|
White Dude who Likes Jordan Peterson is going to whine about how the left doesn't get humour. I know this because he previously edited the reply to say it was sarcasm lmao.
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:49 |
|
|
Rutibex posted:JP isn't a philosopher. he is a preacher for atheists He… he is overtly Christian what in the gently caress are you talking about?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
don't think I'm going to put this one in my Epic Goon DESTROYS Triggered Goon collection
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
Long-Time Lurker posted:White Dude who Likes Jordan Peterson is going to whine about how the left doesn't get humour. I know this because he previously edited the reply to say it was sarcasm lmao. Sarcasm or not, he's a garbage person and in my opinion, he's disqualified himself from participating meaningfully in the discussion. At this point, any and all replies to him should just be telling him that he's garbage and he should stay away from other people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
Hamburger Sandwich posted:I'm not sure what your looking for here. Like he's a reactionary and they are popular for a numerous of reasons many of which have been developed by some of the thinkers you mentioned before. The one you mentioned, that people are reacting to the "death of god/metaphysics" has been around forever man. amazing post btw
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:01
|
|
|
Dang It Bhabhi! posted:He… he is overtly Christian what in the gently caress are you talking about? he presents himself as a scientist and intellectual when presenting christian ideas. so i guess what im saying isn't that he is a preacher "for atheism" but he is "a preacher who is trying to appeal to atheists" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGoRFbNg0RU
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:don't think I'm going to put this one in my Epic Goon DESTROYS Triggered Goon collection I'm so triggered that I changed colors and shot a bunch of ink everywhere in an attempt to confuse and evade Oolp's searing retort.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
must be hard thinking you're a Big Strong Boy and that nobody wants to help anyone else
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:05
|
|
|
Powerful Katrinka posted:Sarcasm or not, he's a garbage person and in my opinion, he's disqualified himself from participating meaningfully in the discussion. At this point, any and all replies to him should just be telling him that he's garbage and he should stay away from other people. Oh totally. Was just guessing which predictable route the garbage person would go after this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
I love Jordan Peterson
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:19
|
|
|
Long-Time Lurker posted:Oh totally. Was just guessing which predictable route the garbage person would go after this. Yeah, you and I are on the same wavelength. I'm just replying ahead of time to the inevitable, and making it clear that it's just as stupid and indefensible if it was sincere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:19
|
|
|
My room isn't clean
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
BIG BABY JESUS posted:My room isn't clean I'll clean it for u
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
I love Jordan Peterson and can't stop cleaning rooms
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
Lil Swamp Booger Baby posted:I'll clean it for u uurgghhhooooaaggghhhh? helping, people? that's not the conservative way! begone, dragon of chaos (feminine)
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:27
|
|
|
Lil Swamp Booger Baby posted:I love Jordan Peterson and can't stop cleaning rooms hey fellas get a load of this beta!
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:32
|
|
|
When is Jordan Peterson going to remind his followers to wipe their rear end too
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:35
|
|
|
When is Jordan Peterson going to make a sequel to Grandma's Boy
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:36
|
|
|
drink WATER
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:36
|
|
|
Private Cumshoe posted:When is Jordan Peterson going to remind his followers to wipe their rear end too Thats gay though
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:55
|
|
|
Oolb posted:Wow I like how what you all took from that is that I'm a White Dude who Likes Jordan Peterson. Congrats on continuing to be insufferable nerds but that's not fair because at least nerds loving read between the lines. Oh okay I'm sorry. I was "arguing in bad faith". I should have "read the room". I'm sorry this space wasn't safe for you and that this has obviously upset you greatly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:56
|
|
|
Private Cumshoe posted:When is Jordan Peterson going to remind his followers to wipe their rear end too You should do what other people do, unless you have a very good reason not to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:00
|
|
|
Lil Swamp Booger Baby posted:With arms wide open - Creed my own prison is a good song. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
Marie Kondo is the Jordan Peterson of um uh basketball
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:04
|
|
|
Lil Swamp Booger Baby posted:I'll clean it for u that's communism and JBP hates you for it
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
a white dude into jorp? i don't believe you
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
How many times do you think he pooped and peed himself in the benzo coma
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Soapy_Bumslap posted:How many times do you think he pooped and peed himself in the benzo coma I bet he gets those really backed up with Oreos and pork rind style farts that are all like FANK FANK FANK FANK FANK when they come out
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
Soapy_Bumslap posted:How many times do you think he pooped and peed himself in the benzo coma Some say he is still shidding and farding and pissing himself to this day
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
Robo Reagan posted:where jorp steal the clip art of the chaos dragon
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 01:49
|
|
|
BIG BABY JESUS posted:must be hard thinking you're a Big Strong Boy and that nobody wants to help anyone else This bit of projection is probably the most disconcerting part of it all. The whole reason i support leftist ideals is because I want to see the most amount of people elevated out of poverty, having access to safe jobs, living wages, and health care. The idea he thinks these sentiments are spurious or that everyone who wants to help others is "virtue signalling" is a pretty grim indicator of the persons outlook.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 02:52
|
|
|
Poohs Packin posted:This bit of projection is probably the most disconcerting part of it all. The whole reason i support leftist ideals is because I want to see the most amount of people elevated out of poverty, having access to safe jobs, living wages, and health care. That's, like, the entire US-conservative outlook on life in a nutshell. "I'm a selfish rear end in a top hat who would screw you over for a buck and say you deserve it, therefore everyone must be like me. Anyone who says they aren't is just lying to get one over on everyone else better."
