comment by Poolmyfinger (U12438)
posted 22 minutes ago
You Brits are hilarious 🤣
Imagine spending £££ on an investigation into whether some Speaker of your parliament had bullied others.
“Bullying” FFS
All of politics is bullying. The point of politics is to find ways to force your ideas onto others and use votes to justify it.
You’ve gone soft
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's an interesting take
FWIW the report (89 pages) by the Commissioner for Standards found his conduct had been unacceptable. And he'd used his position to intimidate, and abuse colleagues. His conduct was so serious that, "had he still been a Member of Parliament, we would have determined that he should be expelled by resolution of the House"
And he would be banned from getting a pass giving him access to Parliament's buildings. He's since been suspended by the Labour party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60660385.amp
I think 'enforced monogamy' as a concept, is poorly thought out and really should be rejected.
It's fine to like things JP says and find some of his psychology useful or insightful. But at the same time, he is capable of saying things which are very wrong.
Just look at Freud, who despite being recognised as groundbreaking, also said a lot of dumb crap.
Intelligent people are sometimes the worst idiots around.
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 1 minute ago
I think 'enforced monogamy' as a concept, is poorly thought out and really should be rejected.
It's fine to like things JP says and find some of his psychology useful or insightful. But at the same time, he is capable of saying things which are very wrong.
Just look at Freud, who despite being recognised as groundbreaking, also said a lot of dumb crap.
Intelligent people are sometimes the worst idiots around.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My problem isn't even with his terminology.
The interview where I heard him use that term was when he defended a fekin incel murderer with "he was mad at God." That incel he was, in my view, defending hired a van and drove along a sidewalk in Toronto killing 11 people and injuring 15. Fek JP.
Junky a$$ed azzole.
comment by Poolmyfinger (U12438)
posted about an hour ago
You Brits are hilarious 🤣
Imagine spending £££ on an investigation into whether some Speaker of your parliament had bullied others.
“Bullying” FFS
All of politics is bullying. The point of politics is to find ways to force your ideas onto others and use votes to justify it.
You’ve gone soft
---------------------------------------------------------------------https://t.co/wJjyereqCI
This you?
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 7 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So he admitted that?
Tell SatNav.
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you. Just another example of how he talks schit.
And I'd say those American Christians may believe its the most important, but there are billions besides me who'd disagree.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.Just another example of how he talks schit.
And I'd say those American Christians may believe its the most important, but there are billions besides me who'd disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would consider the Bible the most influential book ever assembled - I would struggle to think of an alternative.
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
Its actually a collection of books though. Various authors.
Tell you what I will agree though. It was ( I think) the first book in print.
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.Just another example of how he talks schit.
And I'd say those American Christians may believe its the most important, but there are billions besides me who'd disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would consider the Bible the most influential book ever assembled - I would struggle to think of an alternative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd agree, was thinking of an alternative and I could only come up with Euclid's Elements. I spent 2018-2021 writing software that was primarily centered around Euclidean geometry. Which is pretty mi d boggling afte all that time. Ironically it is the second most published book after the Bible.
'Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.'
Or he meant something different to what was conceived and construed.
Anyway, I think it's dull route of conversation tbh.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was angry at God." Explain that. Because to me that's giving the murderer an out.
And martial law hasn't happened in Canada since 1970.
But he claims it was used by Justin Trudeau. You know really, really smart people can be wrong. Takes humility or just honesty to admit it.
And that term is not a psychological term.
Its used in anthropology. In the sense he was using it.
Probably why I couldn't find it in any psychology or psychiatry dictionary.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 2 minutes ago
really, really smart people can be wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIES !!!!
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 2 minutes ago
really, really smart people can be wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIES !!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes - you're wrong all the time but are at least moderately intelligent
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was angry at God." Explain that. Because to me that's giving the murderer an out.
And martial law hasn't happened in Canada since 1970.
But he claims it was used by Justin Trudeau. You know really, really smart people can be wrong. Takes humility or just honesty to admit it.
And that term is not a psychological term.
Its used in anthropology. In the sense he was using it.
Probably why I couldn't find it in any psychology or psychiatry dictionary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is giving a murderer an out? Being angry at god doesn’t excuse murder? Does it?
