He didn’t call those sessions therapy- which raises the question of whether he’s actually licensed to provide psychological services. It’s not listed on his LinkedIn page.
5 Likes
Um citation needed. I got a friend across the way from me that’s got a degree in anthropology. I’m pretty sure he’ll laugh if I tell him this. I’m sorry but until you and Pete compile an exhaustive list of evidence of such mythologies spanning the globe I’m just not going to believe either of you. I say this as a big nerd for things like Gnosticism and mythologies in general. I’ve never seen anyone characterize the feminine as “chaos” in Ancient Chinese mythologies or that of other mythologies out of Ancient Egypt. Even there the roles of the harbinger and/or bringer of chaos flips depending on the time frame. Sometimes it’s a god, sometimes it’s a goddess, sometimes it’s a beast, sometimes it’s something else altogether. There’s no guaranteed solid pattern in any mythology even within the same cultural group when it comes down to it. So I can’t imagine how the heck you or Peterson think you got a grand narrative to work from (hint: you don’t).
Eehh, no. He doesn’t understand the Nazis by any stretch. They weren’t anymore “evil” than the Allies as the US had similar eugenics laws as Germany enacted along with the Holocaust (news flash, it was inspired by what the US did to the Native Americans). Hitler and company were driven by an ideology that was taken to its logical end which requires total war against one’s perceived enemy. They didn’t cook up the Holocaust at the start but it was inevitable as many records (letters, communiques, etc) show. To Hitler, killing off every Jew was the end goal of his war plans. Holding resources for his newly minted empire was just the icing on the cake. If you want a good summary of this stuff look up Three Arrows’ video on Youtube.
13 Likes
^ This. I’m really tired of seeing people try to dress up their religious beliefs as some kind of ur-mythology (use to do it myself when I was introduced to Gnosticism). It’s not to say that cultural groups don’t share common myths or oral traditions but that these aren’t going to be world spanning by any stretch. And those that seem universal such as your mother/child motifs are so simple that they’re more about being human than being some complex set of values (humans have babies, sometimes mom takes care of babies, sometimes it’s grandma/pa/etc). There’s not much in that field to my knowledge that archaeologists or anthropologists bother to research anymore. It’s a fallow research area.
12 Likes
Please do not post walls of text or links here (or any other topic). They do not contribute to the conversation.
10 Likes
Dude… refrain from including me when defending your own specious arguments.
12 Likes
Mythologies are only as reliable as poetry or as other literary works of art. Art that inspired people in the past can be obselete today. Even art that includes universal themes isn’t neccesarily informative, because beliefs, values and social conventions change.
Religious myths are fictions. Even if they describe true universal human experiences, they can only reflect our ever-changing ideals about what should be done. They can’t be called truth about humanity because they are imagined allegories about true human experience, not universally agreed upon morals or provable facts. Stories of ideals might motivate us to pursue them, but at the end of the day, they are still just stories.
Recognizing this isn’t giving anything up. Storytelling is profound and it does benefit humanity, but using old stories to justify old, outdated ideals is hardly original or groundbreaking.
Modern fictions are also not “true”. The difference is that we don’t pretend that they aren’t products of our imaginations.
Edit: words
14 Likes
It’s tiring to always have the exact same arguments with the same sorts of people whenever Peterson is mentioned. Tiresome because nothing happens; no posters experience epiphanies, no deep truths are uncovered, and no alteration to status quo is achieved.
As an ex-Branhamite myself, I can see that the tactics and patterns of Branhamites and Peterson followers are exactly the same. Both hold their man to be a prophet restoring ancient truths. Both see their prophets as bulwarks against a world in moral decay, a world undermined by feminists feminine chaos. Both argue that one cannot legitimately criticize these prophets without consuming all of said prophet’s works first.
A great resource examining and refuting Branham’s auto-biography is located here.
JBP’s delusional, frightened mindset is quite self-evident. I wish his subscribers could see his fundamental lack of insight. I wish they could see the harm he and his devotees cause. I wish they could see him as the misogynistic, hateful asshole he is.
There’s no productive conversation to be had with regards to Peterson. There’s no point in further commiseration.
'ta.
===================================================
This has been yet another bloody post, and hopefully the last one I have to ever write on the topic of the worst Canadian psychologist. I’m tinoesroho, you can find me wasting time on github here: tinoesroho (austin) · GitHub
8 Likes
Or Kek might be a more apt example.