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 04:51
|
|
|
Remember last year (I think) when Megan McCain on The View had a whole "I had no idea how important maternity leave was until I became a mother!" speech? Yeah. That pretty much sums up the mentality. Speaking of which, that same friend who recommended 12 Rules recently had a Facebook post about how he never realized how inhospitable his neighborhood was to wheelchairs and such until he had to push a stroller around for his kid. I mean, not to virtue signal, but that was one of my first thoughts when I first visited the area.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 05:43
|
|
|
Ihki posted:It's been a while since I've read SOI, but I'm pretty well read on Zizek (most recently Sex and the Failed Absolute and actively following his essays). More read than on any other philosopher, really. That's a pretty strange read of SOI's namesake concept, but that's a bit beyond what's on the table. To the best of my knowledge, I'm asking the questions you said I should be asking, where critique of ideology is quite exactly about the opposite: seeking for the hidden psychic or material truth that motivates people. If the big point I've tried to color in is how he is a systemic problem for a systemic demand that is not going anywhere, then that's pretty materialist to me. I am taking Peterson and his phenomenon at almost face value here, speculating about what is a realistic response to his ascendancy which isn't already burned in the culture war. If anything, this is in the vein of the later, more Hegelian materialist than Lacanian Zizek. You haven't made an analytical critique for me to find unacceptable. You've mentioned a lot of names but in a very vague, not really related sense, where I am unable to really determine what you draw from them. I mean even when you say I'm incorrectly interpreting the sublime object you never say why. This was (and still is) a feature of the "rationalist" community where intelligence was primarily measured aesthetically. I'm not pegging you as someone that's a part of that community, but I do think its a bad habit you picked up. You won't be run out for using psychoanalytic terms, yeah you may be jumped on, but SMG would have been thrown out a long time ago if that was true. You use the theory to better actually understand it, if you don’t you won’t. I may still be misunderstanding what a Sublime Object is but at least people can engage me about it directly. My critique is, when you do any sort of examination you realize that Peterson is not a new paradigm he's just a reactionary, many people have already pointed this out to you in this thread. Despite this you refuse to accept this and continue to seek some kernel of significance within Peterson to explain some further truth. My analysis is not to relate Peterson to a Sublime Object (though he is), but to reveal that you make a fundamental theoretical error in the analysis of Peterson as a symptom. Marx invented the symptom because his analysis of the commodity form is homologous with Frauds analysis of dreams, this is because both realized you must avoid the properly fetishistic fascination of the 'content' supposedly hidden behind the form: the 'secret' to be unveiled through analysis is not the content hidden by the forms, but the secret of the form itself. "But as Marx points out, there is a certain 'yet': the unmasking of the secret is not sufficient, Classical bourgeois political economy has already discovered the 'secret' of the commodity form; its limit is that it is not able to disengage itself from this fascination ….. what it cannot explain the true secret ... the secret behind its form itself. In spite of its quite correct explanation of the 'secret of the magnitude of value' the commodity remains for the classical political economy a mysterious, enigmatic thing - it is the same as with the dream: after we have explained its hidden meaning, its latent thought, the dream remains an enigmatic phenomenon; what is not yet explained is simply its form; the process by means of which the hidden meaning disguised itself in such a form" It is not in the magnitude of value in a commodity nor is it the latent thought of a dream that you must stop at. Dreams are nothing other than a particular form of thinking, commodities a type of abstract social relation. Instead you must take the next crucial step and examine the process by which by means of which the concealed content assumes such a form, this is how Fraud and Marx discover the unconscious of their particular symptoms. This is where yourself and Zizek differ, you are still fascinated by the supposed concealed content within Peterson, the sublime which is revealed to be ordinary content upon examination. In your opening post you believe him to be special because he can offer "some grand, ageless metaphysical struggle for the soul of mankind" to young alienated men. But that is exactly how reactionary politics functions, it is there to cover up the inconsistencies within society by appealing to an ideal tradition that never existed. What you miss is that because liberal capitalism is inherently alienating it needs reactionaries like Peterson to function. In this way he is no different to any other reactionary, any further analysis at this level reveals nothing we don't already know. This is Zizek's point about the pathological jealous husband who is correct that one time when his wife did cheat on him. He didn't properly analysis his symptom, just because his neuroses was true doesn't mean he is not pathological. This is also why he says Petersons art is "of lying with the truth.?". Similarly his critique of left-wing "identity politics" is that it is missing this extra step of critique, it doesn't address how we are actually are alienated. So often is identity politics just consumerism, the process in which we ourselves are alienated in the first place. How I believe Zizek would respond to this threads (and my) neurosis? That this is a form of jouissance, we are trapped within Capitalist Realism, there is no united authentic left wing project and because there is no left wing "big