Comments by "" (@psychcowboy1) on "Fox News" channel.

  1. 18
  2. 6
  3. 5
  4. 5
  5. 5
  6. 5
  7. 5
  8. 4
  9. 4
  10. 4
  11. 4
  12. 4
  13. 3
  14. 3
  15. 3
  16. 3
  17. 3
  18. 3
  19. 3
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28. 3
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. I don't hate him. Rather I have no idea why anyone looks to him as any sort of intellectual. Giving clean your room advice, fine. In science and politics however the guy is a joke. If you disagree with my comments in brackets please elaborate: 1. 'The ignorant Left says you can place the responsibility for hierarchy and inequality at the feet of western civilization and capitalism...that is unbelievably wrong.' [Who is saying that, and how did you get that from reading a paper on lobsters?] 2. "It is inevitable that there will be continuity in how humans and animals organize their structures." [What is an animal structure, and how does an animal organize it?] 3. "The post modern ideology of the toxic Left characterizes the sociological landscape as an idiom of responsibility for protracting the hierarchy inequality and genocidal ideology of western civilization". [Huh?] 4. "The more likely problem in 100 years, assuming there are even creatures like us in 100 years, is that there will be too few people rather than too many." [Huh? Humans have not evolved biologically substantially in the last 20,000 or so years, but you are projecting some radical evolution in the next 100? Many of the current world problems are population related, but you are projecting somehow there will be too few people in 100 years? Too few to do what exactly?] 5. "I don’t think that the Caucasians should revert to being white. I think that is a bad idea. It is a dangerous idea, and it is coming fast …I think that is reprehensible. It is devastating. It is genocidal in its ultimate expression." [What is Caucasians reverting to white, and how is that, whatever it is, more genocidal than say dropping an A-bomb?]
    2
  90. 2
  91. 2
  92. Jordan's 13th Rule; We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. [Jordan, how about not projecting your personal confusion about consciousness on to everyone else?] Jordan's 14th Rule; How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self evident fact to your ignorant mind. Jordan's 15 Rule; The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Jordan's 16th Rule; Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. Jordan's 17th Rule; There is no evidence that women can create social organizations. Jordan's 18th Rule, Hard core clinical psychology research has determined that perception influences behavior. [Yes Jordan, when I perceive I am thirsty my behavior is to go to the fridge for a drink.] Jordan's 19th Rule; There is something to us. [Uh sure Jordan, a bit pointless and ambiguous however.] Jordan's 20th Rule; I realized psychologically that the future is in a sense actually unpredictable. [You needed psychology to figure that out Jordan? I figured it out without psychology.] Jordan's 21 Rule: It is hard to get in to Harvard and it takes good SAT scores. [Yes Jordan, everyone already knows that.] Jordan's 22 Rule: The world is not objects, it is the harmonious interplay of patterns, you dance with the world, you don't want a person who will dominate you sexually during the initial dance . Jordan's 23 Rule: If you have a functional identity, when you act it out in the world you get what you want and need. [I am pretty sure I have a function, and an identity, and I act out in the world, but merely wanting something is no promise that I will get it. Sorry Jordan If/Then logic failure on your part.] Jordan's 24 Rule: I highly recommend that you try and put yourself together. [Wow, I am totally going to do that now that you told me.] Jordan's 25th Rule: The biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception. [Huh?] Jordan's 26th Rule: I have been thinking for 40 years and I realized that you have to prioritize your perceptions. Prioritize means some things are more important than others in a hierarchy. Does that hierarchy have to be unified or not. There is an immediate existential consequence to not having a hierarchy of perceptual priority. You need a hierarchy to filter the world and what is at the highest point of the hierarchy. Jordan's 27th Rule: There are no models of animal industriousness, there is nothing random about dreams, no one advises a loved one to get an abortion, we don't have an overpopulation problem, the women's movement didn't advance women's rights, plenty of them are saying there should be no such thing as hierarchies, our hierarchies are of competence not power, no one knows that the world has improved in every way in the last 50 years including the environment, the West is an oppressive patriarchy but the West is not an oppressive patriarchy.... Jordan's 28th Rule: 'You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.' @AmbietsRato 
    2
  93. 2
  94. 2
  95. 2
  96. 2
  97. 2
  98. 2
  99. 2
  100. 2
  101. 2
  102. 2
  103. 2
  104. 2
  105. 2
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131.  @rfbedell347  1:30 'SBF Anything I make I am going to give away, money from FTX backdoored to another company, it disappeared, he donated $38 million to democrat elections, a denial is not proof, American government donated to Ukraine with crypto FTX, how much of that went backdoor to SBF and then to democrats, was money to Ukraine going back to the people who were voting to fund the war....' [Sorry Will, SBF donated about 1% of his networth to election campaigns, not 'anything I make'. A denial is not proof? True, your allegation is not proof either as much as Fox viewers will probably believe it is. The US government donated to Ukraine with FTX crypto? Any proof of that? What the US is doing is supplying security infrastructure for Ukraine defense not 'here is a stake in our crypto account' pal. 'how much money to Ukraine going back to the people who were voting to fund the war.' The US isn't funding a war, it is trying to stop a war invasion by psycho Putin, that Trump and Fox like to excuse. To establish your wild allegations we need to know: A. The US government was giving Ukraine money. B. This was in the form of FTX crypto currency. C. Instead of using this alleged crypto money to fight the Russia invasion, someone in Ukraine simply decided to give it back someone in the US. Here is my suggestion Will and Fox. For your next post, how about addressing those issues with some form of evidence rather than wild inflammatory theories. This would require Fox to be an actual news channel however.]
