Haven’t watched the video yet but after high school I fell into a depression that left me bed ridden for almost 3 months, I didn’t get out of bed unless I needed to use the bathroom. It got to the point where it became uncomfortable to walk. My mom would have to bring me food which I usually didn’t touch. I finally came across Dr.Peterson’s videos and he did more for me than any therapist, family member, or psychologist ever did. He’s the one who inspired me to get my life together and stop rotting away.
Dr. Peterson has helped me so much since the births of my daughters. To parent them in a practical and logical way. I know it’s not his focus but his advice on parenting and responsibility has been priceless. My youngest daughter is autistic and having his words to listen to have been so helpful. Many parents get into the mindset of the world having to change to allow for asd kids, but then many have grown up so entitled. My daughter is 6 and I’m certain without listening to him we would still be co sleeping and she would only eat chicken nuggets and fries!
Jordan Peterson spoke in Vancouver several years ago. My daughter spoke to him after the lecture and found him to be very interested in hearing how she had found his advice very helpful during a health crisis she had. She said that he was very humble and kind. His genuine interest in her meant a lot to my daughter.
@@judethaddeus9856 Or he could simply be pleased that someone found his work helpful. Some people actually have an interest in helping others instead of merely being seen to help others, and spouting trendy slogans on social media. If you think the people he tries to help aren't deserving of it, that really says more about you than he.
@@judethaddeus9856 you haven’t reviewed his less hostile discussions. Or your incapable of forming an independent opinion of him without political polarization influences.
He's a professor, a clinical psychologist. I don't consider him a philosopher and I don't consider him perfection. I take his information and enjoy most of his rhetoric. He'd not want you to entirely embrace him only but to consider his ideas and challenge them. Good professors teach you to think, not to agree. Just my take.
I just wanted to say that I appreciate your approach. You have a way of not tearing down. Your very thoughtful with your words, I sense no vindictiveness. You don’t take pleasure in that. Your a calming person and that usually translates to trust. Thank you for your videos and breaking down many things I think about. You do so with such dignity for all. ❤️
Social satirists Irma Bombeck and Art Buckwald identified the source of humor as anger. Early in his career Mark Twain identified the source of humor as anger. Near the end of his career he identified the source as pain. (I've been told by psychiatrists that behind anger is fear. I ask, "Fear of what?" I answer, "Fear of pain.")
Here's something...I recently went through something horrific. Around the same time, I found Jordan Peterson clips on TH-cam...his 12 rules...snippets of his advice... I distinctly remember being out one day, and I remembered his rule to stand up straight, and I did it...I know it's "obvious," yet I had never stopped to consider doing it. And it dramatically affected my mood that day. It's something I have since adopted whenever I think of it (and I still don't always think of it). My point: Sometimes it really does help for someone to state the obvious; many of us are lost in our stuff and need simple direction. I love him!
Excellent observation and great comment! It’s funny as I went through boot camp way back in 1996 and that’s one of those things getting drilled into you with the recruit division commanders screaming this at you for around nine weeks, they’d say “stand up tall, shoulders back, head up straight, stand proud.” or something very similar (they’d all say the same thing albeit with slight variations). You’re very right about it working as I really did mature a lot that year. I saw first hand how it helped many others that did not have the same level of confidence that I had.
@@Jimvesterstallone You are very welcome! Another thing I remembered after you replied was the level of mind games they would play with your head if only to see if you’ll break under pressure and don’t belong in the military. They do this because it’s a lot cheaper to send someone back home during recruit training than to spend countless dollars on them and their training just to have that person ‘break down’ later on, especially if that person’s ‘break down’ is in a combat zone! I’d estimate that we lost up to 20% of our division that first week! As the first week just prepares you for the training ahead (getting gear assigned, signing forms, drug test, medical & dental checkups, etc.) they repeatedly ask “who doesn’t want to be here? It’s much easier if you tell us now before you get assigned to a division [and start training!]” They want you to tell them as it only cost Uncle Sam a few bucks mostly on logistics at this point, e.g. hotels, airfare, and the like. They also ask you this on very little sleep and try to keep you awake! Now, I dunno your background on this, but kids that suffer extreme child abuse will mostly come out psychologically ‘broken’ themselves, but some (a MUCH smaller number) will thrive and come out stronger. Sadly, I came from a very abusive home and when I tell people what I actually haven’t repressed you could see the looks of disgust on their faces! I’m an open book regarding this, however the details are not relevant right now. What is relevant is the fact that I fortunately came out ‘emotionally scarred,’ but with a will that’s far stronger than many will ever have. I was not going to allow the pattern to repeat! I was also going to be the polar opposite of the ‘white trash’ who ‘raised’ me, and I guess a few accomplishments of mine did prove this if only to myself! Here’s my point (more of a theory, actually), confidence in general, without the cockiness, and regardless how one arrived to have a generally high level of confidence, will foster (a) Being immune to others who attempt to be emotionally hurtful to you, directly proportionate to the level of confidence. One who’s truly confident doesn’t ‘compete’ with others, but rather themselves exclusively. They also could care less regarding the negative, hurtful statements made my others. (b) One’s will, e.g. not giving up, is also directly proportionate to their level of confidence. And, finally (c) It doesn’t matter where or how this level of confidence was obtained or cultivated, only the fact that it’s actually “true” confidence (rather than narcissism, grandiosity, cockiness, etc.) Sometimes, which you’ll soon clearly see, extremely negative events could segue into positive events on the same ‘level.’ One final story to tie this altogether, and I know this is long, so I’ll try to be quick: While in boot camp, I don’t exactly remember what I did, but it was a relatively minor infraction, and there are a lot of those, so it’s not unusual. Many times, the recruit division commanders will have you “make it rain” as a form of punishment. Making it rain is having you do very quick exercises in full uniform for an extended length of time while commands and sometimes insults are yelled at you. So, I started to hit the deck and do push-ups, sit-ups, etc. - back up on me feet and do jumping jacks, running in place, etc. - rinse and repeat - as each command was called out. As I was in the best shape of my life, I was actually enjoying the workout, and he saw the ‘smile’ I had on, so he called over another recruit division commander to “join in the fun.” By the time ‘THEY were done,’ there were three of them yelling at me. Over an hour past and I was still going strong. Finally, I heard the words “stop, on your feet!” The recruit division commander finally asked “so, Rose, what the hell is it going to take to break you?!” With a smile, I simply said “You can’t. I’m sorry, but that’s just not possible.” He was so frustrated as he didn’t know what to even say to that, so I shrugged, and obviously defeated, he said “go back to everyone in the division, we’re through here.” I know one thing for damn sure, I earned his respect and the respect of a few of his peers that evening as the recruit division commanders were talking about me and this event. I don’t think I even spoke about it much thereafter, I really didn’t care one way or another about the event. The thing is, and this question could be perceived as if only bordering philosophical: If I didn’t face over a decade of various of types of quite literally heinous abuse, and had the mental strength to somehow not only survive, but walk away rather positively thereafter (which was a miracle according to numerous psychologists, therapists, etc., that I’ve seen), would the events of that evening have transpired any different?! I would go with a definite “abso-effing-lutely!!!” (read: Yes!) Feel free to ‘chime in’ with any thoughts, and again, thanks for reading this as I know it was a lot to digest!
@Calm in the Storm - I think many people view him that way, while I think he's really the culmination of adult voices most just didn't listen to while growing up and now find that advice so profound when put into the mouth of one man.
@@Malt454 I grew up, from about 6, reading, and reading, and reading. Born in 1948 -- do the math -- at my age I'm not much impressed by any so-called 'intellectuals" -- which isn't by itself the whole person. Better to read Socrates: he teaches how to THINK CRITICALLY.
Jim Grasso “a lawyer who has himself for a lawyer has a fool for a client.” I suppose it would apply in a critique of oneself...too close to the problem.
Jim Grasso I’m sure the good doctor uses meta cognition all the time. I’m sure he is his own critic frequently. I’d hazard to guess that he knows himself better than the vast majority of us know ourselves. Still, a self critique my him would be interesting.
That's something I believe we all could do. It helps to understand why we might have the world view we have. A careful analysis could reveal blind spots.
I love how you focus on patterns rather then individual instances where he made mistakes. This is my fav approach when trying to judge other's more accurately.
@@davidbudo5551 i agree. Pattern recognition is why Artificial intelligence and machine learning are so dangerous to our society (when in the wrong hands).
This is probably the best commentary I've seen yet on Mr. Peterson. I enjoy the fact that you are specifically coming from an outside point of view and you don't tear him down in any sort of way. You are specifically scientific about your observations and your criticisms of him are very insightful. Thank you Dr. Grande for making this content! I enjoy it very much. I also enjoy your breakdowns of other mental illnesses and trying to get people to understand about each specific mental illness/personality disorders. I am always learning something new from you videos and I love the fact that I'm obtaining so much knowledge from your videos. So, again, thank you so much for all of your videos!
@@chokinonashes61 Outside of his professional field, he seems like a typical waterboy for the neoliberal globalist empire to me...not exactly what one thinks of as a "reactionary." He's generally going very much "with the Establishment flow" in most every area but free speech and his recognition of some of the (generally ignored, ridiculed, or minimized) existential problems bedeviling young men today.
One correction on a statement you made, Peterson’s book 12 Rules for Life is not a book for men. It’s for men, women, and anyone who wants to set their life in order. He’s always sure to make that point known. Thanks
I get what you're saying, and you're not wrong either, but the demographic that is the majority of his followers are young men. So to extrapolate that to say it's for men isn't entirely wrong. As at the very least, something he is doing is catering for men more than other groups and if there was a product that was used predominantly by men, even if it wasn't exclusively marketed towards them, we'd be inclined to perceive it as 'for men'
I love Dr. Peterson's psychological works and his university lectures, that I find very thought-provoking. His political "activism" so to say is very weird to say the least, though.
Oh like when he told millions of people thier transphobia was justified thus adding more stochastic terrorism to innocent lgbt people.. what a cool guy.
@@Onus6688 saying a fear of something is understandable doesn’t excuse the irrationality of that fear. Understanding where your fears are based however can help you work through them. Jesus never condemned anyone but people have been condemning and killing in his name. Some people will find any reason or cause for violence. All people deserve respect and love and the peace to live their life as they see fit as long as they aren’t hurting anyone.
this is weird seeing a 5 year old grande vid. i wasn't sure it was even him. i got a feeling he may choose celebrities to talk about to get views. why even cover successful people when his MO is the unseemly side of life. he did one on george carlin a year ago. people have nothing but respect for carlin, and there's grande talking about the drug habits of a dead man. he'll do anything for views. that one left a bad taste in my mouth, as does this one on peterson. it seems awkward for grande to comment on people in the same category as himself just to ride their coattails and gain notoriety. he should stick with the murders and leave people like dr. phil and peterson alone. unless of course they murder someone...
"Dr Peterson, what's your favorite color?" "Well that depends on what you mean by favorite. And it also depends on what you mean by color. This is a very complex question.. One must acknowledge the underlying verisimilitude that is irrevocably nested within a multi-layered metaphysical substrate which many people fundamentally conflate with their ideologi- cal presuppositions with no uncertain irregularity, causing the inadvertent dismissal of Jung's arche- typal extrapolation of the quintessential axiomatic juxtaposition required to achieve Raskolnikov's magnitude of Neo-Marxist existential nihilism..." Be careful Dr.Grande Dr.Peterson might analyse you too🤣🤣
Man the hunter favors blue/green those being optimal hunting conditions. Women choose red/pink because those are the targets of a gatherer. That is wired into our DNA. Very few deviations. Lobsters
Well, that depends on what you mean by "what." In fact, we cannot define anything. That is all. Well, that isn't actually that...at all. Wait.... Falls into a black hole.