other" to recognize us we hysterically attack people like Peterson. However as Zizek pointed out, out of the two types of neurosis, hysteria and obsession it is hysteria that has the potential to be revolutionary. The subject's questioning of his symbolic title is what hysteria is about. The hysterical subject is the subject whose very existence involves radical doubt and questioning, their entire being is sustained by uncertainty. The obsessive neurotic, instead, is still captured in the fantasy of the big other. They are so attached to the comforting fantasy of absolute enjoyment that their terrified by the lack in the Other. The hysteric has to confront the anxiety of choice who's afraid by the unknown and, ultimately, by death. The obsessive indulges in the fantasy of being already dead because he doesn't want to face the unbearable uncertainty and precariousness of life. Zizek calls Hegel a hysteric, so in turn, quite a compliment you gave us. Hamburger Sandwich fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Nov 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 05:49
|
|
|
Ihki posted:It's been a while since I've read SOI, but I'm pretty well read on Zizek (most recently Sex and the Failed Absolute and actively following his essays). More read than on any other philosopher, really. That's a pretty strange read of SOI's namesake concept, but that's a bit beyond what's on the table. To the best of my knowledge, I'm asking the questions you said I should be asking, where critique of ideology is quite exactly about the opposite: seeking for the hidden psychic or material truth that motivates people. If the big point I've tried to color in is how he is a systemic problem for a systemic demand that is not going anywhere, then that's pretty materialist to me. I am taking Peterson and his phenomenon at almost face value here, speculating about what is a realistic response to his ascendancy which isn't already burned in the culture war. If anything, this is in the vein of the later, more Hegelian materialist than Lacanian Zizek. Gibberish.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 05:51
|
|
|
While nothing you said was wrong, doing the over the top Peterson pseudo-intellectualization of somewhat obvious ideas like that still grates. Or maybe my attention span is just ruined.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 05:53
|
|
|
Maybe I'll read this with some more thought later but it doesn't seem very interesting, honestly. I've repeatedly said I didn't come here to measure dicks about Lacan or Hegel, and have gotten quite enough poo poo for not doing that. If being less of a rationalist would help me be better about that, there's a thought we'll never get to measure.Hamburger Sandwich posted:Zizek calls Hegel a hysteric, so in turn, quite a compliment you gave us. It's what I'd call myself, but I don't believe my posting is pure hysteria. There's a distinction if you want it. Everyone is something, as you would know. I don't mind being psychoanalyzed based on a dozen paragraphs I've written about Jordan Peterson, even if it rings kind of hollow, but what remains is how Zizek would be driven out of this thread for having the sort of opinion on Jorp that only broken, subhuman manchildren have. Fundamentally, he agrees with Peterson on his prognosis of postmodern neo-Marxism and identity politics, simply not on its taxonomy as Marxist. I'm a little bit more torn on that. However unproductively I've failed to make my case, I think this is an interesting grounds for talking about our political culture. I don't think your talk of Zizek takes Zizek seriously, nor could it be done in this thread. That's my problem at this point. My personal failings under analysis, many as they may be, seem to be a helpful diversion from this major point, and since I slept like poo poo, and need to head to an ophthalmologist before work, I'll leave it at that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 06:20
|
|
|
I haven't psychoanalysed you, all I've done is compared what you have had to say with what Zizek has written. The closest I have is to mention my opinion about your prose. In the debate Zizek calls identity politics "impotent moralising", he is saying they are not able of effecting substantial political change. Peterson believes that they are the root cause of societies ills, they are effecting political change through teachings at HR Departments and University Faculties. They have different prognosis. I'm not sure what you mean to say that "I don't think your talk of Zizek is serious". I am applying his concepts from his book and I'm saying you should be more rigours when you do so because your missing a key element of what he is saying Hamburger Sandwich fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Nov 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 06:49
|
|
|
Hamburger Sandwich posted:My critique is, when you do any sort of examination you realize that Peterson is not a new paradigm he's just a reactionary, many people have already pointed this out to you in this thread. Despite this you refuse to accept this and continue to seek some kernel of significance within Peterson to explain some further truth. These passages are aligned with what I was saying, I think - Peterson is nothing new, his points are reactionary and already addressed by decades of lit. I generally disagree with ziz because identity is a political battleground - whether its white nationalists or socialists or communists or transgender people - identity is a key facet of what we need from the world and how we want it, and ourselves, shaped. But jorp definitely doesn't have anything new to say about that, he's got reactionary views on the identity of men, women, and transgender people - and those views informed his political action against C-16.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 07:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:49 |
|
|
Hamburger Sandwich posted:Marx invented the symptom because his analysis of the commodity form is homologous with Frauds analysis of dreams, fraudian slip
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 07:12
|
|
