Mediaboss Marketing

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson is a clinical psychologist and professor emeritus at the University of Toronto. From 1993 to 1998 he served as assistant and then associate professor of psychology at Harvard. He spent fifteen years writing Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief (1999; released in June 2018as a now bestselling author-readaudiobook). Maps of Meaning is a scholarly investigation into the nature of narrative and religious thought, the structure of perception, the regulation of emotion, and the motivation for atrocity in the service of ideology. Dr. Peterson also penned the popular global bestsellers Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life & 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos, #1 for nonfiction in 2018 in the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, the Netherlands, Brazil and Norway, both translated into some 50 languages. The latter book has sold more than five million copies; the former, released in mid 2021, 750,000.

Raised and toughened in the frigid wastelands of Northern Alberta :), Dr. Peterson has flown a hammer-head roll in a carbon-fiber stuntplane, piloted a mahogany racing sailboat around Alcatraz Island, explored an Arizona meteorite crater with a group of astronauts, built a Native American Long-House on the upper floor of his Toronto home, and been inducted into a Pacific Kwakwakawakw family (see charlesjoseph.ca). Hes been a dishwasher, short-order cook, beekeeper, tow-truck driver, gas jockey, bartender, oil derrick bit re-tipper, plywood mill laborer and railway line worker. Hes taught mythology to physicians, lawyers, and businessmen; worked with Jim Balsillie, former CEO of Blackberrys Research in Motion, on Resilient People, Resilient Planet, the report of the UN Secretary Generals High Level Panel on Global Sustainability; helped his clinical clients manage the triumphs and catastrophes of life; served as an advisor to senior partners of major Canadian law firms; penned the forward for the 50th anniversary edition of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyns The Gulag Archipelago; lectured to university audiences all around the English-speaking world (see Harvard 2017, Cambridge (2018, 2021, 2021 TBA) and Oxford (2018, 2021 TBA); identified thousands of promising entrepreneurs, with the The Founder Institute in 60 different countries; spoke to sold-out audiences across North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand in the course of one of the most-well attended booktours ever mounted; and is currently mounting the 2022 Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life book tour on a similar scale (tickets available here).

With his students and colleagues, Dr. Peterson has published more than a hundred scientific papers with his colleagues and students, advancing the modern understanding of alcoholism, antisocial behavior, play, emotion, creativity, competence and personality. He was nominated for five consecutive years as one of Ontarios Best University Lecturers, and was one of only three profs rated as life changing in the U of Ts underground student handbook of course ratings.

In 2016, shortly before the publication of 12 Rules, several of Dr. Petersons online lectures, videos and interviews went viral, launching him into unprecedented international prominence as a public intellectual and educator. His work, public postings and discussions are featured on the following platforms:

Dr. Petersons classroom lectures on mythology and the psychology of religion, based on Maps of Meaning (2016 version here), were turned into a popular 13-part TV series on Canadian public televisionsTVO. Malcolm Gladwell discussed psychology with him while researching his books; Norman Doidge, author of The Brain that Changes Itself, wrote the forward to 12 Rules; and bestselling thriller writer Gregg Hurwitz employed several of his valuable things as a plot feature in his #1 international bestseller, Orphan X.

With his colleagues, Dr. Daniel M. Higgins and Dr. Robert O. Pihl, Dr. Peterson has also produced two online programs to help people understand themselves better and to improve their psychological and practical functioning. The most recent of these, UnderstandMyself, provides its users with detailed information about their personalities, based on work he published with his students here. Tens of thousands of people now know themselves better, as a consequence of completing this 15-minute program.His original self-analysis program,theSelf Authoring Suite, (featured in O: The Oprah Magazine, CBC radio, and NPRs national website), has helped over 200,000 people resolve the problems of their past, rectify their personality faults and enhance their virtues, and radically improve their future. Research documenting the programs effectiveness can be found here and here.

Dr. Peterson has appeared on many popular podcasts and shows, including the Joe Rogan Experience (#877, #958, #1006), The Rubin Report (12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos, Free Speech, Psychology, Gender Pronouns), H3H3(#37), and many more. He is currently working on a new book, tentatively titledBeyond Mere Order: 12 More Rules for Life, slated for publication in late 2020.