Especially when they are looking at credentials and published papers. One of the funniest retorts I receive constantly is, “What is your degree in?” As if that matters to the topic at hand. If I said something wrong, correct me. If I said something that SOUNDS wrong, then study the topic more yourself. Asking for credentials is pure Ad Hominem coming from people who think insults are “ad hominem.” 😂
I think if people lose a relationship it can definitely bring on ptsd. He may not have elaborated but the partner may have been abusive or the break up could trigger pre existing issues. There can also be psycho social dynamics around the break up due to a smear campaign and social abuses they can be very crazy making. The partner may have been an addict which can cause a nervous breakdown. The person may take a deeper look at self and family and friends and coke to awareness that is shattering. So perhaps a break up could be one aspect of a more global issue that shatters or devastates. Having a partner die can be the most stressful event in a persons life and a ptsd diagnosis is often quite accurate in that situation. Being rejected or abandoned can be quite a trigger with a ptsd issue that already exists on some level. No one said the symptoms weren’t there. He simply did not elaborate.
This is the best, most balanced critique I've seen on JP so far. Great to see a peer that is not afraid to be both critical and complimentary at the same time. This is rare and much appreciated for those of us trying to make sense of these difficult but important topics.
I’m sure Dr Grande would both dislike and appreciate a similar evaluation of himself, possibly from Dr. Peterson. I strongly believe Dr. Peterson could set aside his own evaluation and use his not insignificant insight and intelligence to make a very fair evaluation. In both cases they would likely have errors, but at least they would be well reasoned and fair. (As fair and reasoned as we could hope).
@@7LegSpiders I’m pretty sure Dr Peterson may have his feelings hurt, (he’s very sensitive) but he’s also a tough guy and has suffered far worse slings and arrows. And furthermore both of these men might learn more about themselves in such an endeavour then they would learn about each other. Unfortunately it may actually go over our heads unless they’d dumb it down, (I’m only peripherally knowledgeable on some of psychology as are most of the viewers/commenters so ideally they would keep it more mundane, which does risk slight inaccuracies for our sakes).
Difficult topics? The only reason the topics are difficult, is that you are trying to accommodate (and possibly obey) the leftist lunacy that is plaguing our culture.
'12 steps to life' may be seen as 'simplistic and obvious' by fully established professional men but the book is also aimed at young males starting out in life. We need more books like that which are easily understood by many of the seemingly lost or floundering youth of today.
You know something, there’s a lot of beauty in simplicity. To me, it’s actually a selling point. He Lays out things he considers to be irrefutable truth in all their starkness for all the world to see; naked truth, by God.
I bought the book and I'm reading it right now. I passed it several times because of that, but I can almost assure you, when you read it, it's not like anything you expect. It's amazing and FULL with scientific evidence/information that can make your head spin, actually questioning the points that he makes. I really suggest the reading, it's for everybody (even women, for that matter). The rules themselves seems tongue in the cheek and very simplistic, but they're just a "hook" to get you in, in very important topics that describes the nature of our behaviour and how we can surpass through work and diligence our inadequacies. It's in my top 5, and I've read MANY books. If anything, I suggest you guys read it online, even if it's a preview. The lobster part is fucking great.
Before watching this video, I would like to ask Dr. Grande to consider doing an update on Jordan Peterson. There have been significant developments concerning Dr. Peterson since this installment.
Significant developments indeed including: 1. In late 2019 he sought "emergency" detox from benzodiazepine addiction 2. JP has developed a propensity to cry and weep in most of his interviews. 3. I most recently heard him say that he believes in Jesus Christ and he believes in the resurrection literally. 4. JP's political leanings have shifted from center left leaning all the way to MAGA Trumpian. I would say much much more for Dr. Todd Grande to analyze.
Yeah. The signs were all there back when this video was initially published, but it'd be easy to have missed them without doing a very thorough dive into his behavior. Now? Dude's gone off the rails. That said, I don't think I would enjoy a modern Grande video on the topic, personally. Would feel like watching a rotting, squishy horse's corpse being wailed on. @@randyorr9443
I see him as capable, yet fallible, artistic individual with above average intelligence, and an expert on some topics. BUT also not someone that has critically thought about some topics to the extent that he has with other topics, and rightfully so. So we should listen to him and consider his ideas on his field of expertise. You know, not treat him as a Messiah of all topics like some people seem to do. I love Jordan Peterson because he made me think about some things from a different perspective. Hearing interesting advice about some things I've never considered can be intoxicating to me personally.
So in reality you're one of the people that has actually treated him as a Messiah of all topics considering what you said "I love Jordan Peterson because he made me think about some things from a different perspective. Hearing interesting advice about some things I've never considered can be intoxicating to me personally. " You're one of those people that experiences something and then calls others out on that which you are also doing and makes it as if that's not something youre a part of but what's really going on here is you actually understand those people and have noticed that because you are one of those people.
@@Tolbat "You're one of those people that experiences something and then calls others out on that which you are also doing and makes it as if that's not something youre a part of but what's really going on here is you actually understand those people and have noticed that because you are one of those people" lol yeah it's almost as if people can make mistakes through experience, learn from them, and then give reasonable advice to other people on how to have a more productive, realistic perspective. You know, the kind of thing that leads to improvement, unlike your comment which solely exists to smear and tear down people like an insecure douchebag
@@andnowwevibe270 But he's not owning the fact he is one of those people, he is pretending he is not....yea real helpful...How about be honest so people can really relate to you and absorb your advice?
@@Tolbat There's literally no empirical or logically sound reason to assume the OP sees JP as an infallible genius on all topics. On no planet does 'He made me see some things from a different perspective' translate to 'I think he's right and well researched about everything'. You made a massive logical leap to get there, also known as an assumption. Can only imagine why Secondly the OP made a recommendation of good form: to not just assume that everything someone says is true because they have a reputation as an intellectual. Your post is just pure ad hominem based on a nonsensical logical leap. More than likely you just needed your boost of narcissistic supply to make it through the day
Your critique of his work is damn good. Reasonable, informed and presented in a respectable manner. I do not agree with all of the critique, but I also do not agree with all the things J.P. concludes (or I just don't understand). All in all, it is the attitude with which you comment that won me. It was pleasant listening to your perspective of his work.
@@andrewtaylor2430 this video seems to have been posted prior to Peterson’s drug abuse being common knowledge. But, if the creator didn’t make that pause deliberately, it was still a very apt pause.
Im a physician. I thought it was just me too. My opinion of him is he’s hard to follow and sometimes he doesn’t make any sense. I also thought that he overthinks things. Being able to keep complex things simple is a sign of a true understanding of an issue. I like him though and will be willing to listen to him for a few minutes. But once he starts overthinking I have found myself tuning out.
I am a board certified psychologist and I can certify that he knows a lot about Jung,Freud..etc..he has read many a book.he makes mistakes as everyone does and, sometimes he overthinks basic concepts but he is a well read individual with a high IQ..most of the times he knows what he is talking about..
Yeah he's an interesting anomaly when it comes to communication. On one hand he is exceedingly passionate and eloquent but on the other he goes off on unnecessary tangents and overcomplicates the subject matter. I find that his speech can lack clarity of thought and that he is guilty of using word salad every now and then.
Is Dr. Phil even really a doctor or does he just call himself that like Dr. Schlesinger or Queen Latifa? If he really wanted to help people he wouldn't put them on TV and shame them.
@@undeadpresident He is a real doctor in that he has a PhD, so he can use that title. He is not currently licensed to practice though, and he hasn't been for quite some time.
@@MariGolds2 Ha, ha... Indeed, I've sometimes seen Dr. Peterson talk a lot without saying anything meaningful. Or use verbose statement to make something trite seem profound. Dr. Grande was unduly modest in saying that he is willing to accept that he may not be smart enough to understand what Dr. Peterson is sometimes saying.
This critique is a whole lesson on how to appreciate the intellectual work of someone, with equanimity and fairness. I stand schooled and happy to have learned a lot, not only about how to assess someone's ableness and depth but mostly on how to be a serious critic. Thank you,
This critique is worth a flunking grade on an undergraduate paper as far as I am concerned. If some student handed it to me, I would give him or her a failing grade and a sharp note that he or she was being so mentally lazy that I suspect they're not the sort that should bother taking up space in a university. Anyone who thinks this is any kind of credible critique simply does not have the level of critical thinking skills of a smart high schooler student.
@@An-fi8is Don't try to pretend or sound like you're a competent thinker because you're obviously not -- WAKE UP and try to learn how to use your brains. People need WAKE UP calls sometimes. Your comment indicates that your standards are pathetically low, and your expectations of yourself are pathetic and self-fulfilling. WAKE UP AND START USING YOUR BRAINS. Maybe start by reading "The Dumbest Generation" by Max Bauerlein. And check out the TH-cam videos by Richard Arum. If you've got the brains to take in and consider some data and competent reasoning, you'll be able to WAKE UP to how PATHETICALLY LOW your standards are in making your pathetically-vacuous comment, and hopefully that'll inspire you to try to learn how to think.
sorry to hear that you have lost the ability to think. "12 rules for life is rules for how young men should act" -clear bias before he even begins teh actual critique
@@immortalwombat10 Peterson has said that the rules don't just apply to men but everyone. A list to become a better person. A guide to moral fortitude, and a foundation grounded in strong basic ethics
I haven't seen every Jordan Peterson lecture or interview. I haven't read every book or paper he has written either. The things I have seen and read really impress me. I think he is extremely insightful. I think he has a very practical way of looking at people and the world at large. He has earned my respect.
@@wolflarsen1900 Can you give any examples to support what you're saying? Specifically, please give some examples of what is "astonishing far away from any academic standard", and give some examples of what is "senseless and inconsistent" or is "rubbish, outdated or just nonsense". Do you know how the various "five factor" models have been derived? Peterson's lab produced the two senior authors (Colin DeYoung and Linda Quilty) of the best-ever version of the five factor model (called the "Big Five Aspects Scale" in their version) and it's based on factor analysis of many thousands of personality adjectives. Peterson was the third author of the foundational paper for that highly-refined, best-ever formulation of the five factors. The various five factor models look to be so solidly grounded that they reconcile with genetics research and now with the developing field of personality neuroscience. In other words, Peterson and his former students have gone a very, very, very long way with an area of linguistics that's been hugely validated (now in something like 30 languages, maybe more) and they've produced the best-ever formulation of it. Not all linguists have a clue about the five factor model and its derivation -- so perhaps you don't understand that aspect of Peterson's work. Whatever the case, please substantiate your statements about his comments about "language, meaning, etc." to be "rubbish, outdated or just nonsense". A friend of mine did his Ph.D. under Chomsky and he said that Chomsky was badly over-confident in many of his linguistic pronouncements, and one can see a kind of extreme or even delusional, detached, self-satisfied over-confidence in his political pontifications as well. I wouldn't like to think that linguists as a group suffer from that kind of delusional, smug, over-confidence and tendency to make sweeping pontifications that are just self-satisfied hot air. So please, Mr. German Philosopher of Language, instead of your non-specific, grand slurs, and sweeping dismissals, show us enough evidence to prove that you're not just pontificating and full of hot air like all the others who try to score points for themselves by knocking Peterson.
@Wolf Larsen damn you wrote a lot but didn’t give any evidence to support your original point. Please let us know which Peterson comments in the linguistic field you were referring to
@@wolflarsen1900 Who's afraid of the big bad wolf? Especially a philosopher who confesses to having the attention span and intellectual integrity of a goldfish. Huff and puff as might, but you didn't substantiate your sweeping slurs with anything worth any respect. You are so inept in linguistics that you don't realize that you're disclosing your amateur status by constantly harping on status themes, and ONLY on status themes. Stay away from the callings that require competence in thinking -- you'd have no future in any of them.