3 Likes
To say nothing of the fact that you still don’t know what Jungian archetypes are, Jungian archetypes don’t make predictions. Seriously?
As for the endless ramblings of @tinoesroho;
His claims have been addressed by far more patient and eloquent writers, in depth and at length. Whether it’s him banging on about how Jungian Archetypes are the key to mystic truths (see his rants about Egyptian artwork depicting a DNA helix) or his fundamentally unverifiable psycho-analytical meandering diagrams, to his vast conspiracy of Post Modern Neo Marxists coming to unleash the Chaos Dragon and destroy Western Civilization, everything he’s ever said has been dissected and debunked.
As of this moment, nothing he’s said has been analyzed and debunked. Like, at all. PZ Myers is as unfamiliar as anyone on the left when it comes to anything JP says, and thus has no idea what Jungian archetypes are. Thus, his ‘response’ to what JP is saying about witches and the double helix simply betrays his ignorances regarding anything JP is talking about. This equally applies to the rest of what you said. Strangely, I look, but I yet to actually find Peterson lay out a theory with a response argument. Where on God’s Earth are the ‘dissections’ of Peterson’s theory, rather than dishonest attempts of isolating quotes and 30 second snippets from his videos (cough, PZ Myers) to “debunk” them?
Quite frankly, I think I’m going to ignore tino in my future replies. I can’t think of a more lazy and unsuccessful attempt to address any word coming out of JP. We’ve earlier heard tino defend the claim that JP is an alt-right nazi, followed by my crushing refutations of it here and here. Tino is interested in ideology, not conversation.
Um citation needed. I got a friend across the way from me that’s got a degree in anthropology. I’m pretty sure he’ll laugh if I tell him this. I’m sorry but until you and Pete compile an exhaustive list of evidence of such mythologies spanning the globe I’m just not going to believe either of you. I say this as a big nerd for things like Gnosticism and mythologies in general. I’ve never seen anyone characterize the feminine as “chaos” in Ancient Chinese mythologies or that of other mythologies out of Ancient Egypt.
Hmm. This sounds like a genuinely asked question, so I’ll assume it is. Your friend wont actually laugh, of course, and it’s strange you’ve never heard of this in Chinese mythologies even though I’ve explained it earlier at least twice on this thread so far. Now, JP’s academic publications have garnered over 10,000 citations and his 1999 book Maps of Meaning contains more information about the chaos/feminine and order/masculie duality, and this book was published by one of the most reputable academic publishers. Anyways, as I wrote earlier, “fundamental mythology” isn’t something that appears hundreds of times in various mythologies. It’s a term that just means a mythology that represents a true archetype. In Chinese philosophy, this is symbolized by the yin and yang. The yin represents chaos, and the feminine, whereas the yang represents order, and the masculine. It’s explained here by the Ancient History Encyclopedia. Man, it’s even mentioned in this Huffington Post article before JP was famous (as in when facts about mythology were not yet wrongthink).
I’m a history buff, but my ‘buff’ is mostly in Jewish, Christian and Roman history, so I too didn’t know about this when JP mentioned it. But I must make some qualifiers. For one, ‘feminine’ here isn’t the same as ‘an actual female’, as JP explains in this video. Secondly, ‘chaos’ isn’t the same as ‘mayhem’ in this characterization. It’s not a bad thing at all. It simply represents the unknown, that which is unfamiliar to us. If anything, JP lauds ‘order’ with some pretty negative things himself, JP explains that the archetype of the tyrannical king in the tower and concentration camps belong to ‘order’. In short, this is not JP’s personal theory, it’s well known and he just accepted it, and it has absolutely zero to do with degradation of the feminine itself. JP thinks order and chaos are both necessary to undergo the ‘heroic path’ of mythology, as we must live our lives on the fine line separating order and chaos.
Eehh, no. He doesn’t understand the Nazis by any stretch. They weren’t anymore “evil” than the Allies as the US had similar eugenics laws as Germany enacted along with the Holocaust (news flash, it was inspired by what the US did to the Native Americans). Hitler and company were driven by an ideology that was taken to its logical end which requires total war against one’s perceived enemy. They didn’t cook up the Holocaust at the start but it was inevitable as many records (letters, communiques, etc) show. To Hitler, killing off every Jew was the end goal of his war plans. Holding resources for his newly minted empire was just the icing on the cake. If you want a good summary of this stuff look up Three Arrows’ video on Youtube.
