's hard to prove?

I've had something akin to more than a passing interest in Psychology itself, and Jungian thinking was one of those things that really puzzled me and I've always wanted to know more about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPX5kzy

In Rainbows

kiwifarms.net
I've got a question regarding Peterson's fascination with Jung for those who are more familiar with that particular subject, but why is it that people like Peterson are drawn to Jungian thinking, and why was it discarded in modern Psychology? I know it's been relegated more towards being useful in terms of literary tools and what not, but what exactly about it isn't applicable in the field itself? Is it because it's hard to prove?

I've had something akin to more than a passing interest in Psychology itself, and Jungian thinking was one of those things that really puzzled me and I've always wanted to know more about it.
Jungian thought, much like Freudian thought, is touchy feely and appeals to the common man because of it.

It was discarded in the psychology because psychology moved towards a medical, evidence based model. It's now less about theory and more about science, and Jung fails hilariously when analyzed under that light.