@@wolflarsen1900 You made a point of mentioning the brevity of your attention span and the fact that you said you only read the beginning and the end of my post, and not the middle, indicates a lack of intellectual integrity in our exchange just as the fact that you haven't substantiated any of your sweeping statements and slurs about Peterson suggests a lack of intellectual integrity. It's easy to see your immaturity as you dance around avoiding substantiating your claims, even though I am not the only person who's asked for substantiation and who's pointed out to you that your replies are just empty blither. So yes, you have no intellectual integrity.
Once I was dumped by text. It was a serious relationship. No closure. At the time I was really messed up by it. Years later I suffered a tragic loss, and could see, looking back, that essentially I'd felt a similar level of shock and grief when I'd been dumped so cruelly. Not the same level as my painful bereavement, but the same type of awful feelings and how it floored me.
@@LenticloudularHealthy people don't break up in this manner. Your ex might have suffered from narcissistic personality disorder. Your breakup sounds like a classic Narcissist discard. I'm very sorry for your loss. ❤
@@Eagles.Fan.Since.Super.Bowl.52 I agree with you. Narcissistic personality disorder = asshole, eh? With retrospect I saw that. Thank to for your kind words. The person I mourn was an angel. ❤️😇
I'm not sure what the point of it was. Shouldn't it have been more of an analysis for a psychological understanding channel? I understand the Dr didn't want to go into specific details, but in doing so it didn't address some of the main critiques of Peterson, particularly on giving out "vacuous" self help advice and being the equivalent of a "Rorsach test" where wholly competing views can find their own meaning in what he says. Plus, Peterson's divisive sociological political views are kinda the point. Might have been better to do it, say, from a standpoint of - is this narcissistic behavior? Or something similar.
Anthony Miesel here’s a few other ones about his views on Marxism & Postmodernism. Really educational th-cam.com/video/V2hhrUHSD6o/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/cU1LhcEh8Ms/w-d-xo.html
@mike gallimore ha ha😊... sassy comeback & I do appreciate your facetious parley, BUT... to expound on xyzz Doe's point which is the crux to your comment: 1) As a proclaimed "Self-Help" guru w/ books titled "Maps of Meaning" & "12 Rules..." the ire the Dr.'s ideas invoke in academic & intellectual circles is well deserved. His ideas: often hackneyed, using superfluous verbosity to exclaim the obvious. When Bill Maher exclaimed, "Why do I feel what this guy says is just common sense?" it's bc that's precisely his m.o. & that extends to almost all he spouts (esp. "Life advice") put under a scrutinous microscope. And the mental acrobats the reader (listener) has to perform to make sense of the Dr.'s long-winded, hifalutin proclamations leaves one (groupies) to acquiesce an undeserved appeal to authority. 2) Since the Dr. has been a constant critic of Marxist/Communist/Socialist philosophies to then flee to Russia in search of some rehab not available in the "post-modern" west is unabashedly hypocritical. Your anecdote about a fitness instructor is spot-on 👍(better than my ethical commitee politician recently found cheating analogy). His personal trails are inconsequential to his ideas & conclusions, (like dismissing Nietzsche due to his mental dissipation) & to hastily claim, "Well look how many people he's helped!" is an unwarranted appeal to emotion to the issues he's espousing. Taken on their own, his precepts & "Rules" (at face value) may seem wise, but held to any exegesis are found invalid & lacking integrity. ( Like advice to mimick the hierarchy of male lobsters? One may as well take Meine Kampf arguments about the master race seriously, ergo the Nazi comparisons among other radically conservative stances.) This can't be overstated enough esp. for someone called the "Intellectual of our Time" & who has been undeservedly crowned a "Messiah" in the Pscho/Self-help community. If there's any argument that we are not in the realm of the Bizarro - well here we are folks! And as far as our grandparents are concerned Mike G.😉, when they complain about the latest medication they've been prescribed, change the subject to one of the most meaningful events in their life & listen humbly.
ordan Peterson's behaviour/ mannerisms reminds me of someone diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder....but he seems like a narcissist who has studied psychology, philosophy and scientific politics and has identified himself as somone who has experienced emotional/psychological abuse as a child. His behaviour and mannerisms seems like his struggling inside. His ego comes out alot
@@imoeazy agreed. I think you are a better psychologist than JP. he cannot even sort out his issue and went into depression. 😂😂 can a depressed patient trust a depressed clinical psychologist ? lmao
@@imoeazy From this comment it is clear you haven't consumed much of JP's content. The ego is an integral part of the complete self. I find it difficult to trust anyone who doesn't show us their true selves every now and then. Especially someone who speaks publicly and on podcasts as much as JP. I'm glad he gets vulnerable and shows us his passion/love for humanity.
I do believe that ends of relationships can be traumatic, depending on the relationships and how they end. I also think his philosophical theories are well-grounded in what he's read and that he's given Jung's work contemporary relevance. Maybe because I happen to be a lawyer, I do appreciate his logical reason. As a feminist, I was initially turned off to him because of things I'd gleaned from feminist media. I was wrong. When I actually began listening to his lectures and books, I found him to be informed, insightful and curiously open to new thinking, despite his adherence to the values of orderliness. Moreover, I find myself completely unoffended by his acknowledgment of the biological difference between men and women, and the inherent differences of physical, experiential and motivational aspects of gender that they entail. I think he's a genius, most of all, in his attempts to wed the benefits of order with the possible progress that can emerge from chaos.
Very well said. I also appreciate your ability to admit when you are wrong. A rare trait in today's world. If you don't mind a question, do you still consider yourself to be a feminist after listening to Jordan Peterson or has that changed somewhat? Even if ever so slightly?
His lectures are pretty fast forward, but I`ve recently seen some of his interviews and was blown away by such an engaged listener, so patient and supportive, and though suspicious at first, I now feel his motivational messages come from deep concern for changing the tragic human condition. A very fair and informed critique from dr.Grande
I don't know. At first I was captivated by Dr. P. Then, as I watched more and more lectures of his, I started to question his motiffs more and more often. When asked about certain topics, he seems to be deliberately disingenuine. Other times he ommits certain crucial facts or is incredibly uncharitable when speaking about his political opponents. I still attributed it all to his flawed human nature, but the deal-breaker was probably actually reading his work. It was far from what I expected it to be: unprofessional, sloppy and outright dumb at some points. I still appreciate the fact that he seems to be helping people (precisely young men), but other than that, I don't have much admiration for him.
I disagree that a person can not suffer PTSD after a relationship ending. It depends on the ending. Some people have lived a lie in a relationship and everything they thought their life was in fact was indeed a farce. I work with many women who have experienced this and it destroys them. Some never recover.
He is referring to the DSM criteria though - it is very clear. Maybe JP advocates for a change to the criteria. I am not going to copy and paste the criteria here but by definition, a person can't.
@@bethbeth5122 I have CPTSD. Yes I know there isn't a diagnosis stating specifically the C in the DSM. It just means it is chronic. I feel like PTSD is the latest buzz word that people attach themselves to. Like bipolar was a few years ago. Unfortunately I have that too. I don't know when mental illness became fashionable but if someone really has it, it can be crippling. PTSD attacks cause me to be extremely anxious, hypervigilant even in my home, panic attacks that are so severe I cannot breathe or talk, fight or flight (usually flight). I've got so many alarms my house has been named Fort Knox by my sister. Those are but a few symptoms. I would not wish true PTSD on anyone.
I am not sure Peterson aims to be ‘entertaining’ 😐 at all. His rambling style seems to be actually his natural thought process. A lot of people ‘gets’ him. A lot of people don’t.
Peterson is quite the fan of Carl Jung, and among the things Jung has talked about are "archetypes" which are basically images and motifs Jung thought were some sort of innate knowledge all humans have in some form such as the archetype of the hero or the father, etc. This is particularly relevant for storytelling, and Peterson has said he does aim to tell stories and keep people interested. From there I would say he does intend to be entertaining in the sense of keeping attention on him when he's trying to convey whatever thoughts he has.
@@jackalopegaming4948 i think that everyone that is teaching something should aim to be entretaining, without detriement of the knowleadge itself of course
Sometimes people associate the word ‘entertaining’ to evoking extreme emotions or reactions or to performing clownish acts. I think Peterson’s style evokes curiosity and thought. I think he’s entertaining in that manner.
@@jackalopegaming4948 to further that, a lot of the theorised interpretations of archetypes focus on how an archetype (Great Father, Anima/Animus, etc) can be of merit for humans in explaining. Peterson follows Jung to a high degree, so I feel he takes influence from Jung in this sense. He isn't afraid to enter the realm of storytelling in an educational setting because he sees the utulity in it from a Jungian theoretical standpoint.
@@jnagarya519 It is 100% social science. The question is "how scientific is social science?". Dr. Peterson quotes extensive studies that show that men and women differ in preferences and that these differences produce unequal outcomes in the percent of men and women in nursing vs. engineering. This seems to me to be science, though not as rigorous as testing theories of physics. He has also stated that IQ and success in life are highly correlated. He quotes the correlation coefficients. This sounds like science, but again, not as rigorous as physics or chemistry. But certainly not 100% subjective or anything close to it.
I've waited a long time for someone else to say that they sometimes have no idea what Jordan Petersen is talking about! Lol I thought it was just me. Thanks Dr Grande for your honesty!
Yes!!! At the request of a friend, I checked out some of his videos, and in one he was almost ...manic for lack of a better word? He was talking very fast and making no sense. Now my IQ is high enough that I can keep up with him, and catch him in extreme ideas, but I even doubted my own reality for a split second, which is a huge red flag. I even slowed the video down, and he was creepily incoherent. In other videos, not so much. But he is not consistant from interview to interview. I was really excited to see Dr Grande review him! He has some good points, and great ideas, but then will say something so ridiculous- like feminism is ruining the ideology of manhood. (Paraphrased) or that Ann Frank's diary is fiction :o I keep watching him, not as a fan, but out of interest and specticism. He's def not consistant. My friend is paying $100 to see him speak later this month. That's her thing tho.
I think Jordan structures his ideas in a very linear fashion. It’s as if he’s building a giant structure with his ideas which isn’t how a lot of people think. Instead of freely floating between related points, he uses each idea to expand upon the previous. I’m sure there’s a much more nuanced explanation but this is just my two cents
Honestly, his words did kickstart me improving my life. I wouldn't ever suggest putting your faith in a single person, though, and his behavior since in the political sphere is concerning and disappointing, especially considering how kind he comes off as.
Me and my gf found his book very useful in our lives. We may have been both not been living our best lives, I think that's who he appeals too most. The forgotten people of this world.
Very interesting critique from someone that I know personally, and who was my psychology professor in 2002 way before he had achieved his fame. It always seems so surreal that some that I know personally become this world famous intellectual
@@guillermoromero3071 That is a very good question. For starters, back in 2001 he wasn’t effected by fame, so Prof. Jordan Peterson actually very much like himself and was able to see how he really was. I in fact, could see immediately that he had that intense intellectual spark in the very first class that I attended; -and unlike what most people think, he was actually quite extraverted, and was always energized around people. This contrasted me, whom was always very introverted
I had a number of excellent professors at junior college and later at UCLA, but none so engaging, challenging, interesting, or clear as Dr. Peterson. I have watched hundreds of hours of his lectures and I've often thought "Man . . . I wonder how many of those students realize how fortunate they are to have a professor of this caliber!" Nice to see one of them sharing here! :)
@@primalcritters Agreed there! Also, there have been other great men of genius, but don’t really know how to teach. One of the reasons as to why Albert Einstein had such difficulties in getting a faculty position, was because he wasn’t good at teaching and sounded more like a monologue according to the other professors who audited his lectures (or mock lectures). Einstein was very introverted like myself, but Jordan Peterson had the great advantage that he was an extrovert
@@jubjub2112 Yes I do consider myself very fortunate! I’ve been known also for having quite a catalogue of colorful and interesting acquaintances. Unlike with most of the other intellectuals, Jordan Peterson was an extrovert, which allowed him to lecture without difficulties, be very energetic and even entertaining. Albert Einstein, whom was known to be one of humanity’s greatest geniuses was not known to be a great lecturer, abs even had a very difficult time finding a job as a professor due to his rather monotoned and monologue-like way of of teaching. Unlike Jordan, he was an introvert like myself
Im very fond of Jordan Peterson's work, but Im always worried about not getting to attached to any one thinker, so Im always on the lookout for reasonable criticism. All the critique that I had found till now seemed to me to be either not very well informed or stemming from the need to defend a pre held beleif. This is the first reasonable and objective critique that Ive found, kudos for that! Suscribed!