Read more here:
Jordan Peterson | About

Jordan Peterson's goal is to strengthen the individual. Life contains tragedy and evil. The hero's journey justifies the burden of being by pursuing truth, making order out of chaos. The alternative is deceiving yourself with ideology and nihilism. So, take yourself seriously, know the monster within you, and become a responsible person with an integrated character.

r/JordanPetersonis an open forum where controversial topics can be discussed in good faith. Free speech, despite risking offense, is necessary to conduct civil discourse between opposing ideologies. Bans will be given to users who post excessively abusive material.

Follow Jordan Peterson on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Youtube, and JBP Daily

OfficialWebsite |Youtube |Blog |Events |Merchandise Store |Contact

Applicationsthinkspot |JBP Daily |Youtube Search |Transcripts

Social MediaFacebook |Twitter |Quora |Instagram |Soundcloud |Spotify

SupportDonate

BooksMaps of Meaning |12 Rules for Life

ScholarshipResearch |Google Scholar |

StudiesJordan Peterson's Claims Reference List |List of Studies From James Damore's Google Memo

ResourcesAll Videos | Q&A Catalog | FAQ |Reading List |Great Books |Writing Guide |42 Things Everyone Should Know |Art Collection | Psychology as a Career

Fan Made ContentWikiQuote | School of Peterson|Land of Meaning |12 Rules for Life Infographic | Lobster Writer - Essay Writing App

Related New Real Peer Review |Postmodernism Generator |OpenMind |HumanProgress

Subreddit Starter Pack |Surveys |Analysis

JBP Ask Me Anything! 2017 | Responses 2018 | Responses

Read the original here:
Jordan Peterson: Descensus ad inferos - reddit

The left, he believes, refuses to admit that men might be in charge because they are better at it. The people who hold that our culture is an oppressive patriarchy, they dont want to admit that the current hierarchy might be predicated on competence, he said.

Mr. Peterson illustrates his arguments with copious references to ancient myths bringing up stories of witches, biblical allegories and ancient traditions. I ask why these old stories should guide us today.

It makes sense that a witch lives in a swamp. Yeah, he says. Why?

Its a hard one.

Right. Thats right. You dont know. Its because those things hang together at a very deep level. Right. Yeah. And it makes sense that an old king lives in a desiccated tower.

But witches dont exist, and they dont live in swamps, I say.

Yeah, they do. They do exist. They just dont exist the way you think they exist. They certainly exist. You may say well dragons dont exist. Its, like, yes they do the category predator and the category dragon are the same category. It absolutely exists. Its a superordinate category. It exists absolutely more than anything else. In fact, it really exists. What exists is not obvious. You say, Well, theres no such thing as witches. Yeah, I know what you mean, but that isnt what you think when you go see a movie about them. You cant help but fall into these categories. Theres no escape from them.

Recently, a young man named Alek Minassian drove through Toronto trying to kill people with his van. Ten were killed, and he has been charged with first-degree murder for their deaths, and with attempted murder for 16 people who were injured. Mr. Minassian declared himself to be part of a misogynist group whose members call themselves incels. The term is short for involuntary celibates, though the group has evolved into a male supremacist movement made up of people some celibate, some not who believe that women should be treated as sexual objects with few rights. Some believe in forced sexual redistribution, in which a governing body would intervene in womens lives to force them into sexual relationships.

Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married.

Read the original:
Jordan Peterson, Custodian of the Patriarchy - The New ...

According to the famous Canadian professor and clinical psychologist, totalitarians hate comedians and private automobiles. That would make Jerry Seinfelds Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee outrage for these folks. In short, a capital sin. As absurd as that may sound, that sadly makes a lot of sense.

Just check what totalitarian leaders demand in the countries that failed to avoid them: making fun of the "capo di tutti capi" leads to prison time. Preventing the regular Joe to have access to passenger cars allows them to control how people move around. In some sense, it also gives these leaders the power to rule where citizens can go. For them, people are just sheep or cattle.

An excellent example of what that restriction represents came with the international health crisis. Air companies are canceling multiple flights because pilots and crew members are getting sick. For some folks, that will just mean they will have to travel by car. In a society with no automobiles, it would mean they are stranded, and they would just have to accept that. Offering options for society is healthy. Demanding people to do as they are told is totalitarian. The war on cars is really heading that way, even if in more subtle ways.