    1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158.  @debd7631  My opinion is what you should realize however is that We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self-evident fact to your ignorant mind. The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.' And most importantly, the biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception.
    1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240.  @jameswheeler1610  1:30 'SBF Anything I make I am going to give away, money from FTX backdoored to another company, it disappeared, he donated $38 million to democrat elections, a denial is not proof, American government donated to Ukraine with crypto FTX, how much of that went backdoor to SBF and then to democrats, was money to Ukraine going back to the people who were voting to fund the war....' [Sorry Will, SBF donated about 1% of his networth to election campaigns, not 'anything I make'. A denial is not proof? True, your allegation is not proof either as much as Fox viewers will probably believe it is. The US government donated to Ukraine with FTX crypto? Any proof of that? What the US is doing is supplying security infrastructure for Ukraine defense not 'here is a stake in our crypto account' pal. 'how much money to Ukraine going back to the people who were voting to fund the war.' The US isn't funding a war, it is trying to stop a war invasion by psycho Putin, that Trump and Fox like to excuse. To establish your wild allegations we need to know: A. The US government was giving Ukraine money. B. This was in the form of FTX crypto currency. C. Instead of using this alleged crypto money to fight the Russia invasion, someone in Ukraine simply decided to give it back someone in the US. Here is my suggestion Will and Fox. For your next post, how about addressing those issues with some form of evidence rather than wild inflammatory theories. This would require Fox to be an actual news channel however.]
    1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244.  @angelshalo06  Fox generally not that trustworthy, basically appealing to gullible conservatives, so let's check in to Will Cain here: 1:30  'SBF Anything I make I am going to give away, money from FTX backdoored to another company, it disappeared, he donated $38 million to democrat elections, a denial is not proof, American government donated to Ukraine with crypto FTX, how much of that went backdoor to SBF and then to democrats, was money to Ukraine going back to the people who were voting to fund the war....' [Sorry Will, SBF donated about 1% of his networth to election campaigns, not 'anything I make'.  A denial is not proof?  True, your allegation is not proof either as much as Fox viewers will probably believe it is.  The US government donated to Ukraine with FTX crypto?  Any proof of that?  What the US is doing is supplying security infrastructure for Ukraine defense not 'here is a stake in our crypto account' pal.  'how much money to Ukraine going back to the people who were voting to fund the war.'  The US isn't funding a war, it is trying to stop a war invasion by psycho Putin, that Trump and Fox like to excuse.  To establish your wild allegations we need to know:  A.  The US government was giving Ukraine money.  B.  This was in the form of FTX crypto currency.  C.  Instead of using this alleged crypto money to fight the Russia invasion, someone in Ukraine simply decided to give it back someone in the US.  Here is my suggestion Will and Fox.  For your next post, how about addressing those issues with some form of evidence rather than wild inflammatory theories.  This would require Fox to be an actual news channel however.] Tucker:  "The news media is horrible, it is often intentionally wrong, the first draft is always wrong, laughably untrue, they are lying on purpose, to manipulate you, if Russia attacked NATO by definition that would be world war 3 hundreds of people would die, intel official said Russia had launched a strike on Poland by definition it was time for the US to begin a total war on Putin Russia, and now for a Zelinski clip who is a friend of Sean Penn commanded the US to start a world war, the missle had a s300 ukrainian symbol, Ukraine bombed Poland and Zelinski was lying...is it time to stop backing Zelinski getting rich from US handouts, a ukraine missle killed two Poles..." [Wait, Tucker is complaining about news media being always wrong and they are lying on purpose?  They are always wrong?  Sorry Tucker,
    1
  245. 1
  246. 1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275.  @dark3031  I cleaned JP's room, found scraps of paper all over the floor. I decided that My opinion is what you should realize however is that We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self-evident fact to your ignorant mind. The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.' And most importantly, the biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception.