Sorry, but what you say here fails to actually respond to a word JP says, or actually show JP doesn’t understand the nazis. JP, of course, enormously understands the nazis and has been lecturing about them in Harvard and the University of Toronto for decades. The nazis, of course, were far more evil than the Allies. Simply having eugenics doesn’t make you equivalent to people willing to incinerate millions of people in gas chambers because they fail to belong to the correct Aryan race. That’s not what JP said – though I’m pretty sure he thinks it since it’s obvious. But just know I won’t take serious any claim about the Nazi’s being not any more evil than the Allies.
1 Like
Dude… refrain from including me when defending your own specious arguments.
I’m still waiting for your demonstration that anything I said is ‘specious’. I haven’t forgotten your misunderstanding of JP where you claimed that JP said we somehow should only exist with order and not chaos, and tried to rebut this by pointing out it’s a duality. Turned out, if you haven’t forgotten, that JP knows it’s a duality and that was his entire point – we need both the order and the chaos, and to live our lives on the fine line between them. And if you want me disincluded from my comments, avoid saying things that actually agree with JP but you don’t really want known out loud around … ugh … here.
Mythologies are only as reliable as poetry or as other literary works of art. Art that inspired people in the past can be obselete today. Even art that includes universal themes isn’t neccesarily informative, because beliefs, values and social conventions change.
Of course, that’s what is intuitive. The problem, of course, is that this presuppositional idea that ancient mythologies are without value, is the entire thing Peterson was demonstrating to be wrong in his magnitudinous 1999 monograph Maps of Meaning, which has now been cited hundreds of times in his field and receives comments like it being a “brilliant enlargement of our understanding of human motivation…a beautiful work” from Sheldon White of Harvard University. Dan Blazer in the American Journal of Psychiatry says that Maps of Meaning is;
“…not a book to be abstracted and summarized. Rather, it should be read at leisure (although it is anything but light reading) and employed as a stimulus and reference to expand one’s own maps of meaning”
You continue;
Even if they describe true universal human experiences, they can only reflect our ever-changing ideals about what should be done
This kind of mistake can be easily forgiven, because here’s the point: JP tries to get to the bottom of archetypes that are true of our pscyhobiological realities. These ‘true archetypes’ remain true of us, the individuals that make up our society, and who we are, regardless of our time. Alexander Blum, who is on the left, excellently summarizes JP’s argument:
Peterson’s argument is simple: repeated cultural symbols, in large part, represent aspects of our psychobiological nature, and many of these symbols have been expressed universally across cultures through myths, legends and archetypes. Such symbols may include the snake swallowing its own tail (chaos) and the heroic individual (the Self emerging out of chaos). This Jungian work may be difficult to read, and to validate empirically, but it is not subjective mist. Its basic assumptions derive from neuroscience, evolutionary biology and developmental psychology. Unlike postmodern thought, Peterson’s work is built on synthesising what we know from the behavioural sciences with the vast accumulated record of mythological story-telling and what these stories tell us about human nature. It is an ambitious project that no other public intellectual has dared to provide in an age that is exhausted and cynical of grand narratives.
No wonder JP’s new book has sold a million copies in half a year, and it’s still #1 on Amazon whereas Milo Yiannoupoulos’s book is already forgotten. Milo’s book is a political diatribe. Peterson’s book is a long lasting work which is the product of decades of scholarship which is about something he’s found of humanity itself. When you say “Recognizing this isn’t giving anything up. Storytelling is profound and it does benefit humanity, but using old stories to justify old, outdated ideals is hardly original or groundbreaking”, you just reflect you don’t know a word of what JP is saying. This is because your information comes from reading a few, well, hit pieces about him in the media from the perspective that he’s an enemy, not an ally. Once you forget about these ‘media’ articles and watch his lectures, such as the one at HowToAcademy, you’ll realize there’s something that the media hasn’t told you. Start here, this is an older video.
2 Likes
Feel free to hold your breath indefinitely.
10 Likes
Yeah, that’s not a problem.
Quoting positive book reviews…really?
Suffice it to say that’s hardly a rebuttal to my point that mythologies are not reliable or factual.
They are not true of our psychological realities. You and JP can wish as hard as you like, but that is an utterly baseless claim.
Referencing a Quillete opinion piece is just as bad. The whole site is Conservative Liberatarian pablum dressed up as edgy intellectualism, ala JP.
You didn’t address any of my actual points.
Edit: spelling.
12 Likes
This conversation long went past the point of debating the article or interview, and devolved into posters challenging each others semantics or another pedantry.
