Comments by "Kristopher Driver" (@paxdriver) on "Jordan B Peterson" channel.

  1. 1
  2. 1
  3. 1
  4. 1
  5. 1
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. The irony of this conversation is that this is what critical race theory is lol. Being able to critically and objectively analyze racially motivated or inspired actions in the system and its effects. CRT isn't the problem, it's treating CRT as if it has concluded and provides trainable answers, that's the problem. It would be like treating the scientific method as if experimentation were no longer necessary because we've learned all the science there is. "We've reached the pinnacle of moral fortitude, now we can teach moral high ground with no need for further deliberation." Hiw do we know there isn't more unconscious bias to be found if we're not able to question the baseline, it is taught and monitored from above - like a hierarchy, that tyrannical sort that these same activists claim to vehemently oppose by fundamental principle of righthood. It's a circular and provably false premise to teach the bias out of teachers without imprinting any biases in its place. We should start teaching Aristotle or Kant before deciding we're fit to teach anti-racism. Just teach biology, expression of gender will be obvious when we teach biochemistry and genetic variability. Teach science and skin colour will be knowble nonsense, not doctrines but common sense. We teach physics and religion will be read as a metaphor and if we teach literacy it won't matter what zealots try to hijack religion because nobody literate who can think critically could be radicalized. We can solve all these insane problems with real education, we don't need special training or compensation to equity training, just teach the fundamentals. No doctrine required. Learn to spell, and write, and count, and play music, and physical health, and history etc. Verifiable material realities, kids need those to develop proper ideas, they don't need to be spoofed anti-racism because that's only going to radicalized their parents or force them toward a horrible option when those kids feel rebellious. It's absolutely counter productive to create the ideas we're trying to dispell. This is obsessively insecure and kids' quality of life is being permanently scarred by replacing stem with 62 genders when kids are still learning what it means to go on a date with their fancy of the week lol. What nuance could they possibly learn from that conversation?
    1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. It's kind of tragic how terrified these men are of thought. "you can't... without someone else showing you first", "we can't speak about anything if we don't agree on masculin and feminin..." Why? Where do you come up with these ultimatums? Both of you need to read Kant critique on pure reason to learn how to formulate and process rational logic. This fear of independent thought is either cynical toward human capacity or nihilistic toward the future of the species. Either way I'd rather blow up trying to make something work than curl up trying to preserve something that clearly doesn't work. One is guaranteed to fail, the other is not. It's a no brainer progress comes from stepping into the unknown. Conservatism is literally the opposite of that, it's being too fearful to realize there's water behind you opting instead to only look in front of you and wait for it to rain. It's really sad, but I think a bigger part of this ideology is their need to feel important. Two aging out of touch white guys scared of being dethroned. I love Peterson, watched all of his work and a hundred hours of lectures. It's not his character I'm attacking or his compétence, it's the unreasonable and illogical premise of his point of view and the narrow focus of his parroting guests that I find a bit pathetic. I keep suggesting he learn stats and economics before deciding to know enough to try to steer the country on its foundations. It really doesn't seem like he's ever tried to watch and trade stock markets or learn dynamics models like curl derivatives to apply toward human behaviours. Stats would help him read the studies and journal articles properly, help him critique fallacies, and more adequately assess cost benefits of his ideas. Very important discussion though, gratefully appreciate the upload. I hope one of these days one of my comments gets read with an open mind instead of defensive vitriol.
    1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. What I don't understand about how we assess factors of racial discrimination in the justice system is how little we punish white collar criminal offences especially with regard to incarceration, and taking that into consideration when also reflecting on the motivations of poorer people suffering by their poverty both for want of family or feeling trapped by health costs or prospects for upward mobility with the cost of upgrading employable skills. So on the one hand you've got people whose incomes are for sure suppressed, their job prospects suppressed by that economic constraint, and then on top of that harsher sentencing further diminishing employability and political involvement. If we're not punishing people who commit fraud in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and not once but serially for years like Trump or Trudeau, but then we coerce plea bargains and police raids and press charges for minor offences on an 18 year old which follows them the rest of their lives - those factor aren't additive or even multiplicative they're exponentially weighted against each other over time and spanning generations. Add to that a history and culture of oppression not even 1 generation removed from today's working prime adults, the severity of massive financial crimes is grossly underrated when we consider what people are doing in response to poverty. By stealing money unduly in excesses and when already living comfortably, that should be worse than a low level coke dealer trying to pay rent and tuition or medical bills for their children. The racial divide in incarceration rates and lifetime wealth accumulation has a lot to do with what we consider severe and what we deem punishable by fines and settlements. I wonder what the racial ratios are for white/black people settling out of court compared to plea bargains. I suspect black men accept more disadvantageous plea bargains, are victims of raids and civil forfeiture, and I would bet white men tend to settle and pay fines to escape justice and keep part of their ill gotten gains contrasting the theft of the poorer minorities charged more harshly for lesser offences which were motivated by necessity as opposed to greed. The factors compound I think that's crucial. Leniency on financial crimes should be weighted to account for all the crimes prosecuted by individuals motivated by or triggered by lacking resources and access basic needs. Stealing vaste sums is lending itself to more poverty, that makes the white collar crime more harmful than we give it credit for so long as there are people suffering from poverty they can't reasonably escape from by effort or brute force grit. The better solution is prosecute financial crimes adequately. Prosecute shareholders like Sacklers or Trumps. If we don't we're enabling rich white people to make desperate those who we "can't afford" 5i feed to educate into even economic competition on level grounds. The reality is we don't like competition or meritocracy. We like easy money and when we've won the lottery we like to think we were just smarter than everyone else for having guessed the winning numbers.
    1
  25. 1
  26. 1