Did the emergency act give the government the right to use the military to enforce that law? Yes or no? (I don’t know I’m just asking)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2016.1216153
It’s a mixture of evolutionary biology, anthropology and psychology
Psychological anthropology is a subfield of anthropology devoted to the way cognition, emotion, and motivation are shaped in sociocultural settings and to the psychological factors that are important in culture learning and expression.
I’m really not going into this all again. If this is your main point of concern about someone who speaks publicly as much as he does then you should feel happy that this is your only gripe. If you want to take this as an example of “why he talks sheeet” then good luck to you.
It’s really not that big of a deal and I think you should move on. I get it, you think the guy is a whiny grifter who doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. I’d say he’s better placed than you or I to classify what is and what is not included in psychology. And certainly better placed than some New York Times writer or wherever you read the criticism in the first place.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was angry at God." Explain that. Because to me that's giving the murderer an out.
And martial law hasn't happened in Canada since 1970.
But he claims it was used by Justin Trudeau. You know really, really smart people can be wrong. Takes humility or just honesty to admit it.
And that term is not a psychological term.
Its used in anthropology. In the sense he was using it.
Probably why I couldn't find it in any psychology or psychiatry dictionary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is giving a murderer an out? Being angry at god doesn’t excuse murder? Does it?
Did the emergency act give the government the right to use the military to enforce that law? Yes or no? (I don’t know I’m just asking)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2016.1216153
It’s a mixture of evolutionary biology, anthropology and psychology
Psychological anthropology is a subfield of anthropology devoted to the way cognition, emotion, and motivation are shaped in sociocultural settings and to the psychological factors that are important in culture learning and expression.
I’m really not going into this all again. If this is your main point of concern about someone who speaks publicly as much as he does then you should feel happy that this is your only gripe. If you want to take this as an example of “why he talks sheeet” then good luck to you.
It’s really not that big of a deal and I think you should move on. I get it, you think the guy is a whiny grifter who doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. I’d say he’s better placed than you or I to classify what is and what is not included in psychology. And certainly better placed than some New York Times writer or wherever you read the criticism in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually he did say something I agree with. This Trudeau is a fekin incompetent. The guy was a friggin dramabteacher before the Liberals pulled the dynasty card.But as you and the other right wingers say about British politics the opposition is even more incompetent. Oh and the emergency Act can be used to call out military but IT WASN'T.
Can’t stand I keep up with Canadian politics and politicians, my knowledge is extremely limited to say the least.
Waitresses on the other hand….
Explain your unlimited knowledge of waitresses please.
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whilst these vices are problems, I don't really believe them to be the reasons for people becoming Incels. I see it as a problem stemming from mental health, lack of opportunities and internet echo chambers. I don't something think prnography, leads people to become Incels.
At best you can say those vices might lead to misogyny. In which case then JP, would be better off saying we need to fight misogyny rather than enforced monogamy. But that would be very much off brand for him.
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whilst these vices are problems, I don't really believe them to be the reasons for people becoming Incels. I see it as a problem stemming from mental health, lack of opportunities and internet echo chambers. I don't something think prnography, leads people to become Incels.
At best you can say those vices might lead to misogyny. In which case then JP, would be better off saying we need to fight misogyny rather than enforced monogamy. But that would be very much off brand for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re entitled to your opinion but I think the link to orngraphy addiction and people ending up feeling the way they incels do is quite apparent & obvious.
I never said it was the sole cause, I listed various things. None of which help and all of which create a melting pot which exacerbate these feelings in people.
Sign in if you want to comment
Arguing w/strangers cause I'm lonely thread
Page 2552 of 4858
2553 | 2554 | 2555 | 2556 | 2557
posted on 8/3/22
comment by Poolmyfinger (U12438)
posted 22 minutes ago
You Brits are hilarious 🤣
Imagine spending £££ on an investigation into whether some Speaker of your parliament had bullied others.
“Bullying” FFS
All of politics is bullying. The point of politics is to find ways to force your ideas onto others and use votes to justify it.
You’ve gone soft
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's an interesting take
FWIW the report (89 pages) by the Commissioner for Standards found his conduct had been unacceptable. And he'd used his position to intimidate, and abuse colleagues. His conduct was so serious that, "had he still been a Member of Parliament, we would have determined that he should be expelled by resolution of the House"
And he would be banned from getting a pass giving him access to Parliament's buildings. He's since been suspended by the Labour party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60660385.amp
posted on 8/3/22
I think 'enforced monogamy' as a concept, is poorly thought out and really should be rejected.