@@lucaswilhelmmeyer6943 if you like thinkers who don't defend pre-held beliefs, then maybe you should find a guy who doesn't believe in god or racial IQ science? Because those have been around for awhile, and they're definitely "beliefs," not facts based on the science.
@@d.m.collins1501 It’s not Nike Peterson had made a particularly big deal out of what his religious beliefs may be , and frankly it’s not like Athieism has proven immune to ideological preconceptions either. And has he particularly “defended racial IQ science”? How?
@@cainemangakahia4842 he hasn't defended racial IQ. He used the fact that if you see the people who come into the extreme ends of top IQ range, are dominated by Jews (statistics), and used that to make the point against equity.
I stumbled across JP several years ago when I was going through a lot changes and difficulties and a lot of what he had to say then helped me tremendously. I don’t think I would’ve advanced and grown as much as I have on all fronts if I hadn’t seen those videos years ago. Glad to see one of my favorite people critiquing another one of my favorite people. Thank you! 🙂
I see people say this a lot, and I believe them, but it's kind of irrelevant to whether or not Peterson is actually insightful in any way. Many people find Islam in prison and it genuinely makes them much better people, it's still a fictional immoral religion though. Much like Petersons advice might actually do something for you, but it's still kind of a pile of bullshit.
@@johnroop9625 What so hard about cleaning your room? People like you like to criticize for the sake of judging someone. Peterson has helped millions of people, how many people have you helped?
@@PC4ever possible rebuttals to your comment: 1. How many lives has Peterson damaged, destroyed, insult, steamrolled and just afflicted with psychological stress severe enough to cause sequela? 2. You said helped, what do you consider helped to entail? As a psychologist he knows about “reckless help”. Has he helped you? Why respond to a comment expressing their freedom of opinion and they weren’t even mean; but did you help with the personal offense you feel on his behalf? 3. Obviously suffering brain insults during his russian medically induced coma is nothing related to intelligence but what about his whining?
One danger area for smart people is that some of them may tend to overestimate how smart they are. This is understandable, as they are often the smartest person in the room. But they're not _always_ the smartest person in the room.
Smart people tend to know their limits... Jordan Peterson is just some dude who sells self-help books to a demographic that used to be reluctant to buy them...
Sometimes the unusual pauses in the middle of your sentences really get me "He seems like he's really high-" "- in openness to experience." Like... I think you can imagine where my head went with what you meant for a moment lmao
@@faustianrevival3816 Incorrect. He went on anxiety relief medication because the light of his life and his literal soulmate, his wife, came down with a very volatile type of cancer relatively suddenly and he spent months suffering with the very real and likely possibility that he might lose his other half. Everyone has a breaking point where they are no longer strong enough to rely on themselves alone, and sometimes there's nothing people in one's immediate support systems can do. His philosophy couldn't save him from the unbearable suffering of facing one of his worst fears, and so he turned to medication. When his wife recovered, he realized he couldn't come off it by himself so he took responsibility and sought out the help he needed. Idk what the hell is up with all the people demonizing him for this.
@@faustianrevival3816 I didn't hear any thing about pain killers but I definitely heard about him being on benzodiazepines and abusing them. I'm on pain killers most of the time for permanently damaged proximal hamstring and adductors tendons (groin). But I've managed to keep my overall doses low by sticking to the recommended doses, and when I know my pain is significant and steady, by cutting my pills into quarters and dosing on the half life so I get stable effects. There's nothing unfortunate for Peterson though. He's a United Nations agent acting to prevent white males from thinking to form political identity groups to protect themselves, their countries and their interests. Try digging deeper. He's a shill for judeo-masonry.
When Peterson lectures and draws on biblical texts, and examines and explains them through his modern lens of psychology I sometimes get the feeling he is looking at a Rorschach ink blot, and that his “interpretation” says as much about him as it says about the meaning of the text.
Thanks for your meaningful comment. I would dare to say that most texts, especially those with a strong philosophical context, are literally material for interpretation - based on the fact that we all have different backgrounds and have gone through different things that have shaped us and the way how we see the world. Jordan Peterson is undoubtedly an interesting person, and his approach is quite unique in the western part of the western world. What I mean by that is approximately this. If you read the comments here (even from educated professionals), many of them praised JP for his help, wisdom, knowledge, insight, etc. I would agree with that (although I disagree with JP on some points), but I have one, I think, significant objection. To most Americans, maybe even Canadians (IDK, I can't judge that since I don't have enough data or experience to do so, thus, I'm speaking more from an "American perspective"), JP is super educated. That's an American view reflecting the overall quality of the American education system. I'm pretty sure that, e.g., the European audience sees JP similarly, however not exactly in the same way. European education is very different from American, and although I am sure JP is seen as a well-versed, thoughtful, and well-educated gentleman in Europe too, the gap between him and his audience in America and Europe is discrepant. Most European high schools teach history and civics as an organic part of the school curriculum. (This also applies to middle grades = children aged 11-15.) Europeans are used to critical thinking and a much wider range of subjects that schools generally teach. E.g., Civics is divided into several years (depending on the type of school/graduate profile), and the curriculum usually includes philosophy, psychology, sociology, economics, political science, and law. Briefly - the European audience would probably agree with these scholars, who point out that JP's view and advice are not so unique, but rather a matter of the common sense that has somehow been lost in America, and a person who educates himself, reads, analyzes and talks about that can easily give the impression he is almost from another planet. Yes, Americans can read, and Carl Jung, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Leo Tolstoy, and others are translated into English. But how many Americans read them...? The general reluctance of Americans to read and learn even their own history is infamous and outrageous. Then, someone like JP comes along and looks like a supernova. I am not trying to belittle him, but if Americans read (more), they wouldn't be so overwhelmed by his knowledge. JP is or was (...?; he currently has some health issues...) considered a supernova in America. In Europe, he would face many such supernovas, and the European audience wouldn't look at them as some alien supermen... America should seriously rethink its values, the separation of church and state, and invest tons of money into the education of our children, so they can be more educated than generations of their parents and grandparents.
@@xpsxps1339 You make some very interesting and important points! I often wonder why so many commenters argue from angles that omit aspects I at least deem obvious, and this impression stems from the education I experienced in Germany during the last quarter of the 20th century (what my grade 8 daughter's is being taught now in Switzerland is different, but not in a good way). Sadly the educational standards in Europe are also declining and decidedly "woked up", which does nothing to enhance the content. Furthermore the funds for schools and universities are successsively diminished - in many schools the parents are even friendly coerced to help renovate the buildings, or e.g. toilets are simply closed if they do not function properly or have been vandalised (even here in CH this is an increasing problem - in my daughter's school [in a village with ca. 4.500 inhabitants!] a toilet was DETONATED and is now closed since ca. three months, instead of being repaired). Due to increasing residential poverty (job losses and diminished incoming taxes due to the pandemic exaggerating the effect) and immigrant influx the communities are financially depleted, and this reflects on the funding for education, as this seems to be the "easiest accessible" department for financial cuts. The US are trendsetters for Europe, we will be following your path rather sooner than later. This is shameful, as ALL (young) people deserve and should get the best possible education, regardless of where they live. Uninformed people make uninformed decisions. But maybe this is the plan. A good read on topic: "Bullsh*t Jobs" by David Graeber. If you have not seen the movie "Idiocracy", i strongly recommend it. This intended satire has evolved into a documentary IMO. Good day.
A grandiose nutjob who pushes snake oil salesmen through her show....who made a career turning suburban white women dumber and ended up being a 'Black Icon'. Okay she had to wear a sack to school and thats terrible but throughout her adult life she mostly distanced herself from pressing issues most black people in her country faced. She and her crew of quacks have to be taken off the pedestal
Summary + A good debater: he's polite and listens carefully and generously to the views of his conversation partners. He's speaks articulately, precisely and deliberately. He doesn't let people put words in his mouth. + He's intelligent and productive and has thought very deeply about his opinions and conclusions. + His mix of subject areas makes him interesting and knowledgeable. + His conclusions are interesting and engaging. - Many academics consider his 12 rules to be "simplistic and obvious." - He often "moves a little too far beyond" what his evidence supports when making a conclusion. He arrives at those stretched conclusions via experience and personal opinion without explicitly stating he's doing so, giving him an undeserved air of validity. The example given is a time he gave a conclusion that defied an accepted medical definition without explicitly stating he was doing so. - Some of his lectures, especially some philosophy ones, are too abstract and removed from his source literature to make sense or to have a coherent meaning. - He is hard to follow. - He rarely makes it clear when he is crossing the line between philosophy (opinion) and science. Unsubstantiated criticisms 1. He has rude mannerisms: Todd thinks that's just his deliberate and attentive style. 2. He is unqualified to speak about politics: no one should be barred from political discussion, and JP backs up his views with subjects he is well versed on. 3. He's "ambiguous, murky, and unfocused.": Todd believes this is a product of his multiple subject areas. Though I'm personally not convinced it provides an excuse for it.
thats one grip I've had with listening to JP he seemed to be a bit vague or beat about the bush somewhat, maybe I'm being ignorant but its just how I feel.
@@Jorpando Anything that attempts to bridge academic philosophy and/or psychology and everyday life application and experience, will be criticised from both sides.
I stayed away from Jordan Peterson for a long time because of his politics, but I have recently started listening to his podcast and some videos where he was interviewed. Much of his podcasts do not address the problematic political views he is known for. Instead, he covers a wide range of topics and I find his thoughts and insights very interesting and concept expanding. I wish my education base was greater in those areas so I could contextualize his thoughts better instead of just accepting what he says. You mentioned that Peterson appeals to doctors and lawyers. I'm fairly certain he also appeals to the large majority of engineers (engineering is also an applied science). For the interviews, he is a highly skilled debater and while he can become very irritated/angry, he maintains confidence in his position and rarely loses ground. I wonder how much benzo use has allowed him to stay calm under pressure. His success in interviews can be strongly attributed to his debating approach, which has aggressive undertones and can throw off an interviewer. It is easy to attribute him "winning" in interviews to his position instead of his debating style, but it is important to recognize that his debating style plays a very large part in his interview success and that his position should be evaluated on it's own merit.
Name one or two of his "problematic political views"? I find the label "problematic" rather pretentious - as it's always used by people who think their position is somehow unassailably correct and righteous. Also, you say he seems to win in interviews due to style not substance. Oh sure -- which interviewer did he beat only on style not substance? Cathy Newman? Somehow I think it's your political views that may be . . . "problematic."
@MichaelDamianPHD he uses every logical fallacy to win arguments, from refusing to clearly define anything so he can always claim he was misunderstood to strawman arguments to aggressively attacking the other person when challenged to shifting the goal posts to meaningless word salad to denying he's said things he's been documented saying- this is the style that wins him the arguments. He argues dishonestly like a typical narcissist which is why he's impossible to beat
“There’s a difference between opinions and science”. I could not agree more. As a recovering alcoholic, we talk about sharing our experience, strength, and hope with each other. NOT opinions. The definition of “opinion” is, an idea formed in the mind not necessarily based in fact. When both pilots become incapacitated at altitude, the flight attendants don’t ask for someone with an opinion about flying the plane...they want EXPERIENCE! : ) I really enjoy your TH-cam videos Dr. Grande. Thank you.
