The usual outpouring of enthusiastic applause as Peterson walked on stage was conspicuously absent (there was just the polite regular amount, thank-you). Peterson is not a hometown hero, it would seem.
During the debate, Dyson and Goldberg made openly false arguments about Peterson. "Google it", Goldberg said after falsely claiming that Peterson had said that women should not be allowed to wear make up in the workplace. Amazingly, the audience didn't openly scoff at her ignorance and arrogance.
It would seem that there is now a large Liberal crowd which has decided to NOT listen to Jordan Peterson, to NOT explore or read his work and to NOT hear what he has to say, but to instead rely upon hit-piece articles and other authority figures for their intelligence about what he stands for. For such people, that is enough. Authoritarians don't care about the content of the [official] authority's words, as long as it is the familiar, official authority that is instructing and doing their thinking for them.
A perfect example of this authoritarian mindset reacting to new ideas was seen in a Toronto Star hit piece published in the aftermath of the debate. In the article we see the curious and common phenomenon of writers complaining openly that Peterson is so knowledgeable in his arguments that it is impossible to win a debate against him. They never stop to consider that perhaps they can't win a debate because they are wrong and he isn't. Peterson spent much time determining the root of this same observation and came up with his views regarding Post Modernist philosophy, (where there is no Truth, only Power). In any case, it is such a common complaint among editorial writers and aired without any trace of irony or embarrassment, that one begins to wonder if there isn't something a little weird going on in the heads of such people.
That the Authoritarian mindset responds to authority over reason might indicate that the type of 'reasoning' that propagates through their brains is either very weak, or missing altogether.
That said, the fear of Peterson is well founded in one respect; there is ample, frightening evidence that weak-minded people can fall under the sway of strong speakers. This fear was at the root of the Toronto Star article mentioned above. The truth is that many people are cult victims waiting to happen. Their 'safe guard' against the realization of this nightmare scenario lies, bizarrely, in collectively aligning themselves with the 'correct' authority, (who they know instinctively will dominate them, but at least it is the 'right' and familiar authority). Do they somehow know which authority is the 'right' one? Of course not! They simply depend on the old herding system that asks: 'what is everybody else (or the majority, or the apparent majority) doing? Casting aspersions on Jordan Peterson? Then that's the correct thing to do.'
The end result seems to be a significant percentage of the population who are either too lazy [or constitutionally unable?] to explore Peterson's message for themselves and are content to allow authority figures to dictate to them what they should believe, or have actively decided that they simply don't want to know. They have chosen ignorance, have decided that it is okay to be ignorant - so long as it is never called ignorance - and they make all necessary efforts to not think about what it is they are really doing: lying to themselves and avoiding responsibility for those lies and, ultimately, their own lives.
What is the end result for a significant percentage of a population engaging in such willful rejection of their own sovereignty? No one knows for sure, but if we all live long enough, we might just find out.
Reader Comments
And Dyson seems like a spell binder... and he couldn’t stay away from making personal digs... a verbose disappointment, well if there was such a thing he would be it for me.
Steven Fri was a breath of fresh air... somebody give him a hug.
How can one deny truth, and that is why his detractors have nothing more to say than trap themselves in circular argument, which in reality, makes no sense to a rational mind. Full of bravado and sensationalism to make an argument.
Now truth, who can argue with that. Truth outs lies any day of the week.
The pschoanalysis of a generation, using the Internet as their lab.
That these editors at SOTT, feel free enough to put so many of these articles up here -- says a lot of what they think about their readership.
Peterson is smoke and mirrors, stealing the thunder of the likes of Joseph Campbell and claiming it as his own.
If I need water I will go to the well -- not buy it off a street vender and in a plastic disposable container at that...
I will also say that he is far from being an "idiot".
And now on a totally different matter; PLEASE allow comments on (Ark's?) 'Quantum Quirks'! I believe that I've requested this more than thrice, and that I first so asked with within a week of its appearance blessing this site. Genius deserves recognition!As I type this, it is located, for me, RIGHT HERE - - - - - - ->>>>
although it's probably elsewhere, for you. (It's at the very bottom of the right column items and links.)
A typical quick glimpse of QQ now, (5.19p EDT, 6/3/18 Sunday) shows a photo of two forks stuck in the ends of a hot dog, with some lights. (That's likely what too many would leave the image with; but shouldn't!)
However, the way my brain has always worked, I cannot 'bypass' seeing pretty much everything.*
It is actually a photograph of an experiment some of us might have seen in a Junior High physics class, covering electromagnetics and energy generally.That genius deserves recognition and discussion!!!
A closer look at the photo shows that the two forks are wired up to an electrical source, (probably DC), and that an electrical current is running through the hot dog, causing:
A) The tiny LED? Christmas lights to light up; AND,
B) Cooking the hot dog due to the resistance in the hot dog.
The title of the picture is "I = V/R," also known as "Ohm's Law." (Anyone flash back to Junior High School?)
Of course, the final question is: Who ate the hot dog?
Thanks for considering my (and others', I'm sure) respectful request.
R.C.
P.s., I know you folks now allow comments on your "Picture of the Day" at the top of the column; but not on QQ. I'll post this there, also.
* Which tendency towards over input caused me to never buy a TV until when I was ~ 32 (about seven years ago)** when I bought one watch film videos. I also cannot have one playing if I'm trying to do anything else, as it prevents me getting anything done.
Another example of that predisposition is that whenever I am driving down the road, I notice, without looking, every misspelled word on the road signs, along with every upside-down "N', any upside-down 6 in place of a 9, any zero in place of an "O", and vice versa, etc.
Folks who've driven with me will hear me say stuff like:
RC: "Back there on the right is a sign with an upside-down small 'g' posing as a six."
Rider: "Where? What?"
RC: "I don't know, I just know my brain saw it." (It's been eons since anyone questioned the truth of such statements as I'll say, "OK, if you wish to go back, we'll go back, and if I can't show it to you - though I don't know exactly where it is, I'll pay you $10; But, if it's there, you pay me $10." )
So I always notice QQ and it is routinely fantastic!
** Jesting; I'm a bit older than that; e.g., I remember 11/22/63 very well.
RC
Calling him a mean white man.
What a pathetic group representing the Left.