zoony Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 This is a very refreshing take, much needed in todays climate https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/putting-monsterpaint-onjordan-peterson/550859/ First, a person says something. Then, another person restates what they purportedly said so as to make it seem as if their view is as offensive, hostile, or absurd... Peterson begins the interview by explaining why he tells young men to grow up and take responsibility for getting their lives together and becoming good partners. He notes he isn’t talking exclusively to men, and that he has lots of female fans. “What’s in it for the women, though?” Newman asks. “Well, what sort of partner do you want?” Peterson says. “Do you want an overgrown child? Or do you want someone to contend with who is going to help you?” “So you’re saying,” Newman retorts, “that women have some sort of duty to help fix the crisis of masculinity.” But that’s not what he said. He posited a vested interest, not a duty. “Women deeply want men who are competent and powerful,” Peterson goes on to assert. “And I don’t mean power in that they can exert tyrannical control over others. That’s not power. That’s just corruption. Power is competence. And why in the world would you not want a competent partner? Well, I know why, actually, you can’t dominate a competent partner. So if you want domination—” The interviewer interrupts, “So you’re saying women want to dominate, is that what you’re saying?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I thought it wonderfully ironic that an article about purposefully misconstruing what a person actually said takes one interview by one person and calls the article "Why can't People hear what Jordan Peterson is saying" rather than "Why can't this one person hear what he's saying." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: I thought it wonderfully ironic that an article about purposefully misconstruing what a person actually said takes one interview by one person and calls the article "Why can't People hear what Jordan Peterson is saying" rather than "Why can't this one person hear what he's saying." Im pretty sure hes been labeled a misogynist by the left for saying that the gender pay gap is bogus, which it is. Hes never said it didnt exist, which is what most automatically hear. Hes also been labeled far right, which is pretty funny too. I think youtube actually banned him at one point though im not sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Then you should post an article about those things. The article you posted is about Kathy Newman's interview style, which, who the **** cares? Edit: My thought on her interview style is that it is Kellyanne Conway in reverse. If Kellyanne doesn't like a question, she restates it in a way more favorable to her, then answers that question. If this interviewer doesn't like the answer she gets, she restates the answer after using the words "So basically you are saying...." People do that on ES all the time and, I agree, it's annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 9 minutes ago, zoony said: Im pretty sure hes been labeled a misogynist by the left for saying that the gender pay gap is bogus, which it is. Hes never said it didnt exist, which is what most automatically hear. Hes also been labeled far right, which is pretty funny too. I think youtube actually banned him at one point though im not sure In the part of your story, he doesn't even seem to claim that it is bogus: "No, I’m saying that is one component of a multivariate equation that predicts salary. It accounts for maybe 5 percent of the variance. So you need another 18 factors, one of which is gender. And there is prejudice. There’s no doubt about that. But it accounts for a much smaller portion of the variance in the pay gap than the radical feminists claim." Agreeability accounts for about 5% of the variance so other things must explain the vast majority of the variance and those things include things like gender and prejudice and presumably some other things. (And I will point out there, that he's doing something similar to what this article is written on. He's describing a view to a broad number of people that I'm not sure if anybody meaningful actually holds. How many people are these "radical feminists" that over state the amount of the pay gap is due to gender?) Oh and just to be clear, I don't like Peterson (the little I know of him). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 16 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: I thought it wonderfully ironic that an article about purposefully misconstruing what a person actually said takes one interview by one person and calls the article "Why can't People hear what Jordan Peterson is saying" rather than "Why can't this one person hear what he's saying." If you re-read (assuming you did) the second paragraph in the article - OR the first in zoony's post - I will forgive you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 14 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: which, who the **** cares? Jordan Peterson is a rallying cry for people who are unhappy with academia, without really knowing why because they aren't in academia and haven't step foot on a campus in decades. In reality, he is a deeply troubled man. I know him because of my time at University of Toronto and our departments work closely with each other. Let's just say that this man has deep rooted issues. Also hilarious that a clinical psychologist is somehow now an expert in gender pay and economic issues. Peterson is a legitimate expert in his specific field. And he is mostly out of his element when he rants about economics from an academic platform. 