I would characterise it differently: An informed opinion is always based on at least a sub-set of facts (i.e. empirical data). These facts then get interpreted in order to form a model of reality (-> opinion). Now the interesting part is that individuals reach different conclusions, even if they are derived from the same facts, for a multitude of reasons. To figure out the differences in interpretation, in order to find out were the real disagreement originates, can be a very stimulating and interesting exercise. Science is full of opinions, when you look at it like that. :-)
Dr Peterson totally changed my life. 2 years ago I was extremely depressed and suicidal. My life and health were falling apart and I was letting it happen. I was in an abusive relationship and not able to care about myself enough to stop it. Then I found Dr. Peterson’s YT channel. I watched every single lecture. His challenge to “rescue my dead father from the abyss” struck a deep emotional chord. I took the challenge and have not looked back. Now I’m getting healthy. No contact with my abusive ex and mother for a year now and life keeps getting better! I can’t thank Dr. Peterson enough for his boldness and for his message. I would not be on this channel today if not for his words breaking through the fog first.
@Hugh mungous Dildeaux yup, and said bad relationship may well be the reason for the breakup. Thus, as JP said, some people who have broken a relationship may have PTSD. That was my initial understanding when he said that.
I have no desire to offend, but I wonder what experience you have with people who are effected by PTSD? I was diagnosed with it ( combat vet ) and have found a lot of people have lose definitions of what the disorder is.
I am a "follower" of Jordan's, and I agree and disagree with him, but he is always interesting and thought-provoking. Your analysis of Jordan is, IMO, both balanced and accurate. Great video.
If you listen to Dr. Petersons older lectures at universities you will see why people think he's highly intelligent and why they love to listen to him. He really is brilliant.
He also really comes across like he really cares about his students. He does an excellent job listening to them and validating them when they ask a question.
@@wolfy1 From what I've seen so far, he does toss a lot of word salad, but he usually has a point that he fiercely and deeply feels, and usually has a well-reasoned and research argument to support it. This does not protect him from inherent biases and dissonances, though.
On the issues of his lectures, he’s said that his lectures are more about exploring ideas publicly and less about presenting and arguing for various positions.
@@esstee9595 they say nothing to people who either lack openness to ideas or lack the capacity to grasp at them. Are you going to get something out of all lectures? No. But if you're going into a lecture with the mentality that you will get nothing or you lack the capacity to engage in the content then you lose credibility in measurement.
@@sxlg_32 Please don't make me out to be a dolt who can't appreciate Peterson. Listening to him speak is like listening to nails on a black board, and after he rambles on and on, he makes either no point, or a simplistic point. He's not articulate, just verbose. He should stick to research and not lectures. He lacks congruity and continuity. Maybe he's better now after rehab. Maybe you need rehab too with an attitude like yours. The emperor has no clothes.
@@esstee9595 If you don't want to be critiqued on your inability to comprehend material perhaps you should spend more time actually thinking about and trying to understand the material to begin with instead of plastering incoherant politicized ideologies in the comments of educational content. There's no point to an argument with an ill-educated fool stuck on ideals of the past who thinks it appropriate or even logically sound to insist on "rehab". And crass, poorly constructed criticisms with no contextual validity nor logical grounds to stand on reside squarely in the realm of a "dolt" as you put it.
Peterson, in my mind, is a person who synthesizes and combines a lot of different branches of knowledge. So yes, he will sometimes seem a little bit "out there". But that is also what makes him great. It allows us to perceive new perspectives. As for the criticism that his advice books are simplistic, well yes, they are really just a form of folk wisdom that most of us should already know, however, most modern audiences do NOT know it. So the work is important. Also, he does not just give the advice but gives a detailed reasoning behind the advice.
He also has a habit of overgeneralizing research or expanding it beyond the scope of what has actually been shown. His discussion on dream interpretation is a perfect example of this as he takes bits and pieces of research and synthesizes it into a statement about dreams that is misleading at best and most likely simply inaccurate.
That’s good for people who don’t like to read books but still like to pretend they are educated . Tell me that’s not what every Jordan Peterson fan is .
@@dinosore4782 That is not treating your audience here in good faith. It comes across as "I'm better than you because I'm educated." Hubris, in other words. You don't need to do that. You don't need to say that. Because, if you do, if you really think that you need to point that out, you are making clear your insecurity, that's all.
@@brendanh8193 blah blah blah. You said everything except that I’m wrong . Becuase you know it’s true, deep down, that’s how you are . Just be honest, it takes alot less sentences to just accept the truth .
The best thing about Jordan Peterson is that he has original, well reasoned, and well intentioned thought. He will explain and defend his stance so long as he thinks it’s reasonable. I think he has identified that people need simplistic truths to live by in order to live, fulfilling, purposeful lives. I think academia doesn’t like him generally, because he’s a threat to their general narrative. He’s a well-educated, well spoken, and seemingly authentic human being at a time when being both an authentic and good person is increasingly rare. He explains his thought pattern as to why phenomenon are occurring and proposes solutions that makes sense to him. I honestly believe that people hate him because he speaks that if you are downtrodden, you should empower yourself, and because he left it open ended as to who would be downtrodden, a bunch of young men who have been told they are toxic and patriarchal, and generally evil and privileged just by their existence, have gravitated towards him, and found truth and help in his words. Everybody else seems to have messages of empowerment in society right now, and he stands against the grain and speaks the truth he has experienced.
Agreed. A fairly significant issue I have with Jordan Peterson is his failure to draw the line between scientific facts and his own theories. I do want to hear his ideas but I would appreciate it if he presents them as such. That said, I personally believe he does not do this with intent to deceive. Rather, I think he assumes his audience can draw the line for themselves (which to me is a faulty assumption).
a great deal of science is just theory and all had beginning as opinion. as we learn more and more that accumulated knowledge increases understanding and the definitions of science and what entails
He usually does draw a distinction between what he thinks/his opinions from data and facts. Often by saying things like "I think it's something like..." or "I have thought a lot about this..." then he cites stats and studies as facts. If it ever gets blurry it's probably during lectures on symbolism and religion where facts aren't as much measurable empirically.
If you are teaching people you will always mix your own understandings and other older theories in science. Is all theories you know! Is just that your brain been washed to accept some and not others you are an authoritarian be,I ever and so blindly believe any theory from your school or what You think is a common truth in science to be more true than something new to you that Peterson Happens to educate on in some video you happened to see with your narrow mindset to what is science and what is not, is you here that is the issue,not the theories of Peterson vs “science”….
@alrick3000 - personally, I cannot recall an instance where he has not prefaced "his own theories" with the fact that they are only his own theories. I cannot remember when his theories have been presented as scientific fact.
@@btat16 Yep, given to him by the very institution that Peterson hates the most - give me a break. He is a blatant charlatan who loves the money he got off young, helpless youth online who couldn't be bothered to read real psychological advice or literature.
I too was moved by your analyses of the subjects , and it's great too critically look at who we watch ,especially in serious matters. Very compelling and I'm hooked . all my best
You're a great person. I dont have a stance yet on Mr.Peterson but I would just like to say that your critique was fair, constructive, and positive. You seem from first impressions a person of major integrity.
I don't necessarily agree a 100% with you, but I also love the fact that your points are so nuanced and qualified. I can't feel anything but respect for the way you analyze his work.
I found that Jordan Peterson has consistently provided meaningful paths in the forests of ambiguity. I think your unique, lucid take on his wanderings has a refreshing outlook that invites different ways to see them. Thanks
Meine Meinung du Falafel You’re right! Critique doesn’t have to be respectful, nice, politically or socially correct. Absolutely! Every other critique of Peterson’s work seems to be driven by ideological nonsense. I simply pointed out that this guy did not do that and what he did do, he did with class. So what point are you trying to make?
09BiGDylan He doesn’t deserve a platform? Can you explain why that is? Or is it simply that you are intimidated by someone who has opposing views to your own?
@@09BiGDylan you don't get a "platform" because you deserve it, but instead because someone/somewhere wants to hear what you have to say. Your use of "deserve" implies you need permission, and in your case permission from a social Marxist and all that entails.
His willingness to have live debates with people who have an apparent desire to discredit him is stupendous. The fact he tends to come out unscathed is amazing to me.
Maybe it's because he is able to decorate them with rarely used but beautiful sounded vocabularies, and avoid answering yes/no questions directly. "Does he believe in god?", looked.for his videos, he never directly answer this, not even with "I'm not sure".
@@williampan29 I agree that he has a an excellent command of the lexicon, however he is very precise in his speech and generally uses the words that correctly defines the subject matter. Words are often nuanced in a way the words such say for instance dog, or pet, or even canine might reflect different ideas depending on context.
He’s a mixed bag for me. He doesn’t always get it right, but he does offer young people a lot of useful advice that works. His book 12 rules of life helped me a lot. He is like a father figure to those who didn’t have one.
I agree. Especially since he is mostly talking about stuff he understands. He gets that right. But he also talked about the NS dictatorship in Germany once. He made so many mistakes do to not knowing things. I really like his attribute towards honesty though. I somewhat modefied that and try to only speak the truth, beinv humble whenever I am wrong and never let anyone who is in my environment klaim false information as valide.
Dr. Grande very gently says that Peterson often doesn't make sense. He gives Peterson an out by saying it could be because Dr. Grande is not smart enough to grasp the nonsensical lectures. This would beg the question that if someone as sharp as Grande finds the lectures nonsensical who the heck are they for? Around the 13:55 mark he notes a common criticism is that Peterson is "ambiguous, murky, and unfocused", which supports the original assertion. Somehow Grande doesn't make that connection and calls the criticism unfounded, despite that often being his personal experience as well.
I do feel you missed a very vital positive. Temperment. The ability to stay calm in some of the appearances where others have a very clear disdain or agenda is consistent and lends credence to be mindful of what you say.
You don't know what all those words mean, do you @robert williams? Ironically, what you said brought my mindful consideration to the idea of quality over quantity in language ( yours, because my temperament is what clinicians describe as "bitchy," and "logorrheic in occasional explosive bouts." Some of the pressure has been released, credible sources report.
Greetings from Finland. Having watched a number of Peterson's videos here and having wondered about these same questions, I found your eloquent and clear summary very useful!
I am a67 yr old Grandmother---Jordan B Peterson has helped me with life lessons I wish I had learnt earlier in life...I am now listening to an audio on The Gulag Archapalego...not something I would generally read though I did read the Russians in my 20s.I think his total presence with a person when he listens or speaks..He gives people his total time and attention..this is very compelling. He shows he really cares for those ,moments...He is totally authentic...He is a great positive influence in my life
Why is it always gullible women that flock to the drivel of pretentious men who use expensive words in order to sound sophisticated while saying nothing new or relevant? I wish I could say I was surprised that you fell for this conman but alas, even someone with your last name is vulnerable to utter stupidity.
Thank you for this discussion. I too have a PHD in one area. When I listen to Jordon Peterson there are times when I find his videos very engaging and other times very confusing. I'm pleased to learn that I am not alone in this. In
I have common sense and cant be tricked in to calling him smart or deep lol he isn't hurting anybody but hell my Dad said all the same stuff as a factory worker lol Socrates he is not.
I’m fascinated with this.. I typically agree with your evaluations and I have been binge watching for a while now.. I never heard of this man until recently on the YT shorts.. and I was absolutely CONFLICTED on how I felt about him.. initially I was totally on board with what I saw, but… after I saw several more clips… I was definitely brought back a step.. I’m really appreciating having your perspective on his material and output..
It’s a disservice to yourself to not watch his long form discussions. Snippets here and there do not do the man justice. Watch his Dr. Oz interview, compelling stuff with an interviewer that I figured would be a detractor initially. His interview with Russel Brand is also interesting, as they aren’t necessarily of the same opinion but the discussion is productive regardless. Dr. Peterson is a “liberal” by the classic definition, which turns off a lot of those that consider themselves “liberal” but don’t really know what that means.