    1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1
  286. 1
  287. 1
  288. 1
  289. 1
  290. 1
  291. 1
  292. 1
  293. 1
  294. 1
  295. 1
  296. 1
  297. 1
  298. 1
  299. 1
  300. 1
  301. Can any JP fan make any sense of any of this, genius or charlatan? "How are you going to orient yourself in the world. The post modernists have no answer to that. Without any attempt to grapple with the cognitive dissonance they default to this loose egalitarian Marxism. If they were concerned with coherence that would be a problem, but they are not concerned with coherence...the force that is driving the activism is the is mostly the post modernism rather than the neo Marxism." This guy has a nice vocabulary, but does he ever have a point? Still waiting for it. "The ignorant Left says you can place the responsibility for hierarchy and inequality at the feet of western civilization and capitalism...that is unbelievably wrong." Challenge to any JP lover: What exactly does JP mean here? That capitalism doesn't create inequality? Then he says "The problem with hierarchy is that it produces inequality." Help me out here. Didn't he just agree with what he said was unbelievably wrong? Jordan thinks he can understand society and government duty to either regulate greed or not regulate greed by reading a paper about lobsters? Nice job Jordan. JP - "The Left is not serious about inequality". Did you get that from your lobster book also? "When you're in that place of where you're facing things courageously and you're speaking the truth... you are imbued with a sense of fundamental meaning, and that meaning is the antidote to the catastrophe of life." When you are feeling good about yourself it adds meaning to your life? Wow, pretty sure JP stole this from 'Everything I need to know I learned in Kindergarten'. I don't disagree with this one at least, just not all that impressed. Change my mind.
    1
  302. 1
  303. 1
  304. 1
  305. 1
  306. 1
  307. 1
  308. 1
  309. 1
  310. 1
  311. 1
  312. 1
  313. 1
  314. 1
  315. 1
  316. 1
  317. 1
  318. 1
  319. 1
  320. 1
  321. 1
  322. 1
  323. 1
  324. 1
  325. 1
  326. 1
  327. 1
  328. 1
  329. 1
  330. 1
  331. 1
  332. 1
  333. 1
  334. He has some simple self help advice that helps some people. He is also widely known as the biggest fake intellecctual of this century. 90% of what he says is total nonsense...Jordan's 13th Rule; We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. [Jordan, how about not projecting your personal confusion about consciousness on to everyone else?] Jordan's 14th Rule; How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self evident fact to your ignorant mind. Jordan's 15 Rule; The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Jordan's 16th Rule; Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. Jordan's 17th Rule; There is no evidence that women can create social organizations. Jordan's 18th Rule, Hard core clinical psychology research has determined that perception influences behavior. [Yes Jordan, when I perceive I am thirsty my behavior is to go to the fridge for a drink.] Jordan's 19th Rule; There is something to us. [Uh sure Jordan, a bit pointless and ambiguous however.] Jordan's 20th Rule; I realized psychologically that the future is in a sense actually unpredictable. [You needed psychology to figure that out Jordan? I figured it out without psychology.] Jordan's 21 Rule: It is hard to get in to Harvard and it takes good SAT scores. [Yes Jordan, everyone already knows that.] Jordan's 22 Rule: The world is not objects, it is the harmonious interplay of patterns, you dance with the world, you don't want a person who will dominate you sexually during the initial dance . Jordan's 23 Rule: If you have a functional identity, when you act it out in the world you get what you want and need. [I am pretty sure I have a function, and an identity, and I act out in the world, but merely wanting something is no promise that I will get it. Sorry Jordan If/Then logic failure on your part.] Jordan's 24 Rule: I highly recommend that you try and put yourself together. [Wow, I am totally going to do that now that you told me.] Jordan's 25th Rule: The biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception. [Huh?] Jordan's 26th Rule: I have been thinking for 40 years and I realized that you have to prioritize your perceptions. Prioritize means some things are more important than others in a hierarchy. Does that hierarchy have to be unified or not. There is an immediate existential consequence to not having a hierarchy of perceptual priority. You need a hierarchy to filter the world and what is at the highest point of the hierarchy. Jordan's 27th Rule: There are no models of animal industriousness, there is nothing random about dreams, no one advises a loved one to get an abortion, we don't have an overpopulation problem, the women's movement didn't advance women's rights, plenty of them are saying there should be no such thing as hierarchies, our hierarchies are of competence not power, no one knows that the world has improved in every way in the last 50 years including the environment, the West is an oppressive patriarchy but the West is not an oppressive patriarchy.... Jordan's 28th Rule: 'You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.'  @neologian1783 
