He Got a Point…

It takes him an hour to get there…

Jordan Peterson has got a point.

…but now I got a handle on his theoretical framework, and I largely agree with it, strangely enough.

One apprehension I am having of his assessment is that he definitely appears to not address the contradictions involved with his conclusions at the various points of development of civilization; that is, he is missing a vital component: the present situation. It’s as though he leaves it out as a necessary result of history, as though it is empty. One gets this impression not because he hasn’t brought his argument up to the present in history, as in the video, rather, more because how he is being involved with his analysis of history. It is as if he just assumes that his assessment is involved with history. And it is this exception which I see shows what is missing, where the water his argument holds begins to drip out.

But, I’ll listen to the second hour at another time and I will leave my comments on that part when I get to it.

For the first hour: I think he’s nailed the problem from a particular standpoint.

But from what I’ve heard of his opinions, I think his solution might be lacking. But as I said, once I listen to the next hour I will make another post as to my thoughts on that.

Author: landzek

My name is Lance Kair, a philosopher, a counselor and a musician who is being questioned.

4 thoughts on “He Got a Point…”

  1. This is the biggest problem with J.P., that even I briefly noted in my essay defending his religious/theological views. It takes him a long while to get to the heart of the matter, but when he finally does, it’s usually something rewarding and insightful. He sometimes is prone to very obtuse language that keeps things murky before he gets to the punch.

    I find it odd, though, given his obvious charisma and charm, that he is not able to do so earlier. He’s very lucky he has his charisma and charm, because few people can hold an audience for an hour to finally get to the rewarding and insightful parts of the talk or interviews. If he was less charismatic or interesting, people wouldn’t wait as long as they do to get to the richness waiting behind 20 layers of wrapping…

    1. I was struck originally, listening to a few pieces of his various lectures on YouTube and such, By The way that he engages with his material. This interests me more than his conclusions, I think. And this in itself intrigues me. I am enjoying that there is aNother possible voice in the discussion where Zizek seems to be king of the mountain somehow. Lol. Zizek definitely is my guy. Even as I have some issues with what I see as the limitations of what he’s talking about, his position. But likewise I see the limitation of Petersons.
      But I think the problem with Peterson’s position is more gaping. Pronounced. Where as Zizek’s is more contradictory.

      It will be an interesting debate on April 18. I kind a wish that I could’ve gone but I hope there is somebody will put it on YouTube or something.

    2. Someone the other day posted like a 2 1/2 hour long talk of Peterson, and I said who the hell has 2 1/2 hours to listen to Peterson? Lol.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s