Well, I found that chappie interesting until he said that there is no poor people in the United States. Such an outrageous lie took my respect from him. To be so immune to other peoples suffering and to brush their tragedies off so carelessly is just mindblowing. Anyone can say what they want about that person, I just dont want to hear anything related to him.
@The Insatiably Curious Skeptic The poverty in the states is different, but it still exists. For example in certain parts of the US people freeze to death because of poverty, that is not something that you would see in the slums of Bombay India. The suffering is different but it is still there.
@The Insatiably Curious Skeptic No what he says is not true, there is poverty and poor in the US and people that die from impoverished conditions. However not all poverty or the poor in the US are entitled like you say, some are that way from genetic dispositions of low IQ, congenital disorders, inbreeding. The thing that separates the US from India is that the US does not have a Cast system. If an individual in the US is born into poverty with a high IQ, they have opportunities to climb the ladder of education and become successful and get out of poverty. This foundation of education for all was laid down by the Calvanists since the New England colonies and is what makes the US unique.
If anyone thinks that delving into the world of psychology and human behavior behavior will be a streamlined, simple endeavor...buckle up. It can never be “simplified”, and to discuss (REALLY discuss) psychology with interest requires a LOT of information. I remember reading a criticism of Peterson regarding how much he adds too much to a discussion involving psychology and philosophy. That one made me chuckle a little. A real discussion of psychology will never be short and sweet, not if you seek to ground your points. I can say with confidence that some of Peterson’s dialogue goes way over my head. I’ve had to look up certain vocabulary while listening to him. But I CAN say, for the most part, I can grasp the context. He is very intelligent, undoubtedly. He also discusses matters on a level many don’t tend to do. Even when I disagree with him though, he does present his cases without devolving into intense emotional reactions, and I can respect that.
These videos keep getting better and better. I really appreciate them. They are a good balance of opinion and science. You do an excellent job of integrating complex literature and your clinical experience without sounding pretentious. Thank you
Considering his own credentials, it’s amazing he isn’t the least bit pretentious. Check his bio sometime. I love his new format using sarcasm and humor. 💯.
I've never had any issue in following the logic Jordan uses, I think he is very good at explaining things as simply as possible, but inevitably when you are talking really deep things, the only way most people can understand them is with analogies and even then, they may get the general point, but they won't necessarily understand the "why". BTW's that not meant as something to belittle you or them, it's more about realising that there are some people out there who are so smart, 99.99% of people will never be able to understand some of the things they understand. The best way I've found of explaining it, is consider the following. If you have an IQ of say 125, that means you are easily in the top 10% of smartness, but if you look at someone who is 35 points below you at 90, they are about as dumb as a rock, now consider how smart someone 35 points above you truly is, they are as much smarter than you, than you are than the dumb as a rock person.
@@kiratorres8805 haha. I’ve found reading his books a few times and listening to his lectures allows time for it al to sink in. He’s an extremely deep and profound thinker and has thought deeply about these existential topics for decades. 🍄 ✌️
I watched a clip where Joe Rogan was talking to Lawrence Krauss , and Krauss said that the reason why the Universe has a diameter of 96 billion Light Years despite only being 14.5 billion years old is because Space travels expands faster than Light. That's simultaneously mind blowing yet easy to understand.
I think two things which add to Peterson's credibility are the many thousands of hours of clinical work that he has done and presumably drawn on in developing his views, and how helpful his writings appear to have been to a great many people.
This is by far, the most fair-minded and honest critique of him I've ever heard. I would love to know which videos or arguments of his confused you! Thank you for always being so honest.
Thanks for an excellent critique. I do agree that Dr. Peterson does occasionally talk beyond his expertise in certain areas, but overall he does a good job.
@Anthony Mendoza I agree with you! Personally I feel he goes beyond his expertise when discussing biblical accounts as if he is a biblical scholar which he is not. God, Jesus and biblical accounts are not to be explained through psychology or philosophy. They are best understood through belief and faith. I realize he is grappling with his beliefs and of course as everyone, has every right to do so. My peeve is that he weeves his ideas in his videos on psychology as if he is qualified theologian. The danger in this is high as many people respect his thoughts, of which I am one, but a person who may be on the fence as to their beliefs will look to his teaching as sound just because he is Jordan Peterson. They may fail to research biblical pastors as a result..pastors who are able to transform you and change your life (i.e.David Pawson, Derek Prince, David Wilkinson, Charles Stanley, John Piper, Voddie Baucham just to name a few). At least they did for me! 🤔
He is often the first to say that he is in fact not an expert when discussing certain topics. Especially in his newest content where he talks to very experienced guests about their area of expertise. I've never seen Dr. Peterson suggest that he is an expert on a given topic when he clearly knows he's not. Quite the opposite.
@@claudiapennisi7987 Actually it is. The guy gave a lecture in Harvard for 6 years discussing myth in the context of Jungian Psychology, and Christianity plays an important role in that discipline (that was developed by Jung himself).
Thank you, Dr. Grande, for a thorough critique of the force of nature that is Dr. Peterson. I have followed Dr. Peterson on TH-cam for a number of years now, starting with his university lectures, his subsequent much-hyped stance on vocabulary control by the Canadian government, his countless interviews, through his (and his wife's) illnesses and on to his present resurgence. I recall him talking, in several interviews, about his days as a therapist and how the plight of his clients moved him deeply. To me, this was so telling because it is my perception that few therapists ever allow themselves to feel deeply about their clients lest they lose their "clinical perspective," while he seemed to be willing to climb right down into the rabbit hole with them in order to truly understand their anguish. I have seen him become quite emotional, in interviews, when recalling some of his former clients. Dr. Peterson also touched a nerve when he asserted that young men today lack good male role-models, and he exhorted them to not compete with each other, but rather, to compete with themselves by striving each day to do better than the day before. "Make your damn bed!" is one of the absolute best admonishments I have ever heard, as it illustrates that one cannot have control over one's life unless there is a firm foundation, that the foundation to growing up is learning how to take care of yourself and it starts with very basic stuff. It seems that a whole generation has missed learning how to do the most fundamental things in life, and they realize now that they are struggling. Through his lectures and interviews, he is trying to fill this void. In addition to being a clear thinker, he is also a consummate humanitarian.
He just is so well educated! You need the 5 hr conversation to even connect well to these subjects. I’d love to have about a day of his time. I do get most of his references to other works and people. And his love, true love, for others individual and societal is overwhelmingly honest. He isn’t afraid to be vulnerable as a person.
Your summary is excellent, but I disagree with your "much-hyped vocab" perception. Birthing person. Menstruating person, Personchester United, personual labour. Nah, his take isn't over the top, he warned us. I enrolled my python at the kindergarten as it identifies as a child. So far, only three kids have mysteriously disappeared, and the python has gone off his food at home.
@@VaughanMcCue Thanks for your reply. Are you familiar with the controversy surrounding Dr. Peterson's stance regarding "vocabulary control by the Canadian government"? His take wasn't "over the top," but it did contribute to the controversy created by the government's insistence on appropriate vocabulary. I have noted, though, that he seems to have gone through some sort of personality (for lack of a better word) changes since his illnesses. He doesn't seem to be the same person, to me anyway.
@@jbrown2908 His health setback and his wife's imminent death from a cancer scare shook them. She came good, and he has to, but the health and mental challenges took their toll on him; naturally, he will be slow to get back into "it". I need to remind myself that his recent experience gave me another insight into his life and I _see_ him differently than before. I am genuinely interested in opinions alleging that he is extremist in his political position, and I am too naive to get what the fuss is.
I frankly find it obscene that people are claiming "PTSD" for everything from a bad breakup to not being picked for team sports as children. Police officers, firefighters, nurses, medics, trauma surgeons, 16:09 servicemen and women who've seen combat and/or the resulting horror, these are the people whom one might expect to suffer from PTSD. Prolonged traumatic events beyond the pale of normal human experience can cause PTSD.
I thought that was a very fair and balanced overview of JP. I could watch him all day long! He’s taught me a lot by modelling HOW to think, not WHAT to think. It’s the mental process clear of emotion. Yet I get the impression he’s a very ethical and empathetic person too. Nice work Dr G!
Yess exactly, people who actually want to develop teach others how to filter and discuss what the good ideas are, not necessarily centered on what they think is best
Jordan Peterson seems to be much better when he's telling people how to think rather than what to think. Any one person will be filled with opinions that are right and wrong, and you shouldn't choose any one person to copy the beliefs of. Some of his beliefs are rather odd, controversial, and in my view, untrue, but a lot of what he teaches about how to go about forming beliefs is very wise. The fact that his advice regarding how to think has actually led me to disagreeing with him goes to show that it really was good advice - instead of teaching us to think in a way that would make us automically agree with him, he wanted us to think for ourselves. When I started with Jordan Peterson I was quite a fan. I genuinely have him to thank for improving my way of thinking and becoming more critical. Despite that, nowadays, I take him with a grain of salt. Again, he really is at his best when he's telling people how to think rather than what to think.
Rules such as patient confidentiality mean we only have his daughter's word that he was on benzoes only. No one knows the source of his addiction. Even in interviews, he always seemed very intense over last three years.
I feel some reassurance myself just from you saying “he’s produced so much content that there would be some errors.” As a writer I fear people focusing on the errors, not the holistic amalgamation of information I’m writing about. It makes sense that someone that’s pumped out a giant collection of work would not be 100% correct about everything.
I think you're lucky if you're 80% correct cause correct is more fuzzy than crisp. Then you have to deal with being "correct" (i.e. socially correct). Future generations will judge you based on their own common sense/social conventions. But I guess if you are lucky enough to have future generations judge you, you've probably pretty well.
His brilliance outshines any unintentional “mistake”. I don’t think y’all get his brilliance or scope and have an opposition to him based on your own political dictates.
Joy Sanders We get that you are mesmerised by his non speak, Peterson is not a complete idiot, more just acting the fool because he can’t get enough attention.
I often have to listen a few times to some of his philosophical lectures…I’m pretty smart too (at least I think so) but even pausing and rewinding a segment to gain understanding, the message is sometimes tough to grasp. This is a very balanced critique!
I walk everyday and listen him and he has helped me a lot in many ways I was in an abusive relationship for many years an he was able to explain what happened. I soon realized that the other therapists I saw knew exactly what was wrong and what I needed to do but wasted my time for years
I was also in an abusive relationship, and I have not found a therapist that has helped me with that. Can you share with me what it is I need to do to move past this trauma?
Well obviously you were willing to listen to the great JP but not mere everyday psychologists. Sometimes people won’t hear what their mother, good friend, GP or psychologist are telling them. Then a prominent person full of his own importance comes along and essentially says the same as the others did. You are willing to believe him even though he is essentially saying the same things others have said.
@@kb8511 you can try trauma therapy. If you can find a trustworthy practitioner of this intervention and are ready for it. It was one of the best things I ever did for myself.
@@jdr9419 you are projecting your own issues all over this person in a really egregious way. This person said she spent years trying to fix her trauma. How dismissive and obnoxious for you to immediately assume, with no evidence whatsoever, that she paid that money and spent all that time but didn’t bother to actually listen or learn anything, because the people with the educations she doesn’t have that she paid lots of money too didn’t seem “self important” enough to stroke her need to hero worship. JP is most certainly not self important. You should consider more how envious you are of the man, and instead of assuming people like him because they’re all contemptible, maybe actually try to understand what makes the man so damned appealing to the people that love him? You can’t learn when you hate the people you need to learn from, and when you feel like people ought to worship you and they don’t so you have serious sour grape energy pervading your life. I hope you open your mind and consider this, and help yourself see past your envy and grow so that you become a more powerful, helpful peraon
Thank you for your fair and reasonable analysis of Jordan Peterson and criticisms surrounding him. I'm so glad you objectively viewed him without a certain bias. We need more therapists and thinkers like you.