11 minutes ago, PeterMP said: (And I will point out there, that he's doing something similar to what this article is written on. He's describing a view to a broad number of people that I'm not sure if anybody meaningful actually holds. How many people are these "radical feminists" that over state the amount of the pay gap is due to gender?) My partner is an economist who studies gender issues. You can even describe her as a "radical feminist". Their analysis of this issue indeed accounts for multivariate analysis. I mean this is pretty standard stuff for people in the social sciences (even Peterson admits this). But of course, admitting that doesn't allow Peterson to create strawmans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 minutes ago, No Excuses said: , admitting that doesn't allow Peterson to create strawmans. strawpersons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 10 minutes ago, DC9 said: If you re-read (assuming you did) the second paragraph in the article - OR the first in zoony's post - I will forgive you. 7 minutes ago, No Excuses said: Jordan Peterson is a rallying cry for people who are unhappy with academia, without really knowing why because they aren't in academia and haven't step foot on a campus in decades. I must be making my point in a way that is much less clear than I think I am being. So, apologies. (I have the flu and am on quite a large amount of drugs). My point is that this article is not about Jordan Peterson. It is about this interviewer and her dishonest interviewing style, and then more broadly, the fact that so many talking heads do what she does. Literally any sentient being capable of speech could replace Jordan Peterson in this article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 Here is the original interview, which is worth a listen. I know its 30 minutes but worth it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 minutes ago, No Excuses said: My partner is an economist who studies gender issues. You can even describe her as a "radical feminist". There analysis of this issue indeed accounts for multivariate analysis. I mean this is pretty standard stuff for people in the social sciences (even Peterson admits this). But of course, admitting that doesn't allow Peterson to create strawmans. That's essentially what this story is about. An interviewer taking Peterson's statements and then re-phrasing them as strawmen to beat up on. But what Peterson does is create a lot of strawmen by claiming there are some meaningfully large important groups that believe wrong/bad things (e.g. that there is some significant mass of radical feminists out there that think the disproportionate amount of the gender pay is not related to prejudice that badly needs to be countered). He also badly misconstrues Christianity and concepts like carrying ones cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 3 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: I must be making my point in a way that is much less clear than I think I am being. So, apologies. (I have the flu and am on quite a large amount of drugs). My point is that this article is not about Jordan Peterson. It is about this interviewer and her dishonest interviewing style, and then more broadly, the fact that so many talking heads do what she does. Literally any sentient being capable of speech could replace Jordan Peterson in this article. Ah, okay - I didn't get that from your post but that's exactly what it's about. My apologies. And then No Excuses came in with his virtue signal to completely discredit the dude with his argument from authority. He is in academia so no one outside of academia may have an opinion about it. Of course, not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 There are two options: 1. We can look for analysis on issues like gender pay gap from a clinical psychologist with an axe to grind on social issues. 2. We can look at what economists who are trained to study this subject have to say about it: https://harvardmagazine.com/2016/05/reassessing-the-gender-wage-gap I don't know what Peterson is getting out of his social crusades. He is a brilliant man, who has done a lot of interesting work in the field of psychology. I would like to see him sit down and actually talk these issues with people who are experts. Trolling around with talk show hosts, and debating someone like Sam Harris doesn't really allow him to have his views challenged in a constructive way. And knowing him on a somewhat personal level, I am almost certain that this is a feature, not a bug. He is not this abrasive when he's around peers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 12 minutes ago, No Excuses said: Jordan Peterson is a rallying cry for people who are unhappy with academia, without really knowing why because they aren't in academia and haven't step foot on a campus in decades. And we are off! I dont agree with your statement, btw 22 minutes ago, PeterMP said: Agreeability accounts for about 5% of the variance so other things must explain the vast majority of the variance and those things include things like gender and prejudice and presumably some other things. And time spent out of the workforce to have children, etc. Or we can just go with `because white males should be ashamed`. That seems to get the most traction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 14 minutes ago, zoony said: And we are off! I dont agree with your statement, btw And time spent out of the workforce to have children, etc. Or we can just go with `because white males should be ashamed`. That seems to get the most traction So what you're saying is....white males shouldn't be ashamed of slavery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 18 minutes ago, zoony said: And we are off! I dont agree with your statement, btw There are a lot of issues in academia, but some kind of radical student body is really not one of them. University of Toronto in particular is a school full of nerds who don't really like making a fuss about things. There are small outbursts here and there at some schools, but for the most part it is business as usual. Social science professors seem to have their own personal crusades that they love dumping onto the student body, projecting upon kids who just wanna go to class, graduate and move on with their lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 29 minutes ago, zoony said: And we are off! I dont agree with your statement, btw And time spent out of the workforce to have children, etc. Like I said, other factors, but even out of the work force due to children is realistically is somewhat the result of historical prejudice. In a normal pregnancy, it doesn't take much time off work to have a kid. Certainly, not enough to affect things like long term pay. My wife worked up to the day that she had the baby, was out of the hospital in two days, and could have certainly gone back to work in under a week in both cases. The issue is that historically maternity leave has been offered to take care of babies, but not paternity leave. There was a societal prejudice that the woman would (and would want to) stay home with new babies and not the men. (My wife readily admits to