Paris had already shown that by imposing ridiculous speed limits in its streets. A sporting goods store made that pretty evident with ads that showed runners being flashed for exceeding the speed limits. Bike riders have reported the same situation. The practical effect is making life in cars so miserable at such low speeds that people will give in and walk or adopt public transportation. Good luck avoiding the frequent strikes they face.

If that were not enough for France, carmakers there will be obliged from March 1, 2022, to change all advertisements on the TV, radio, or movies. They will have to include one of these three recommendations in them: for short journeys, favor walking of cycling, think about carpooling, or use public transport every day. Every day?

To sound more modern and up to date with Instagrammers, these guidelines will also have to bring the hashtag #SeDplacerMoinsPolluer, something like move, pollute less. Any company that fails to comply will have to pay 50,000 ($56,915 at the current exchange rate) for each presentation infringement.

If this rule reminds you of cigarette packages, rest assured it is not by chance. Although the new French law recommendations are just common sense, the fear is that future messages will try to demonize personal transportation. It is already accused of being selfish and senseless. People used to say something like this would eventually happen. Seeing those predictions come true is really concerning. It means that even stable democracies are leaning toward making cars regardless of what powers them something as stigmatized as smoking. But it would be very, very wrong.

Smoking has no purpose. Cars transport goods and people. Electric vehicles do that without emitting pollutant gases, which is one of the primary purposes of the electric shift apart from energy efficiency. Automobiles regardless of combustion engines or motors help people discover what lies in other cities, countries, even some continents. They expand perspectives.

When public transportation is efficient, constantly using it to go to work should be the ideal option. You save money on fuel (if you dont drive an EV), parking, and other fees associated with cars. There would not be traffic jams, and we would not see so many vehicles carrying only the driver. You dont have to worry about where to stop, traffic, other drivers, and so forth. However, COVID-19 also made that change.

Many are now working from home, and only office landlords are complaining about that. Getting in crowded buses or trains is never a good idea in the middle of a pandemic, which made cars the safest option to move around when distances that could not cover on foot were at play. Just think about what would have happened if everybody depended on public transportation when the pandemic first struck, especially physicians and medical staff.

Predictably, Peterson was heavily attacked by haters, including left-wing, progressive car writers that apparently want to write about buses. Some just hate the man because he refuses to use gender-neutral words. Others detest cars. We have not seen a single answer that tried to refute him with proper arguments.

Regardless of your opinion about Peterson, it would be helpful just to read his tweet and reflect on it. It may not be the case that everyone that hates cars is totalitarian, but all authoritarians hate automobiles.

If you are among them and refuse to be classified among Stalin or Mussolini worshipers, consider your real reasons against personal transportation. While you claim to be against climate change, white privilege, or in favor of cities for people, think what is truly underneath the virtue-signaling attempt. It may be the case that you support a Big Brother or a populist savior, and you were not even aware of that.

Cars are indeed an ode to individuals and their decision power. They allow people to drive anywhere they want. Thankfully, some voices will raise to defend them and what they represent, whether you like them or not. Some of them cant be ignored. Trying to vilify them is clear evidence that they matter.

Read more from the original source:
The War on Cars: Jordan Peterson Calls That a Way to Identify Totalitarians - autoevolution

Photo: Jordan Peterson, via YouTube.

Editors note: Welcome to anEvolution Newstradition: a countdown of our Top 10 favorite stories of the past year, concluding on New Years Day. Our staff are enjoying the holidays, as we hope that you are, too!Help keep the daily voice of intelligent design going strong. Please give whatever you can to support the Center for Science & Culture before the end of the year!

The following wasoriginallypublished on August 15, 2021.

Here atEvolution News, Ivewrittenabout the popular public intellectual Jordan Peterson, whose political controversies have unfortunately often overshadowed his fascinating contributions to the cultural discourse on religion, science, and psychology. Although Im unconvinced by his attempts to weave together an evolutionarily grounded unifying narrative of all these things, Ive always admired him and always learn something from his lectures.

When I interviewed Stephen Meyer for his new bookReturn of the God Hypothesis, we chatted a little about Peterson and various other public intellectuals who seem to stand on the shores of theism with one foot in and one foot out. Commentinghereon Jonathan Van Marensrecent surveyof these New New Atheists (which also included figures like Douglas Murray, Tom Holland, and Niall Ferguson), David Klinghoffer expressed his hope that this might be a new window of opportunity for intelligent design to gain a hearing in the public square.