Peterson demystifies areas of thought, teaches that people can think for themselves and that they should never be afraid to take responsibility for their own actions and thoughts.
Haven’t watched the video yet but after high school I fell into a depression that left me bed ridden for almost 3 months, I didn’t get out of bed unless I needed to use the bathroom.
It got to the point where it became uncomfortable to walk. My mom would have to bring me food which I usually didn’t touch. I finally came across Dr.Peterson’s videos and he did more for me than any therapist, family member, or psychologist ever did. He’s the one who inspired me to get my life together and stop rotting away.
Have you heard akira the don's lofi mixes using his clips? Great stuff. I'm glad to hear the wise words helped you along. He gives great life advice.
Dr. Peterson has helped me so much since the births of my daughters. To parent them in a practical and logical way. I know it’s not his focus but his advice on parenting and responsibility has been priceless. My youngest daughter is autistic and having his words to listen to have been so helpful.
Many parents get into the mindset of the world having to change to allow for asd kids, but then many have grown up so entitled. My daughter is 6 and I’m certain without listening to him we would still be co sleeping and she would only eat chicken nuggets and fries!
Well done to you. I’m using his videos to help me understand my issues and motivate me to make changes.
Lynda Burn if anyone can I really believe it’s him.
Watch Academy of Ideas.
Jordan Peterson spoke in Vancouver several years ago. My daughter spoke to him after the lecture and found him to be very interested in hearing how she had found his advice very helpful during a health crisis she had. She said that he was very humble and kind. His genuine interest in her meant a lot to my daughter.
Of course he was interested in hearing how he helped her, of course he was humble and kind… she didn’t challenge his views..
@@judethaddeus9856 Or he could simply be pleased that someone found his work helpful. Some people actually have an interest in helping others instead of merely being seen to help others, and spouting trendy slogans on social media.
If you think the people he tries to help aren't deserving of it, that really says more about you than he.
@@judethaddeus9856 you haven’t reviewed his less hostile discussions. Or your incapable of forming an independent opinion of him without political polarization influences.
@@TheDiverJim what your comment just embodied is the Best we can ever hope for as a direct result of capitalism!
@@michaelvance1118 what does capitalism have to do with my comment? Thanks for the compliment, just confused by it.
He's a professor, a clinical psychologist. I don't consider him a philosopher and I don't consider him perfection. I take his information and enjoy most of his rhetoric. He'd not want you to entirely embrace him only but to consider his ideas and challenge them. Good professors teach you to think, not to agree. Just my take.
His ability to convey concepts and arguments in an understandable manner makes him so incredible to listen to.
Yeah I agree with that it was a great analysis that made me think!
Well put !
@@An-fi8is You haven't had many professors if you're still that impressed by them.
@@johnwinthrop2702 It made you evaluate his "thinking" as if your own. That is the danger of not thinking for yourself.
I just wanted to say that I appreciate your approach. You have a way of not tearing down. Your very thoughtful with your words, I sense no vindictiveness. You don’t take pleasure in that.
Your a calming person and that usually translates to trust.
Thank you for your videos and breaking down many things I think about. You do so with such dignity for all. ❤️
Ditto!
I agree, well said
Social satirists Irma Bombeck and Art Buckwald identified the source of humor as anger.
Early in his career Mark Twain identified the source of humor as anger. Near the end of his career he identified the source as pain. (I've been told by psychiatrists that behind anger is fear. I ask, "Fear of what?" I answer, "Fear of pain.")
I second that!
You should see his latest video on Meghan Markle. He definitely is a hypocrite now
Here's something...I recently went through something horrific. Around the same time, I found Jordan Peterson clips on TH-cam...his 12 rules...snippets of his advice... I distinctly remember being out one day, and I remembered his rule to stand up straight, and I did it...I know it's "obvious," yet I had never stopped to consider doing it. And it dramatically affected my mood that day. It's something I have since adopted whenever I think of it (and I still don't always think of it). My point: Sometimes it really does help for someone to state the obvious; many of us are lost in our stuff and need simple direction. I love him!
Excellent observation and great comment! It’s funny as I went through boot camp way back in 1996 and that’s one of those things getting drilled into you with the recruit division commanders screaming this at you for around nine weeks, they’d say “stand up tall, shoulders back, head up straight, stand proud.” or something very similar (they’d all say the same thing albeit with slight variations). You’re very right about it working as I really did mature a lot that year. I saw first hand how it helped many others that did not have the same level of confidence that I had.
@@jayrose6312 Thank you for sharing that! Great point, that the military pounds this into people... The little things can be the big things.
@@Jimvesterstallone You are very welcome! Another thing I remembered after you replied was the level of mind games they would play with your head if only to see if you’ll break under pressure and don’t belong in the military. They do this because it’s a lot cheaper to send someone back home during recruit training than to spend countless dollars on them and their training just to have that person ‘break down’ later on, especially if that person’s ‘break down’ is in a combat zone! I’d estimate that we lost up to 20% of our division that first week! As the first week just prepares you for the training ahead (getting gear assigned, signing forms, drug test, medical & dental checkups, etc.) they repeatedly ask “who doesn’t want to be here? It’s much easier if you tell us now before you get assigned to a division [and start training!]” They want you to tell them as it only cost Uncle Sam a few bucks mostly on logistics at this point, e.g. hotels, airfare, and the like. They also ask you this on very little sleep and try to keep you awake!
Now, I dunno your background on this, but kids that suffer extreme child abuse will mostly come out psychologically ‘broken’ themselves, but some (a MUCH smaller number) will thrive and come out stronger. Sadly, I came from a very abusive home and when I tell people what I actually haven’t repressed you could see the looks of disgust on their faces! I’m an open book regarding this, however the details are not relevant right now. What is relevant is the fact that I fortunately came out ‘emotionally scarred,’ but with a will that’s far stronger than many will ever have. I was not going to allow the pattern to repeat! I was also going to be the polar opposite of the ‘white trash’ who ‘raised’ me, and I guess a few accomplishments of mine did prove this if only to myself!
Here’s my point (more of a theory, actually), confidence in general, without the cockiness, and regardless how one arrived to have a generally high level of confidence, will foster (a) Being immune to others who attempt to be emotionally hurtful to you, directly proportionate to the level of confidence. One who’s truly confident doesn’t ‘compete’ with others, but rather themselves exclusively. They also could care less regarding the negative, hurtful statements made my others. (b) One’s will, e.g. not giving up, is also directly proportionate to their level of confidence. And, finally (c) It doesn’t matter where or how this level of confidence was obtained or cultivated, only the fact that it’s actually “true” confidence (rather than narcissism, grandiosity, cockiness, etc.) Sometimes, which you’ll soon clearly see, extremely negative events could segue into positive events on the same ‘level.’
One final story to tie this altogether, and I know this is long, so I’ll try to be quick:
While in boot camp, I don’t exactly remember what I did, but it was a relatively minor infraction, and there are a lot of those, so it’s not unusual. Many times, the recruit division commanders will have you “make it rain” as a form of punishment. Making it rain is having you do very quick exercises in full uniform for an extended length of time while commands and sometimes insults are yelled at you. So, I started to hit the deck and do push-ups, sit-ups, etc. - back up on me feet and do jumping jacks, running in place, etc. - rinse and repeat - as each command was called out. As I was in the best shape of my life, I was actually enjoying the workout, and he saw the ‘smile’ I had on, so he called over another recruit division commander to “join in the fun.” By the time ‘THEY were done,’ there were three of them yelling at me. Over an hour past and I was still going strong. Finally, I heard the words “stop, on your feet!” The recruit division commander finally asked “so, Rose, what the hell is it going to take to break you?!” With a smile, I simply said “You can’t. I’m sorry, but that’s just not possible.” He was so frustrated as he didn’t know what to even say to that, so I shrugged, and obviously defeated, he said “go back to everyone in the division, we’re through here.” I know one thing for damn sure, I earned his respect and the respect of a few of his peers that evening as the recruit division commanders were talking about me and this event. I don’t think I even spoke about it much thereafter, I really didn’t care one way or another about the event. The thing is, and this question could be perceived as if only bordering philosophical:
If I didn’t face over a decade of various of types of quite literally heinous abuse, and had the mental strength to somehow not only survive, but walk away rather positively thereafter (which was a miracle according to numerous psychologists, therapists, etc., that I’ve seen), would the events of that evening have transpired any different?!
I would go with a definite “abso-effing-lutely!!!” (read: Yes!)
Feel free to ‘chime in’ with any thoughts, and again, thanks for reading this as I know it was a lot to digest!
@Calm in the Storm - I think many people view him that way, while I think he's really the culmination of adult voices most just didn't listen to while growing up and now find that advice so profound when put into the mouth of one man.
@@Malt454 I grew up, from about 6, reading, and reading, and reading. Born in 1948 -- do the math -- at my age I'm not much impressed by any so-called 'intellectuals" -- which isn't by itself the whole person.
Better to read Socrates: he teaches how to THINK CRITICALLY.
I believe it would be interesting if Dr. Grande critiqued himself.
Jim Grasso “a lawyer who has himself for a lawyer has a fool for a client.” I suppose it would apply in a critique of oneself...too close to the problem.
Jim Grasso I’m sure the good doctor uses meta cognition all the time. I’m sure he is his own critic frequently. I’d hazard to guess that he knows himself better than the vast majority of us know ourselves. Still, a self critique my him would be interesting.
Do himself!
That's something I believe we all could do. It helps to understand why we might have the world view we have. A careful analysis could reveal blind spots.
Specially after defending Bill Gates in the Covid 19 video
I love how you focus on patterns rather then individual instances where he made mistakes. This is my fav approach when trying to judge other's more accurately.
Pattern recognition is the crux of human cognition.
@@davidbudo5551 ...and the foundation of several cognitive fallacies.
Great comment and analysis of the speaker! So true, look for patterns of behaviour.
@@davidbudo5551 i agree. Pattern recognition is why Artificial intelligence and machine learning are so dangerous to our society (when in the wrong hands).
When I look at Petersons patterns he seems slightly arrogant (as most smart individuals tend to be) and also not high in openness.
This is probably the best commentary I've seen yet on Mr. Peterson. I enjoy the fact that you are specifically coming from an outside point of view and you don't tear him down in any sort of way.
You are specifically scientific about your observations and your criticisms of him are very insightful.
Thank you Dr. Grande for making this content! I enjoy it very much. I also enjoy your breakdowns of other mental illnesses and trying to get people to understand about each specific mental illness/personality disorders.
I am always learning something new from you videos and I love the fact that I'm obtaining so much knowledge from your videos.
So, again, thank you so much for all of your videos!
Interviewer : Are you OK Dr.Peterson?
Jordan Peterson : Define OK.
Schizophrenic REACTS 😂 True....but, he has a point.
That's what makes him so interesting. He's ahead of the curve.
@@ML-qs3tf Spot on.
@@TheEternalOuroboros
He misrepresented his free speech start. He is just another reactionary when he goes out of the psychology field.
@@chokinonashes61 Outside of his professional field, he seems like a typical waterboy for the neoliberal globalist empire to me...not exactly what one thinks of as a "reactionary." He's generally going very much "with the Establishment flow" in most every area but free speech and his recognition of some of the (generally ignored, ridiculed, or minimized) existential problems bedeviling young men today.
One correction on a statement you made, Peterson’s book 12 Rules for Life is not a book for men. It’s for men, women, and anyone who wants to set their life in order. He’s always sure to make that point known. Thanks
Most of his audience is male but you're right, it's for everyone
I noticed that immediately as well.