going stir crazy being at home with babies, but I didn't have paternity leave and she did have maternity leave so there wasn't really another option.) So even when you cite things like time spent out of the workforce to have children at least part of that is due to prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 This interview is the biggest meme in the alt-right universe right now. It's so easy to go after a crappy interviewer, which she definitely is. But Peterson's still a tool. I myself kind of like this article about this guy. http://www.macleans.ca/opinion/is-jordan-peterson-the-stupid-mans-smart-person/ 34 minutes ago, zoony said: Or we can just go with `because white males should be ashamed`. That seems to get the most traction I'll go with "some white males are the biggest whiny cupcakes in the entire box" for 500, Alex. Do you need a safe space? (zoony, please note that this an an actual smile, not a twa *gotcha* smiley) 35 minutes ago, No Excuses said: He is a brilliant man, who has done a lot of interesting work in the field of psychology. He is. But none of the stuff he actually researched is what he is famous for on the internet. He's like an astronomer who likes to post tweets about his doubts about climate change. Telling people that Western Civilization is doomed and everything he dislikes is "neo-Marxism" is a good gig if the actual academic work dries up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 Just now, No Excuses said: There are a lot of issues in academia, but some kind of radical student body is really not one of them. University of Toronto in particular is a school full of nerds who don't really like making a fuss about things. There are small outbursts here and there at some schools, but for the most part it is business as usual. Social science professors seem to have their own personal crusades that they love dumping onto the student body, projecting upon kids who just wanna go to class, graduate and move on with their lives. Im not sure how much of this he really ever asked for, although Im sure he has a bit of attention whore in him. After all most career academics do what they do ultimately for recognition... and admittedly i dont know much about the guy at all. That said it seems like he was thrust on the scene mostly because of his refusal to accept gender pronouns or something. But when he talks, i dont disagree with much of anything he says, especially identity politics. He is correct that this is (a) a huge problem in this country and (b) it is consistent with dangerous political idealogies. The entire thing is compounded by the 24 hour ADHD news cycle and social platforms that reward brevity above all.. Much easier to just slap labels on people and problems. I like that he challenges the hell out of that. Most on this website consider me a trump supporter / far right even though i voted for hillary, mainly because i enjoy pointing out hysteria, groupthink, and thought bubbles when i see them. Its much easier to slap labels and move on. Its a dangerous time on the right and left in this country. 5 minutes ago, Predicto said: go with "some white males are the biggest whiny cupcakes in the entire box" for 500, Alex. Do you need a safe space? I might! Every time someone posts something on this board that doesnt fall into line with the Dems and leftist groupthink, they are labeled a whiner or a nazi. Or both. That is definitely safe space worthy 8 minutes ago, Predicto said: Peterson's still a tool. I myself kind of like this article about this guy. http://www.macleans.ca/opinion/is-jordan-peterson-the-stupid-mans-smart-person/ Well, of course. Lets dismiss this all as dumb. Im embarrased now and ashamed. I wish i were smart but not going to happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Just now, Predicto said: It's so easy to go after a crappy interviewer, which she definitely is. But Peterson's still a tool. Indeed. Peterson is a smart man who can outclass any crappy interviewer, especially one who is looking to drive an agenda she isn't well versed in. It's like an NBA athlete marching into a high school basketball game, dunking all over pudgy teenagers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I'd also like to say that there is a fundamental concept beyond men should be ashamed to asking can we (men included and maybe even especially). Can I suggest that we can do better without saying that people should be ashamed? Okay, we have a system that under pays women because they tend to be more agreeable and more agreeable people tend to get paid less. It isn't at least the result of an explicit bias, but how did we actually end up with such a system? Does it make any sense? Does anybody actually like working with disagreeable people? Especially to the point that they should be paid more? Maybe we can do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 10 minutes ago, No Excuses said: Indeed. Peterson is a smart man who can outclass any crappy interviewer, especially one who is looking to drive an agenda she isn't well versed in. It's like an NBA athlete marching into a high school basketball game, dunking all over pudgy teenagers. Actually, it's more like a Division 3 college player marching into a high school basketball game and dunking on everyone. Because a lot of his stuff is just simplistic sloganeering, but it is very well packaged. As we all know, the best debaters in the world are not great because they are factually correct. They are great because they know how to debate. Ted Cruz is a national debate champion. Creationists regularly "win" debates against actual evolutionary biologists who have all the facts on their side. They know how to play the game. Peterson is a master, and this interviewer is incompetent. And thus a meme is born. There were literally 20 threads about this on Imgur at the same time a couple of days ago. Just now, Predicto said: 16 minutes ago, zoony said: Well, of course. Lets dismiss this all as dumb. Im embarrased now and ashamed. I wish i were smart but not going to happen Did you read the article? You might like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 I didn't know who this guy was an hour ago. Now I can't say that. Damn you people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 25, 2018 Author Share Posted January 25, 2018 44 minutes ago, Predicto said: you read the article? You might like it. The one you posted? No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.