It's fine to like things JP says and find some of his psychology useful or insightful. But at the same time, he is capable of saying things which are very wrong.
Just look at Freud, who despite being recognised as groundbreaking, also said a lot of dumb crap.
Intelligent people are sometimes the worst idiots around.
posted on 8/3/22
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 1 minute ago
I think 'enforced monogamy' as a concept, is poorly thought out and really should be rejected.
It's fine to like things JP says and find some of his psychology useful or insightful. But at the same time, he is capable of saying things which are very wrong.
Just look at Freud, who despite being recognised as groundbreaking, also said a lot of dumb crap.
Intelligent people are sometimes the worst idiots around.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My problem isn't even with his terminology.
The interview where I heard him use that term was when he defended a fekin incel murderer with "he was mad at God." That incel he was, in my view, defending hired a van and drove along a sidewalk in Toronto killing 11 people and injuring 15. Fek JP.
Junky a$$ed azzole.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by Poolmyfinger (U12438)
posted about an hour ago
You Brits are hilarious 🤣
Imagine spending £££ on an investigation into whether some Speaker of your parliament had bullied others.
“Bullying” FFS
All of politics is bullying. The point of politics is to find ways to force your ideas onto others and use votes to justify it.
You’ve gone soft
---------------------------------------------------------------------https://t.co/wJjyereqCI
This you?
posted on 8/3/22
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 7 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So he admitted that?
Tell SatNav.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
posted on 8/3/22
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you. Just another example of how he talks schit.
And I'd say those American Christians may believe its the most important, but there are billions besides me who'd disagree.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.Just another example of how he talks schit.
And I'd say those American Christians may believe its the most important, but there are billions besides me who'd disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would consider the Bible the most influential book ever assembled - I would struggle to think of an alternative.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
posted on 8/3/22
Its actually a collection of books though. Various authors.
Tell you what I will agree though. It was ( I think) the first book in print.
posted on 8/3/22
I said assembled
posted on 8/3/22
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 9 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah, you studied history I believe.
Would you agree the bible was the first book?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not in the literal sense, no. Many, many books pre-date it.
The 'first book' though is a phrase I have heard American Christians use to not mean first as in the earliest, but first as in 'the most important'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you.Just another example of how he talks schit.
And I'd say those American Christians may believe its the most important, but there are billions besides me who'd disagree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I would consider the Bible the most influential book ever assembled - I would struggle to think of an alternative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd agree, was thinking of an alternative and I could only come up with Euclid's Elements. I spent 2018-2021 writing software that was primarily centered around Euclidean geometry. Which is pretty mi d boggling afte all that time. Ironically it is the second most published book after the Bible.
posted on 8/3/22
'Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.'
Or he meant something different to what was conceived and construed.
Anyway, I think it's dull route of conversation tbh.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was angry at God." Explain that. Because to me that's giving the murderer an out.
And martial law hasn't happened in Canada since 1970.
But he claims it was used by Justin Trudeau. You know really, really smart people can be wrong. Takes humility or just honesty to admit it.
And that term is not a psychological term.
Its used in anthropology. In the sense he was using it.
Probably why I couldn't find it in any psychology or psychiatry dictionary.
posted on 8/3/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 2 minutes ago
really, really smart people can be wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIES !!!!
posted on 8/3/22
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 2 minutes ago
really, really smart people can be wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIES !!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes - you're wrong all the time but are at least moderately intelligent
posted on 8/3/22
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was angry at God." Explain that. Because to me that's giving the murderer an out.
And martial law hasn't happened in Canada since 1970.
But he claims it was used by Justin Trudeau. You know really, really smart people can be wrong. Takes humility or just honesty to admit it.
And that term is not a psychological term.
Its used in anthropology. In the sense he was using it.
Probably why I couldn't find it in any psychology or psychiatry dictionary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is giving a murderer an out? Being angry at god doesn’t excuse murder? Does it?
Did the emergency act give the government the right to use the military to enforce that law? Yes or no? (I don’t know I’m just asking)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2016.1216153
It’s a mixture of evolutionary biology, anthropology and psychology
Psychological anthropology is a subfield of anthropology devoted to the way cognition, emotion, and motivation are shaped in sociocultural settings and to the psychological factors that are important in culture learning and expression.
