20 thoughts on “What If They Threw A Culture War”

  1. “We would would suggest covering your face as you are a coward.”

  2. Another radical communist group headed by the spawn of leftist elites and funded by one of Soros’ anti American slush funds.

  3. Weird how fractal politics is becoming. Peterson is not alt-right; he never was. The alt-right disavows him as part of Conservative, Inc.

  4. Liberal thesaurus:

    transphobic – see Bad
    alt-right – see Bad
    fascist – see Bad

  5. Looks like those degenerates are going to have their hands full.

    Tickets for this event are almost sold out.

    https://www.stubhub.com/performer/100276573?

    jdm is correct. Peterson and the dissident right are at cross purposes in many issues.

    He is correct in saying “White privilege” is actually majority privilege, and that it is the natural path for humans to take.

    He’s also outspoken regarding the Great Replacement.

    But he’s too ambivalent regarding child adoptions by sexual degenerates. He’s also gone soft on the state’s authority regarding Covid.

    All that said, I wish him and his sold out audience a pleasurable evening of interesting conversation and comradeship.

    However he’s

  6. Peterson’s political observations are less interesting than his insights on human psychology. I always thought that Jung’s idea of the collective unconscious was mystical clap trap. Peterson cleared this up for me. He describes the collective unconscious as a cognitive structure for understanding the world that all humans share, and the reason that it is unconscious is that it evolved before speech evolved, so it can only communicate with us (our egos) us using symbols and emotions.

  8. cognitive structure for understanding the world that all humans share

    Who developed this understanding, how and why? What if it is wrong and black is really white? Or more realistically, what if it was developed as a certain view and does not reflect reality? Hence reality is what you say it is, nothing more, nothing less.

    But back on topic – maybe they are uber health conscious and do not want to give Gestapo the ONLY reason to arrest them. Because Gestapo will allow you to burn, pillage and rape, but if you are not wearing a mask, do not pass GO! – straight to jail.

  9. Study came out recently that noted that those wearing face masks when they’re not required are likely to be less attractive than those showing their faces. Just sayin’.

    Seriously, when partipants in a debate feel the need to cover their faces, what you know a priori is that someone isn’t exactly “fighting by the Marquess of Queensbury rules”, most likely the person wearing the mask.

  10. JPA, the idea of the collective unconscious was developed by Carl Jung. Both Jung & his mentor Freud were working on the problem of personality. I have this thinking thing (the ego) and this can control certain things, but other things it cannot control. The ego may tell itself that it needs to eat better and exercise, but the self doesn’t always do what we will it to do. So whose will is being exercised when we overeat & don’t exercise?
    The goal of Jungian psychotherapy is to integrate the conscious and unconscious so that they work as one, i.e., when my ego tells me that I should do a certain thing, I do it.

  11. If “self” is “id” than I know what you are talking about re personality. Still does not answer my questions about cognitive structure for understanding the world that all humans share unless you are intimating it is “collective ego”. But then, who, what, why and how “created” this collective ego? Yea, yea, I know… the meaning of life and Mr. Creosote.

  12. JPA, I think you would agree that if two humans speaking different languages, coming from radically different cultures (or even time periods) got together, they would start to communicate pretty quickly and that communication would improve over time. You can think of the collective unconscious as the reason why that works. At a very deep level we all perceive the world, including the hazards & helps we might get from another person, the same way. If I point to myself and make a sound, that is me identifying myself to you so you can use that sound to refer to me, etc.

  13. MP, I am not disagreeing with you, everything you say makes perfect sense. I just want to know how the “collective ego” came to be. It is not possible for it to develop organically – not enough time for the disparate beings to be in contact with each other to account for it (yes, I realize it is subconscious). Just like saying bacteria evolved into a sentient human being by chance – not enough time in the universe for that to happen. And if we can ascertain where “collective ego” came from, we can then figure out what reality really is.

  14. Both Jung and Peterson are non-religious, JPA. They describe the mind more than they describe the conditions that created it. Though I think that modern Jungians rely an awful lot on just-so evolutionary stories such as “humans evolved from apes that dwelt in the trees and so they began to see the world in 3D and in terms of grasp so they could swing from branch to branch and also they developed a fear of snakes because there are poisonous snakes in trees.”
    All this exists in the imagination. It is story telling, it is not descriptive of the reality of the senses.

  15. The best of Peterson can be seen in a series of youtube lectures he did years ago, before he was famous, as a lecturer at the University of Toronto. A sample is here: https://youtu.be/a6FHPuICmt0
    The lectures are rambling, but what Peterson is trying to explain is the problem of perception, how our mind takes in raw sensory information and from it creates a coherent world and a coherent self.

  18. MP, thanks. I think I’ll forego Jung and Peterson. Anyone who believes in theory of evolution is completely divorced from reality and science (as opposed to science™), especially theories of probability. To wit, “They describe the mind more than they describe the conditions that created it.” – how can you describe something if you do not postulate where the “power and ability” to describe that something comes from? Isn’t that sloppy for a philosopher, although Schrodinger’s cat and/or Heizenberg’s Uncertainty Principle (something I learned at UofT before it went to shit) come to mind? We are of course talking about the metaphysical world Jung and Peterson theorize about.

  19. The reason the Left hates Peterson is not because of his psychological theories, but because of his using psychology to promote a neo-stoic philosophy. Being a whole man (or woman) means living a virtuous life, if the way that you live your life does not require courage, you are doing it wrong, etc.
    It is the opposite of the current orthodoxy, which insists that you are responsible for every person’s behavior but your own.

  20. That’s very observant, UMMP. I wouldn’t have assigned Neostoicism to Peterson’s philosophy, but it fits.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.