Comments by "" (@psychcowboy1) on "JRE Clips" channel.

  1. 1
  2. 1
  3. 1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8.  @skydragon23101979  Are these examples of Peterson's meticulous thought? AT 8:00 JP 'What do you think emancipated women in the 20th century?' Helen: 'The pill helped, and legal changes.' JP: 'I don't advise men to be nice, ever. I wouldn't call the invention of the tampon nice, its not nice... he saw that his wife was suffering with her period, and he thought he would do something about it.' 'To look back in time and say men took the upper hand and persecuted women in a tyrannical patriarchy is a dreadful misreading of history, it is a horrible thing to inflict upon men.' 'You don't think the pill was a primary force in the emancipation of women? Toilets and tampons. You are thinking instead it was the action of courageous feminists in the 1920's? That is a foolish theory.' [Let's unpack this: 1. The guy who invented the tampon did it because his wife was suffering. 2. Peterson calls this not him doing something to be nice to his wife. Could Peterson be any stupider and more annoying if he tried? Doing something to help the suffering of another person is not an act of being nice? Peterson doesn't ever advise men to be nice? And how is this guy helping humanity exactly if he doesn't think men should be nice to women? I would say he is causing more harm than good, but most relevant is his dumbing down on the composite intellect of humanity. She said the pill was one of the factors, and then Peterson says that her not crediting the pill as one of the factors is foolish? She just said the pill was a factor 20 seconds ago LegoBrain… your span of attention can't last that long? Who is reading history as a tyrannical gender battle Jordan? Helen didn't say that. Straw man. Oh I get it, you saw a tiny window of opportunity to fit in one of your fake smart guy words 'tyrannical patriarchy'. The term wasn't needed. It wasn't relevant to the issue at hand, but you got it in anyway. A bit narcissistic maybe?
    1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. @HatesoLowliesNotasDelichousasPastries 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 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.]
    1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47.  @t.bozmkw3562  You found a JP win? Timestamp and quote please. -Were there any Peterson wins? Here are a couple of Helen wins, starting at like 41:00. 1. Helen: It works in two different ways, it makes lobsters more aggressive and it makes humans less aggressive.' Peterson interrupting: No that's not right, it makes humans less aggressive...It makes a lobster more likely to fight again.' [uh Whoops Jordan. She agreed with you that serotonin makes humans less aggressive, and she is wrong... for agreeing with you? Lobsters that want to fight are not displaying aggression? Fighting isn't aggression? The relevant paper is called Serotonin and Aggression Motivation in Crustaceans, concluding that serotonin makes lobsters adopt aggressive postures...SCORE: Helen 1, Jordan 0] 2."I chose lobsters, the reason I made that argument was to put paid to the absurd Marxist proposition that hierarchical structures are a secondary consequence of free market economies which is as preposterous a theory as you could have about anything.' Helen: 'Lobsters say the thing that you ideologically want to talk about that your belief that there is a kind of Marxist ideology...' Peterson interrupting: 'How do lobsters say that?' [Uh what Jordan? You just explained how lobsters demonstrate that. Remember you chose lobsters to put rest to the absurd Marxist proposition, and now you are saying lobsters don't put to rest the absurd proposition? Remembering what you said 2 minutes ago can be super challenging I know.] SCORE: Helen 2, Jordan 0 3. 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]
    1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1