    1
  335. 1
  336. 1
  337. 1
  338. 1
  339. 1
  340. 1
  341. 1
  342. 1
  343. 1
  344. 1
  345. 1
  346. 1
  347. 1
  348. 1
  349. 1
  350. 1
  351. 1
  352. 1
  353. 1
  354. 1
  355. 1
  356. 1
  357. 1
  358. 1
  359. 1
  360. 1
  361. 1
  362. 1
  363. 1
  364. 1
  365. 1
  366. 1
  367. 1
  368. 1
  369. 1
  370. 1
  371. 1
  372. 1
  373. 1
  374. 1
  375. 1
  376. 1
  377. 1
  378. 1
  379. 1
  380. 1
  381. 1
  382. 1
  383. 1
  384. 1
  385. 1
  386. 1
  387. 1
  388. 1
  389. 1
  390. 1
  391. 1
  392. 1
  393. 1
  394. 1
  395. 1
  396. 1
  397. 1
  398. 1
  399. 1
  400. 1
  401. 1
  402. 1
  403. 1
  404. 1
  405. 1
  406. 1
  407. 1
  408. 1
  409. 1
  410. 1
  411. 1
  412. 1
  413. 1
  414. 1
  415. 1
  416. 1
  417. 1
  418. 1
  419. 1
  420. 1
  421. 1
  422. 1
  423. 1
  424. 1
  425. 1
  426. 1
  427. 1
  428.  @justincenters2762  The GQ interview 'There was plenty of motivation...? You found a JP win in that video? Cool, Please share what it was. In first five minutes: Helen: Patriarchy is a system of male dominance. JP: That isn't my definition of it. [Helen gives the dictionary definition and JP disagrees, score for Helen.] JP: In what way is society male dominated? Helen: Men have most of the money. JP: You are taking a tiny percentage of hyper successful males and using it to describe all of western culture, most men in prison are men, most people who commit suicide are men... [Helen gives a correct example of male dominance and JP switches the goal post to 'is society easier or more fair to men'. Score for Helen.] JP at 20:30 Helen: 'A female dominated office leaves men feeling left out. JP: How do we get to something that isn't a tyrannical patriarchy, if it is composed of mostly women and its a tyrannical patriarchy and if it is composed of mostly men it is a tyrannical patriarchy we are out of options.... [Jordan pulls a Cathy Newman, SO YOU ARE SAYING if is composed mostly of women it is a tyrannical patriarchy? No Jordan she didn't say anything like that. Helen said absolutely nothing about women dominated is a tyrannical patriarchy, she corrected your vocabulary problem, dominated by women is a matriarchy dude. Neither did she say we have a tyrannical patriarchy. She said the patriarchy was overthrown by the women's movement and women now have almost equal rights with men.] JP at 8:00: Helen; women were barred from professions until 1919. JP: Why would you blame men for that? [Jordan really, why would you blame men for barring women from professions? Score for Helen.] Around 44:00 Helen referring to equality of outcome: 'I don't think that is a widely held view.' JP Interrupting as usual: 20% of social scientists identify as Marxist. Look it up in Haidt's work, I studied it quite carefully, it is a perfectly valid statistical. [Heads up JP, in the survey you are referring to, 3% of college professors identify as Marxist, and you claim that universities are dominated by leftist ideology, thus 3% of a very Left leaning sample identify as Marxist... and you are disagreeing with Helen? Whoops. The study Prevalence of Marxism in Academia states that Marxism is 'A tiny minority faith', ie Peterson cited a study to prove Helen wrong, when it actually proved her right. SCORE: Helen 3, Jordan 0] --Peterson at 19:00: 'That's for sure it's purely not, when you define it as tyrannical patriarchy implies one-dimensional...' [Whoops Jordan, remember in the dave rubin john anderson interview when you said the West is an oppressive patriarchy but not purely that? Contradiction alert'] 'We take a patriarchal structure like the medical profession and we fill it with women, is it that it is mostly men that makes it a patriarchy, if it is a structure that is composed of women then it is also a tyrannical patriarchy, if it is composed of women and it is a tyrannical patriarchy... [She just corrected you that composed or dominated primarily of women is a matriarchy. So after denying that we have a patriarchy numerous times in this interview you are now admitting that the medical field is a patriarchy? Score for Helen.) Let's get our definitions straight on identity politics. [Helen gives a correct definition, JP gives no definition. Score for Helen.]