That wish has now come true at least for the Canadian rock-star professor, whotweeted out his positive first impressionsof MeyersReturn of the God Hypothesisthis weekend. Its a difficult book, Peterson wrote, well-written, densely informative. He claims (p. 211) without functional criteria to guide a search through the vast space of possible sequences, random variation is probabilistically doomed. (This is in reference to the groundbreaking experimental work conducted by Douglas Axe.) Peterson followed up that tweet byasking his followersIs this an accurate claim? He makes the case very carefully. Its not often that I encounter a book that contains so much that I did not know

Its refreshing to see such intellectual humility from a figure with Petersons status. But not all his followers were thrilled. The more colorful replies dismissed Petersons quote from the book as intelligent design nonsense, gobbledygook, absolute rubbish, etc. Onethanked Petersonfor making it clearer once again that you are nought but a Christian zealot. How are we still having this discussion in 2021?one follower sniffed.

Others were more polite but still took issue with the claim, repeating well-worn objections. Even rare events can happen,replied one follower. You just have to play for long enough or simultaneously. Someone elseechoed this, saying the rare and improbable are happening all the time in the universe.due to its vastness. When a 1:1000000 event could happen any time and in a self propagating system you only need that one event to start the ball rolling.

Of course, its trivially true that rare eventscanhappen, but probabilistically speaking, when weighing likelihoods this is very thin gruel indeed, and thats precisely Meyers point. Someone elseobjected, Its not a scientific hypothesis, unless we can test it. To which someone elsecorrectly replied, Then you just got rid of history and the scientific method itself!

Some tried a slightly more clever tack, one followersuggestingthe quote is double-edged, since he could flip it to say without functional criteria to guide a search through the vast space of possible sequences, random variation is probabilistically the best option for success. He followed up that if you assume things like the many universes theory, or cyclic time, then random variation becomes probabilistically sound.

But as Meyer discusses in the book, those sorts of things are not insignificant ifs, to say the least! Indeed, they have the classic look ofad hocassumptions, like Ptolemys epicycles of old. Peterson agrees,retweeting with the reply, But those assumptions add immense complexity to what was once a theory typified by its elegance. If you have to posit whole universes to maintain the credibility of your assumptions is that not a problem?

Hmm!

Not all reactions were negative. One followersaidthat he had just seen a video about the immune system from Kurzgesagt and found it difficult to believe the complexity of this system is the result of random processes. While materialists insist science will find answers in time, he suggests maybe science will lean towards the creationist argument.

A European followeragreedthat straight forward evolution as developed from Charles Darwinis mathematically impossible, pointing other followers to the roundtable discussion on combinatorial explosion with Meyer, David Berlinski, and David Gelernter.

Peterson himself mentioned the combinatorial problem ina later followup tweet: Which neo-Darwinists effectively address critiques of neo-Darwinisms putative inability to deal with the problem of combinatorial explosion with regard to protein folding (to say nothing of DNA mutation)@StephenCMeyer?

Needless to say, hell have a long wait for the answer to that question! In reply, Meyer explained:

Neo-Darwinists largely ignored the combinatorial search problem associated w/ novel protein folds. As evolutionary biologist H. Allen Orr admitted this problem was almost entirely ignored for two decades by molecular evolutionists. But protein scientists like the late Dan Tawfik (Weizmann Institute) called protein fold origination close to a miracle. He showed protein folds loose thermodynamic stability after a few mutations & long before they can evolve new folds.

Of course, Peterson was trained with the same assumptions of naturalism and materialism shared by other evolutionary thinkers. This has tended to make him reach for naturalistic explanations of everything by default. He has shown respect for theists, but like Carl Jung before him, he generally frames their belief in psychological terms, where God is a product of our own collective unconscious rather than a distinct, personal, creative entity. Its not that he closes the door on traditional theism. He just hasnt yet felt comfortable opening it beyond a crack, at least not publicly.

Now that hes giving Meyers work a hearing, he may have invited a new barrage of flak. But the good doctor has already proven himself capable of taking more than a bit of heat. Inmy post analyzing his podcast with Lawrence Krauss, I said that it seemed Krauss was content to stop searching, while Petersons search didnt seem to be over. Im happy to have been proven right.

Link:
#7 Story of 2021: Peterson and God Hypothesis - Discovery Institute