• Redrangutang@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    I like a lot of JPs stuff l. He intruduced me to a lot of concepts but ironically i must warn that his content really is for the thinking man in the sense that you need to stay vigilant to spot the cintradictions with reality. Cleaning your room doesnt fix dating or the job market for instance and sometimes those realities that go beyond our own self discipline and talent really are overwhelming.

  • drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    I think Rogan was the smarter one.

    Actually, I know Rogan is smarter. Rogan had a craft as a fight commentator; that’s a skill that takes knowledge in both tv presentation and fighting. And I bet you rogan easily talk for a full day about Pride FC without repeating a point.

    JP knows how fill an essay up to four paragraphs.

      • drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        I am not. Rogan is a legit expert at his field. Charisma is just another thing he has on JP. And I am not even a fan of Rogan.

        I can’t even name what JP is good at.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          You can be an expert and be extremely good at something and still an absolute fucking idiot hence charisma and experience rather than intelligence.

    • Redrangutang@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Dont forget how he had to wrestle mike goldberg so that he wouldnt drink more than 2 monster energys per night and say something outof pocket

  • xorollo@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 day ago

    So, I haven’t heard much about JP in a while,and now I’ve heard a podcast and this. Is it just coincidence or is there a reason we’re talking about him again? The podcast mentioned he’d gone on some show debating Christianity with 20 atheists. It went as you might imagine, where jp argued that atheists were Christian because they didn’t understand the thing they say they don’t believe in. Idk. Anyway – any other reason I’m hearing about him again?

    • Robust Mirror@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      23 hours ago

      It’s mostly just that. The whole thing was a mess. The atheists were told they would be debating a Christian and prepared as such, but he won’t define himself as a Christian. So much time is wasted dancing around that. They had to change the title from Christian debates to Jordan Peterson debates. On top of that he will barely engage properly, saying things like he won’t entertain a hypothetical because he wouldn’t allow himself to get in that situation in the first place. Just generally not acting in good faith.

      • axx@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The guy is a notorious rhetorical shitmuffin.

        He just strings fallacies together and his crowd along.

  • Frenchfryenjoyer (she/her)@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 day ago

    Sealioning (source) + whataboutism. A very cheap method of trolling and exhausting the opponent of the argument which relies on the victim being unaware of sealioning and they’re being sealioned. It’s frustrating seeing JP fans think this is proof he’s a genius. it’s like Ben Shapiro, another rightwing “influencer” who constantly speaks fast and gish gallops on purpose and his fans think he’s a genius for that too

      • Frenchfryenjoyer (she/her)@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 day ago

        That, too. For people who don’t know what that is (source)

        The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities: one modest and easy to defend (the “motte”) and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the “bailey”).[1] The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, insists that only the more modest position is being advanced.[2][3] Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer may claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte)[1] or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).[4]

        • mikezeman@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

          Thanks for teaching me something new!

          Also your username is very apt for this thread.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    My dog is an intellectual powerhouse compared to Jordan Peterson fans.

    Lol. I just Googled him and his YouTube channel description reads…

    “Join intellectual phenomenon Dr. Jordan B. Peterson for enlightening discourse”

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    1 day ago

    False inductive reasoning combined with butwhataboutism and sealinoning. All designed to exhaust the opponent and muddy the argument. Conservatives love this form of argument.

  • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    My father tried to tell me what a “genius” he is. I told my father point blank, Jordan Peterson is only a genius to morons. He even gave me one of Peterson’s self help books, I immediately tossed it in the trash. Though, in retrospect, I probably should have tried to return it to Amazon and used the money to buy something more worthy of reading, like Chick Tracts. 😂 At least they’re entertaining.

        • Øπ3ŕ@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          I was implying that the meat® is from all of the animal… Also, I spent over two decades in the food industry (US, EU, etc.). Ask me for stories — if you don’t ever want to eat at any restaurants ever again.

          • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah but lips and anuses aren’t spit, I think OP was implying that if you attempted what is listed about the kitchen staff are going to make sure the contents of their sinuses form the main protein of your burger.

            • Øπ3ŕ@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              Yes, and animal fluids, et al, are not generally accounted for in the minds of those that consume said products. For instance, are you aware of the “acceptable” volume of fecal matter in “fast food” ingredients? 🤔

              • frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Yes, and fecal matter on food (meat or otherwise) has been the norm for all of human history. We just have ways of measuring it now and make rules about it.

              • Lodespawn@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                2 days ago

                I’m not going to say I’ve thought about it but I would expect it’s defined for a lot of countries (I’d be more worried if it wasn’t deck ed) and I’m going to assume in most cases it aligns with the regulation of fecal matter levels for other foods … unless a lobby group has convinced the relevant government body that they are mitigating it with some process like bleaching (also not great). But on the whole I would expect fast food meat to have the same acceptable level of fecal matter as mushrooms. Whether the level is a problem is going to depend on your country …

      • JcbAzPx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        They don’t have the time or hydration to do that to every order. They have to save that for the special customers.