    1
  429. 1
  430. 1
  431. 1
  432. 1
  433. 1
  434. 1
  435. 1
  436. 1
  437. 1
  438. 1
  439. 1
  440. 1
  441. 1
  442. 1
  443. 1
  444. 1
  445. 1
  446. 1
  447. 1
  448. 1
  449. 1
  450. 1
  451. 1
  452. 1
  453. 1
  454. 1
  455. 1
  456. 1
  457. 1
  458. 1
  459. 1
  460. 1
  461. 1
  462. 1
  463. 1
  464.  @russianbot4418  My opinion is what you should realize however is that We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self-evident fact to your ignorant mind. The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.' And most importantly, the biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception.
    1
  465. 1
  466. 1
  467. 1
  468. 1
  469. 1
  470. 1
  471. 1
  472. 1
  473. 1
  474. 1
  475. 1
  476. 1
  477. 1
  478. 1
  479. 1
  480. JP is generally triggered and insecure. My opinion is what you should realize however is that We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self-evident fact to your ignorant mind. The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.' And most importantly, the biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception. @deathrodamus9608 
    1
  481. 1
  482. 1
  483. 1
  484. 1
  485. 1
  486. 1
  487. 1
  488. 1
  489. 1
  490. 1
  491. 1
  492. 1
  493. 1
  494. 1
  495. 1
  496. 1
  497. 1
  498. You found a profound intellectual idea by JP? Timestamp and quote from some YT video? My opinion is what you should realize however is that We don't understand consciousness, we don't know where it fits in the cosmos. How do you arrange books? Using the axiomatic structure of your a priori perceptions manifesting as self-evident fact to your ignorant mind. The best way for me to interact is individual to individual and as if they are part of the process by which things we don't understand can yet be explored and by things that aren't properly organized in our society can yet be set right. Free speech also is the mechanism by which we generate the conceptions that allow us to organize our experience in the world, it is the mechanism that allows us to reformulate and criticize those conceptions when they become outdated and sterile, to reanimate them in a new form so we can move into the future. You want to fight the dragons that guard the gate to the treasure that you wish to attain, productivity requires aim and responsibility, discipline and willingness to work, it orients you solidly in the world and gives you a dragon to fight, do you want to be illiterate, you have to think, you can't build muscle at the gym unless you lift weights, face your being with the necessity of transformation, those are the dragons, you have to say to yourself 'I will do good.' And most importantly, the biblical corpus is a collection of narratives that shine a different light of characterization on the spirit that occupies the pinnacle in the hierarchy of perception.  @sovl2659 
    1
  499. 1
  500. 1
  501. 1
  502. 1
  503. 1
  504. 1
  505. 1
  506. 1
  507. 1
  508. 1
  509. 1
  510. 1
  511. 1
  512. 1
  513. 1
  514. I don't consider JP an enemy of the Left. I consider him an enemy of logic, more accurately a pseudo intellectual who is more suited to selling holy water on the 700 club. Change my mind, if you disagree with my comments in brackets: 1.  'The ignorant Left says you can place the responsibility for hierarchy and inequality at the feet of western civilization and capitalism...that is unbelievably wrong.' [Who is saying that, and how did you get that from reading a paper on lobsters?] 2. "It is inevitable that there will be continuity in how humans and animals organize their structures." [What is an animal structure, and how does an animal organize it?] 3.  "The post modern ideology of the toxic Left characterizes the sociological landscape as an idiom of responsibility for protracting the hierarchy inequality and genocidal ideology of western civilization". [Huh?] 4.  "The more likely problem in 100 years, assuming there are even creatures like us in 100 years, is that there will be too few people rather than too many." [Huh?  Humans have not evolved biologically substantially in the last 20,000 or so years, but you are projecting some radical evolution in the next 100?  Many of the current world problems are population related, but you are projecting somehow there will be too few people in 100 years?  Too few to do what exactly?] 5.  "I don’t think that the Caucasians should revert to being white. I think that is a bad idea. It is a dangerous idea, and it is coming fast …I think that is reprehensible. It is devastating. It is genocidal in its ultimate expression." [What is Caucasians reverting to white, and how is that, whatever it is, more genocidal than say dropping an A-bomb?]