I’m really not going into this all again. If this is your main point of concern about someone who speaks publicly as much as he does then you should feel happy that this is your only gripe. If you want to take this as an example of “why he talks sheeet” then good luck to you.
It’s really not that big of a deal and I think you should move on. I get it, you think the guy is a whiny grifter who doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. I’d say he’s better placed than you or I to classify what is and what is not included in psychology. And certainly better placed than some New York Times writer or wherever you read the criticism in the first place.
posted on 9/3/22
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 4 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"He was angry at God." Explain that. Because to me that's giving the murderer an out.
And martial law hasn't happened in Canada since 1970.
But he claims it was used by Justin Trudeau. You know really, really smart people can be wrong. Takes humility or just honesty to admit it.
And that term is not a psychological term.
Its used in anthropology. In the sense he was using it.
Probably why I couldn't find it in any psychology or psychiatry dictionary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why is giving a murderer an out? Being angry at god doesn’t excuse murder? Does it?
Did the emergency act give the government the right to use the military to enforce that law? Yes or no? (I don’t know I’m just asking)
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418825.2016.1216153
It’s a mixture of evolutionary biology, anthropology and psychology
Psychological anthropology is a subfield of anthropology devoted to the way cognition, emotion, and motivation are shaped in sociocultural settings and to the psychological factors that are important in culture learning and expression.
I’m really not going into this all again. If this is your main point of concern about someone who speaks publicly as much as he does then you should feel happy that this is your only gripe. If you want to take this as an example of “why he talks sheeet” then good luck to you.
It’s really not that big of a deal and I think you should move on. I get it, you think the guy is a whiny grifter who doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. I’d say he’s better placed than you or I to classify what is and what is not included in psychology. And certainly better placed than some New York Times writer or wherever you read the criticism in the first place.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually he did say something I agree with. This Trudeau is a fekin incompetent. The guy was a friggin dramabteacher before the Liberals pulled the dynasty card.But as you and the other right wingers say about British politics the opposition is even more incompetent. Oh and the emergency Act can be used to call out military but IT WASN'T.
posted on 9/3/22
Can’t stand I keep up with Canadian politics and politicians, my knowledge is extremely limited to say the least.
Waitresses on the other hand….
posted on 9/3/22
Explain your unlimited knowledge of waitresses please.
posted on 9/3/22
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whilst these vices are problems, I don't really believe them to be the reasons for people becoming Incels. I see it as a problem stemming from mental health, lack of opportunities and internet echo chambers. I don't something think prnography, leads people to become Incels.
At best you can say those vices might lead to misogyny. In which case then JP, would be better off saying we need to fight misogyny rather than enforced monogamy. But that would be very much off brand for him.
posted on 9/3/22
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by puNPE (U22712)
posted 6 minutes ago
I think people should stop being hung up on a phrase even Peterson said he expressed poorly from 2018 tbh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think yes and no.
Yes: because a) he is probably developed or changed his stance b) people can be mistaken on topics.
No: because it does remain an ideological goal for incels and it continues to be defended.
Whilst I do not pity incels, it needs to be acknowledged that their resentment, fosters from being outsiders to the rest of society.
They find themselves in a bind between wanting recognition for whatever grievances they have, and being unable to get recognition through the toxicity of their mindset.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what Peterson is talking about is the societal changes in the western world in particular that have occurred over recent decades leading to instant gratification, over s3xualisation, prnography addiction, lack of traditional relationship values. He’s spilling into some of what Simon Sinek talks about the modern generation.
@soq he wasn’t defending incels or the sick person he was talking about, but explaining how things things are encouraged to happen when you change society as we have in recent years.
People can disagree with Jordan Peterson as much as they want to, opinions are like…..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whilst these vices are problems, I don't really believe them to be the reasons for people becoming Incels. I see it as a problem stemming from mental health, lack of opportunities and internet echo chambers. I don't something think prnography, leads people to become Incels.
At best you can say those vices might lead to misogyny. In which case then JP, would be better off saying we need to fight misogyny rather than enforced monogamy. But that would be very much off brand for him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re entitled to your opinion but I think the link to orngraphy addiction and people ending up feeling the way they incels do is quite apparent & obvious.
I never said it was the sole cause, I listed various things. None of which help and all of which create a melting pot which exacerbate these feelings in people.
Page 2552 of 4858
2553 | 2554 | 2555 | 2556 | 2557