Trigger warnings, safe spaces, and fascism on college campuses

[Flystripper]

Good stuff there. I too watched his interview with Kathy Newman, it was ridiculous. When I read that paragraph posted by swampy, I wind up doing it with his accent. It's the only proper way to read his words. It sounds even better! I am interested in what else he has to say.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I've been watching quite a bit of his material lately. Very affable and approachable orator and his thoughts are obviously well thought out from years (if not decades) of introspection. It's not easy to simply dismiss what he has to say.

His lecture series on the bible are fascinating to me, though those more educated in bible history might already be familiar with much of it. The bible's mythology is way more interesting than tired debates about its literalness. Have listened to the first 2. Going to try to get through all of them in the next month or so.

From the second lecture:

I have heard really good things about his bible lectures. Will definitely check them out. I love that quote you referenced.

[swampfrog]

Good stuff there. I too watched his interview with Kathy Newman, it was ridiculous. When I read that paragraph posted by swampy, I wind up doing it with his accent. It's the only proper way to read his words. It sounds even better! I am interested in what else he has to say.

It's a tribute to his oration capabilities. I first ran across that quote in written form and thought I could easily spend 30 minutes trying to get that right. Then I saw him deliver it in his lecture. Just off the cuff. Most of his lectures are extemporaneous--incredible ability to select the right vocabulary to convey the meaning of his ideas.

[jay santos]

If you have the time, see Jordan Peterson analyze the interview as prodded by a more capable interviewer.

He's got two very different aspects. His best stuff and what he was previously most known for is his "Maps of Meaning" or what this interview calls "How to be in the world", his take on mythology and religion from evolutionary science perspective, which is also the stuff that he builds on in his Bible series on his podcast. I absolutely dig this stuff. I think it's some of the most important philosophy and world perspective I've ever known. He gets into this starting at about the 30 minute mark here.

The other part of him, which is what he's in the spotlight right now is his position in the social justice wars, where he has found enormous popularity (which turns to revenues) from the alt-right. I don't think he's a racist or misogynist or homophobe, but he's pandering to these people just enough that he's coming across that way. I'm really disappointed in him doing this. The first 30 minutes or so of this video where he breaks down the interview that went viral with Newman, he does some of that.

This is my favorite lecture of his, which gives good intro to his philosophy related to religion and the Bible.

[YOUTUBE]DtiRzQMgBDM[/YOUTUBE]

[Jeff Lebowski]

He's got two very different aspects. His best stuff and what he was previously most known for is his "Maps of Meaning" or what this interview calls "How to be in the world", his take on mythology and religion from evolutionary science perspective, which is also the stuff that he builds on in his Bible series on his podcast. I absolutely dig this stuff. I think it's some of the most important philosophy and world perspective I've ever known. He gets into this starting at about the 30 minute mark here.

The other part of him, which is what he's in the spotlight right now is his position in the social justice wars, where he has found enormous popularity (which turns to revenues) from the alt-right. I don't think he's a racist or misogynist or homophobe, but he's pandering to these people just enough that he's coming across that way. I'm really disappointed in him doing this. The first 30 minutes or so of this video where he breaks down the interview that went viral with Newman, he does some of that.

This is my favorite lecture of his, which gives good intro to his philosophy related to religion and the Bible.

[YOUTUBE]DtiRzQMgBDM[/YOUTUBE]

Wait a minute. So if someone has the moral courage to address everything that is wrong and damaging with identity politics and the SJW movement, that amounts to pandering to the alt right and a makes one a racist/sexist/homophobe?

Oh brother.

[Moliere]

Trigger warnings, safe spaces, and fascism on college campuses

I’ve been watching some of JP’s videos and I’m impressed. I like that he seems to be seriously focused on the scholarship of psychology without a hint of a political agenda. His breakdown of the interview was brilliant. It shows everything that is wrong in politics and social media today.

There are so few real conversations in politics and social media and that extends to this site. The Trump thread is example #1 in how frank ryan, BlueK, and UT argue back and forth from their idealogical standpoint and never break anything down into a real, valid, fact/opinion-based conversation. There was a time when real conversations were held frequently on this board (they do still happen, just not as frequent) and it was what drew me here in the first place.

It’s a breath of fresh air to see JP go after the current environment on campuses and he does it in an academically defensible way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jay santos]

Wait a minute. So if someone has the moral courage to address everything that is wrong and damaging with identity politics and the SJW movement, that amounts to pandering to the alt right and a makes one a racist/sexist/homophobe?

Oh brother.

No, not always. But maybe sometimes. I know him more for his religion-philosophy stuff than this social justice commentary stuff. And what he's saying on that side of things (social justice issues) usually makes sense to me. But I think he's being intentionally provocative on those things to stir up controversy that is driving his popularity and revenues.

PS I said I DO NOT think he's a sexist-racist-homophobe.

[swampfrog]

He's got two very different aspects. His best stuff and what he was previously most known for is his "Maps of Meaning" or what this interview calls "How to be in the world", his take on mythology and religion from evolutionary science perspective, which is also the stuff that he builds on in his Bible series on his podcast. I absolutely dig this stuff. I think it's some of the most important philosophy and world perspective I've ever known. He gets into this starting at about the 30 minute mark here.