    1
  515. 1
  516. 1
  517. 1
  518. 1
  519. 1
  520. 1
  521. 1
  522. 1
  523. 1
  524. 1
  525. 1
  526. 1
  527. 1
  528. 1
  529. 1
  530. 1
  531. 1
  532. 1
  533. 1
  534. 1
  535. 1
  536. 1
  537. 1
  538. 1
  539. 1
  540. 1
  541. 1
  542. 1
  543. 1
  544. 1
  545. 1
  546. 1
  547. 1
  548. 1
  549. 1
  550. 1
  551. 1
  552. 1
  553. 1
  554. 1
  555. 1
  556. 1
  557. 1
  558. 1
  559. 1
  560. 1
  561. 1
  562. 1
  563. 1
  564. 1
  565. 1
  566. 1
  567. 1
  568. 1
  569. 1
  570.  @ST-rj8iu  In first five minutes: Helen: Patriarchy is a system of male dominance. JP: That isn't my definition of it. [Helen gives the dictionary definition and JP disagrees, score for Helen.] JP: In what way is society male dominated? Helen: Men have most of the money. JP: You are taking a tiny percentage of hyper successful males and using it to describe all of western culture, most men in prison are men, most people who commit suicide are men... [Helen gives a correct example of male dominance and JP switches the goal post to 'is society easier or more fair to men'. Score for Helen.] JP at 20:30 Helen: 'A female dominated office leaves men feeling left out. JP: How do we get to something that isn't a tyrannical patriarchy, if it is composed of mostly women and its a tyrannical patriarchy and if it is composed of mostly men it is a tyrannical patriarchy we are out of options.... [Jordan pulls a Cathy Newman, SO YOU ARE SAYING if is composed mostly of women it is a tyrannical patriarchy? No Jordan she didn't say anything like that. Helen said absolutely nothing about women dominated is a tyrannical patriarchy, she corrected your vocabulary problem, dominated by women is a matriarchy dude. Neither did she say we have a tyrannical patriarchy. She said the patriarchy was overthrown by the women's movement and women now have almost equal rights with men.] JP at 8:00: Helen; women were barred from professions until 1919. JP: Why would you blame men for that? [Jordan really, why would you blame men for barring women from professions? Score for Helen.] Around 44:00 Helen referring to equality of outcome: 'I don't think that is a widely held view.' JP Interrupting as usual: 20% of social scientists identify as Marxist. Look it up in Haidt's work, I studied it quite carefully, it is a perfectly valid statistical. [Heads up JP, in the survey you are referring to, 3% of college professors identify as Marxist, and you claim that universities are dominated by leftist ideology, thus 3% of a very Left leaning sample identify as Marxist... and you are disagreeing with Helen? Whoops. The study Prevalence of Marxism in Academia states that Marxism is 'A tiny minority faith', ie Peterson cited a study to prove Helen wrong, when it actually proved her right. SCORE: Helen 3, Jordan 0] --Peterson at 19:00: 'That's for sure it's purely not, when you define it as tyrannical patriarchy implies one-dimensional...' [Whoops Jordan, remember in the dave rubin john anderson interview when you said the West is an oppressive patriarchy but not purely that? Contradiction alert'] 'We take a patriarchal structure like the medical profession and we fill it with women, is it that it is mostly men that makes it a patriarchy, if it is a structure that is composed of women then it is also a tyrannical patriarchy, if it is composed of women and it is a tyrannical patriarchy... [She just corrected you that composed or dominated primarily of women is a matriarchy. So after denying that we have a patriarchy numerous times in this interview you are now admitting that the medical field is a patriarchy? Score for Helen.) Let's get our definitions straight on identity politics. [Helen gives a correct definition, JP gives no definition. Score for Helen.]
    1
  571. 1
  572. 1
  573. 1
  574. 1
  575. 1
  576. 1
  577. 1
  578. 1
  579. 1
  580. 1
  581. 1
  582. 1
  583. 1
  584. 1
  585. 1
  586. 1
  587. 1
  588. 1
  589. 1
  590. 1
  591. 1
  592. 1
  593. 1
  594. 1
  595. 1
  596. 1
  597. 1
  598. 1
  599. 1
  600. 1
  601. 1
  602. 1
  603. 1
  604. 1
  605. 1
  606. 1
  607. 1
  608. 1