Comments by "Abel Abel" (@abelabel3664) on "Why Jordan Peterson is Wrong About Ideology" video.

One can use Marxist analysis without "being controlled" by it. JP, however, misrepresents what Marxism is and what people actually do with it. He seems to think that it is a "theory of everything" when it is, as people who studied it know, simply an analysis method that has provided valuable results and insights. JP refuses to use this "ideology" or to engage with its relevance at all. Additionally, I'd argue that Marxism exerts way less control over people than the conservatism and religious ideologies JP defends. P.S.: Peterson did not spend his entire life studying philosophy, ideology, marxism, sociology, anthropology or geopolitics. He did study Jungian psychology. P.S.2: Very ironic that his message is allegedly that one should not be controlled when his book literally poses "rules"...
4
@PryorGaming "Few do". Citation needed. Where are all the people engaging with marxist analysis that view it as a theory of everything and refuse to recognize its short-comings? Have you read marxist intellectual production made in the past 30 years? You are mischaracterizing and strawmanning your "opponents". Being hateful of the rich is certainly not the same as critiquing the existence of poverty and class structures. It is much easier to dismiss the later if you argue against the former. There is nothing dangerous in analyzing society through the lens of class struggle and it has PROVEN to explain well many phenomena in societies. Being afraid of an analysis method rooted in proven phenomena is childish and, more importantly, dogmatic. About P.S.1: There isn't a discrepancy in terminology. There is a contradiction in what Peterson says. He simply sees his views as a default devoid of ideology, which is obviously not true. About P.S.2: One could make the exact same argument on Marxism - it is a useful tool to examine the world around you and, therefore, good knowledge to live "a noble life" (whatever that means). More so than the bible, since it was shown to be correct time and again. Much less controlling than the bible, since it does not contain "guidelines", but simply an analysis method from which you can conclude whatever.
3
@PryorGaming You are confusing Marxism with communism. Actually, Marxism and totalitarian governments that claimed to be communist. Marxism is an analysis method, a method that has shown time and again to be relevant and correct in identifying societal dynamics. Marxism in itself does not preach a solution. The communist manifesto does. And if you read that book you will quickly realize that Marx never defended authoritarian regimes, quite the opposite. As you recognized yourself, religion was and is used to harm people (as in the crusades). The same type of misuse was present in authoritarian regimes that used communism as a pretext for their acts. The bible is a bunch of fables that were shoved down peoples' throats for centuries. It is full of contradictions and its philosophy is actually very basic and lacking. More importantly, it requires dogma. It literally preaches dogma. You cannot be against dogmatism and defend religion at the same time. That is contradictory. No need to answer me at all :) Have a good one.
3
Debates are moronic. Anyhow, feel free to watch Zizek making a fool of JP.
3
"a system of ideas and ideals" can literally be applied to any religion and what Peterson spews
3
He provided arguments on why JP is wrong
2
Yes, it tells that maybe that someone is harmful
1