I'm glad I'm not the only one. I'm trying to be careful that I don't get caught up in his abilities as an orator/writer. He has a gift for explaining complex topics, and that affects how I perceive the material also. When I cross some of what he is presenting against some LDS doctrines they seem to both enhance one another, but I may be biased here.

The other part of him, which is what he's in the spotlight right now is his position in the social justice wars, where he has found enormous popularity (which turns to revenues) from the alt-right. I don't think he's a racist or misogynist or homophobe, but he's pandering to these people just enough that he's coming across that way. I'm really disappointed in him doing this. The first 30 minutes or so of this video where he breaks down the interview that went viral with Newman, he does some of that.

I don't get that at all (pandering), though he does seem to understand the use of political forums in order to further his stance on free speech. He gets more agitated and forceful. I've watched the videos he made that got him sucked into the political sphere. He also has made the claim that if ever convicted of those laws/regulations he opposes he will refuse to pay the fine, and if jailed would go on a hunger strike.

This is my favorite lecture of his, which gives good intro to his philosophy related to religion and the Bible.

[YOUTUBE]DtiRzQMgBDM[/YOUTUBE]

I'll have to watch that one, though I'm guessing he'll cover the same material in the bible series which I'm going through.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I’ve been watching some of JP’s videos and I’m impressed. I like that he seems to be seriously focused on the scholarship of psychology without a hint of a political agenda. His breakdown of the interview was brilliant. It shows everything that is wrong in politics and social media today.

There are so few real conversations in politics and social media and that extends to this site. The Trump thread is example #1 in how frank ryan, BlueK, and UT argue back and forth from their idealogical standpoint and never break anything down into a real, valid, fact/opinion-based conversation. There was a time when real conversations were held frequently on this board (they do still happen, just not as frequent) and it was what drew me here in the first place.

It’s a breath of fresh air to see JP go after the current environment on campuses and he does it in an academically defensible way.

Haha. A passive-aggressive swipe at the entire board. Nicely done.

[Moliere]

Haha. A passive-aggressive swipe at the entire board. Nicely done.

What’s passive about calling out certain posters by name??

Okay, it was a little passive. But no one can deny the lower level of intelligent conversation that exists now as opposed to a couple years ago...although I may be romancing the past a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jeff Lebowski]

What’s passive about calling out certain posters by name??

Okay, it was a little passive. But no one can deny the lower level of intelligent conversation that exists now as opposed to a couple years ago...although I may be romancing the past a bit.

You called out individuals and implicated the entire board for a failure to produce meaningful discussion. If you don't like the quality of the discussion, feel free to post more and be part of the solution rather than complain about it. And don't just lob insults at those that have the courage and willingness to engage in open discussion, even if you disagree with their positions.

[Moliere]

You called out individuals and implicated the entire board for a failure to produce meaningful discussion. If you don't like the quality of the discussion, feel free to post more and be part of the solution rather than complain about it. And don't just lob insults at those that have the courage and willingness to engage in open discussion, even if you disagree with their positions.

For one, CS is blocked at work so I have to type from my phone, which is annoying. For two, never mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jeff Lebowski]

No, not always. But maybe sometimes. I know him more for his religion-philosophy stuff than this social justice commentary stuff. And what he's saying on that side of things (social justice issues) usually makes sense to me. But I think he's being intentionally provocative on those things to stir up controversy that is driving his popularity and revenues.

PS I said I DO NOT think he's a sexist-racist-homophobe.

That seems awfully cynical, Jay. Maybe he is pushing this narrative because he sincerely believes what he is saying.

[creekster]

No, not always. But maybe sometimes. I know him more for his religion-philosophy stuff than this social justice commentary stuff. And what he's saying on that side of things (social justice issues) usually makes sense to me. But I think he's being intentionally provocative on those things to stir up controversy that is driving his popularity and revenues.

PS I said I DO NOT think he's a sexist-racist-homophobe.

Can you give an example of something you believe he is portraying in a needlessly provocative way? I have watched a couple of his videos now and while he can be self-satisfied I havent felt like he is being unduly provocative in the context of the questions he has been asked and the general point of his responses.

[jay santos]

Can you give an example of something you believe he is portraying in a needlessly provocative way? I have watched a couple of his videos now and while he can be self-satisfied I havent felt like he is being unduly provocative in the context of the questions he has been asked and the general point of his responses.

Honestly, I've been on the other side of this argument where I've promoted Peterson and then others call him a racist-sexist-homophobe. I've seen a few of his videos and interviews where I kind of agree that he's being provocative or pandering to that side of things. I watch and listen to a lot of him, and I can't recall exactly, but I recall thinking "oh yeah I get what they mean". google where he talks about white privilege, racism, etc. I only preface it with that, because I'm so high on him for his other stuff, that I want to make a distinction on what I love him for, and what I wish he'd rather not emphasize.