Why would I want to live like him
I get what you're saying, and you're not wrong either, but the demographic that is the majority of his followers are young men. So to extrapolate that to say it's for men isn't entirely wrong. As at the very least, something he is doing is catering for men more than other groups and if there was a product that was used predominantly by men, even if it wasn't exclusively marketed towards them, we'd be inclined to perceive it as 'for men'
@@Guppyg53 your IQ is too small to resemble Dr Peterson so even if you did want to live like him you simply couldn't.
I have always enjoyed Jordan Peterson even when I disagree. I find the lectures thought provoking. Thanks for the critique.
most people go over the fact that he has (co)authored over a 100 academic papers way too easily.
I love Dr. Peterson's psychological works and his university lectures, that I find very thought-provoking. His political "activism" so to say is very weird to say the least, though.
Oh like when he told millions of people thier transphobia was justified thus adding more stochastic terrorism to innocent lgbt people.. what a cool guy.
@@Onus6688 saying a fear of something is understandable doesn’t excuse the irrationality of that fear. Understanding where your fears are based however can help you work through them. Jesus never condemned anyone but people have been condemning and killing in his name. Some people will find any reason or cause for violence. All people deserve respect and love and the peace to live their life as they see fit as long as they aren’t hurting anyone.
Jordan Peterson is a narcissist
Dr. Grande, would you be willing to do an updated take on Jordan?
why?
this is weird seeing a 5 year old grande vid. i wasn't sure it was even him.
i got a feeling he may choose celebrities to talk about to get views. why even cover successful people when his MO is the unseemly side of life.
he did one on george carlin a year ago. people have nothing but respect for carlin, and there's grande talking about the drug habits of a dead man. he'll do anything for views. that one left a bad taste in my mouth, as does this one on peterson.
it seems awkward for grande to comment on people in the same category as himself just to ride their coattails and gain notoriety. he should stick with the murders and leave people like dr. phil and peterson alone. unless of course they murder someone...
"Dr Peterson, what's your favorite color?"
"Well that depends on what you mean by favorite.
And it also depends on what you mean by color.
This is a very complex question..
One must acknowledge the underlying
verisimilitude that is irrevocably nested within a
multi-layered metaphysical substrate which many
people fundamentally conflate with their ideologi-
cal presuppositions with no uncertain irregularity,
causing the inadvertent dismissal of Jung's arche-
typal extrapolation of the quintessential axiomatic
juxtaposition required to achieve Raskolnikov's
magnitude of Neo-Marxist existential nihilism..."
Be careful Dr.Grande Dr.Peterson might analyse you too🤣🤣
Hahahahhahaha wth
this is 2 good XD top comment for sure
Too good 😀
Man the hunter favors blue/green those being optimal hunting conditions. Women choose red/pink because those are the targets of a gatherer. That is wired into our DNA. Very few deviations. Lobsters
Well, that depends on what you mean by "what." In fact, we cannot define anything. That is all. Well, that isn't actually that...at all. Wait.... Falls into a black hole.
Basically what I got from this video is that he is really good at what he does but isn't perfect
... in contrast to how some may be positioning him (even he himself, at certain times and topics). Yes.
@constant change you are 😘
Who is?
In other words. Hes human and so far an ok person
Basically, what I got from your comment is that you're an over-simplistic fool!
“I think people get a little too hung up on the way other people look when they talk” that quote warranted my like 👍🏻
Especially when they are looking at credentials and published papers.
One of the funniest retorts I receive constantly is, “What is your degree in?”
As if that matters to the topic at hand. If I said something wrong, correct me. If I said something that SOUNDS wrong, then study the topic more yourself.
Asking for credentials is pure Ad Hominem coming from people who think insults are “ad hominem.” 😂
@@lawtruth3872 It is his real hair. It is just receding.
@@josephcoon5809 12:50
@@stevethea5250 4:50
I think if people lose a relationship it can definitely bring on ptsd. He may not have elaborated but the partner may have been abusive or the break up could trigger pre existing issues. There can also be psycho social dynamics around the break up due to a smear campaign and social abuses they can be very crazy making. The partner may have been an addict which can cause a nervous breakdown. The person may take a deeper look at self and family and friends and coke to awareness that is shattering. So perhaps a break up could be one aspect of a more global issue that shatters or devastates. Having a partner die can be the most stressful event in a persons life and a ptsd diagnosis is often quite accurate in that situation. Being rejected or abandoned can be quite a trigger with a ptsd issue that already exists on some level. No one said the symptoms weren’t there. He simply did not elaborate.
Jordan Peterson had a huge positive impact in my life. Some of his lectures are over my head. It’s the same when I read Nietzsche.
This is the best, most balanced critique I've seen on JP so far. Great to see a peer that is not afraid to be both critical and complimentary at the same time. This is rare and much appreciated for those of us trying to make sense of these difficult but important topics.
I’m sure Dr Grande would both dislike and appreciate a similar evaluation of himself, possibly from Dr. Peterson. I strongly believe Dr. Peterson could set aside his own evaluation and use his not insignificant insight and intelligence to make a very fair evaluation.
In both cases they would likely have errors, but at least they would be well reasoned and fair. (As fair and reasoned as we could hope).
@@john-paulsilke893
Love that idea!
Agree!
@@7LegSpiders I’m pretty sure Dr Peterson may have his feelings hurt, (he’s very sensitive) but he’s also a tough guy and has suffered far worse slings and arrows. And furthermore both of these men might learn more about themselves in such an endeavour then they would learn about each other. Unfortunately it may actually go over our heads unless they’d dumb it down, (I’m only peripherally knowledgeable on some of psychology as are most of the viewers/commenters so ideally they would keep it more mundane, which does risk slight inaccuracies for our sakes).
Difficult topics? The only reason the topics are difficult, is that you are trying to accommodate (and possibly obey) the leftist lunacy that is plaguing our culture.
So much *integrity* in this, hands down the best video on Jordan Peterson I've seen.
Thank you so much!
English Teacher you can tell it's unbiased by the title alone
Marcus, yes, this is an excellent video.
Agreed
in a perfect world this is what criticism would look and sound like. Couldn't find a single ad hominem!
'12 steps to life' may be seen as 'simplistic and obvious' by fully established professional men but the book is also aimed at young males starting out in life. We need more books like that which are easily understood by many of the seemingly lost or floundering youth of today.
You know something, there’s a lot of beauty in simplicity. To me, it’s actually a selling point. He Lays out things he considers to be irrefutable truth in all their starkness for all the world to see; naked truth, by God.
Well stated
Exactly.
I bought the book and I'm reading it right now. I passed it several times because of that, but I can almost assure you, when you read it, it's not like anything you expect. It's amazing and FULL with scientific evidence/information that can make your head spin, actually questioning the points that he makes. I really suggest the reading, it's for everybody (even women, for that matter). The rules themselves seems tongue in the cheek and very simplistic, but they're just a "hook" to get you in, in very important topics that describes the nature of our behaviour and how we can surpass through work and diligence our inadequacies. It's in my top 5, and I've read MANY books. If anything, I suggest you guys read it online, even if it's a preview. The lobster part is fucking great.
I wasn't a huge fan of the book. Was disappointed. Got more value from some of his lectures.
Before watching this video, I would like to ask Dr. Grande to consider doing an update on Jordan Peterson. There have been significant developments concerning Dr. Peterson since this installment.
Significant developments indeed including:
1. In late 2019 he sought "emergency" detox from benzodiazepine addiction
2. JP has developed a propensity to cry and weep in most of his interviews.
3. I most recently heard him say that he believes in Jesus Christ and he believes in the resurrection literally.
4. JP's political leanings have shifted from center left leaning all the way to MAGA Trumpian.
I would say much much more for Dr. Todd Grande to analyze.
Yeah. The signs were all there back when this video was initially published, but it'd be easy to have missed them without doing a very thorough dive into his behavior. Now? Dude's gone off the rails. That said, I don't think I would enjoy a modern Grande video on the topic, personally. Would feel like watching a rotting, squishy horse's corpse being wailed on. @@randyorr9443
I see him as capable, yet fallible, artistic individual with above average intelligence, and an expert on some topics. BUT also not someone that has critically thought about some topics to the extent that he has with other topics, and rightfully so. So we should listen to him and consider his ideas on his field of expertise. You know, not treat him as a Messiah of all topics like some people seem to do.
I love Jordan Peterson because he made me think about some things from a different perspective. Hearing interesting advice about some things I've never considered can be intoxicating to me personally.
So in reality you're one of the people that has actually treated him as a Messiah of all topics considering what you said "I love Jordan Peterson because he made me think about some things from a different perspective. Hearing interesting advice about some things I've never considered can be intoxicating to me personally.
" You're one of those people that experiences something and then calls others out on that which you are also doing and makes it as if that's not something youre a part of but what's really going on here is you actually understand those people and have noticed that because you are one of those people.
@@Tolbat "You're one of those people that experiences something and then calls others out on that which you are also doing and makes it as if that's not something youre a part of but what's really going on here is you actually understand those people and have noticed that because you are one of those people"
lol yeah it's almost as if people can make mistakes through experience, learn from them, and then give reasonable advice to other people on how to have a more productive, realistic perspective. You know, the kind of thing that leads to improvement, unlike your comment which solely exists to smear and tear down people like an insecure douchebag
@@brandonrox10 Sure. Like when he said that Trump was smart.
@@andnowwevibe270 But he's not owning the fact he is one of those people, he is pretending he is not....yea real helpful...How about be honest so people can really relate to you and absorb your advice?
@@Tolbat There's literally no empirical or logically sound reason to assume the OP sees JP as an infallible genius on all topics. On no planet does 'He made me see some things from a different perspective' translate to 'I think he's right and well researched about everything'. You made a massive logical leap to get there, also known as an assumption. Can only imagine why
Secondly the OP made a recommendation of good form: to not just assume that everything someone says is true because they have a reputation as an intellectual. Your post is just pure ad hominem based on a nonsensical logical leap. More than likely you just needed your boost of narcissistic supply to make it through the day
Your critique of his work is damn good. Reasonable, informed and presented in a respectable manner. I do not agree with all of the critique, but I also do not agree with all the things J.P. concludes (or I just don't understand). All in all, it is the attitude with which you comment that won me. It was pleasant listening to your perspective of his work.
“He seems like he’s high... in openness to opinions”. Lmao excellent pause.
@@andrewtaylor2430 this video seems to have been posted prior to Peterson’s drug abuse being common knowledge. But, if the creator didn’t make that pause deliberately, it was still a very apt pause.
Hahahahahaha
@@marialagattuta5438 he needs to clean the opiates out of his room
The pause wasnt long enough to justify this comment.
@@lukepatto4366 well, I didn’t time it... but it was certainly long enough to catch my notice.
Im a physician. I thought it was just me too. My opinion of him is he’s hard to follow and sometimes he doesn’t make any sense. I also thought that he overthinks things. Being able to keep complex things simple is a sign of a true understanding of an issue. I like him though and will be willing to listen to him for a few minutes. But once he starts overthinking I have found myself tuning out.
Great comment !
I am a board certified psychologist and I can certify that he knows a lot about Jung,Freud..etc..he has read many a book.he makes mistakes as everyone does and, sometimes he overthinks basic concepts but he is a well read individual with a high IQ..most of the times he knows what he is talking about..
@@VicBlank-qy9ccI suppose he’s probably smarter than me. I’m just a work horse.
Yeah he's an interesting anomaly when it comes to communication.
On one hand he is exceedingly passionate and eloquent but on the other he goes off on unnecessary tangents and overcomplicates the subject matter. I find that his speech can lack clarity of thought and that he is guilty of using word salad every now and then.
I get the impression he tries to be hard to follow in order to impress people that are listening to him
Dr. Phil sets people up to incriminate themselves on his show.
Excellent point - I just typed that into my outline for my Phil McGraw video yesterday - I remember a few occasions when he did that -
I read something about considering people with a positive moral regard encourages pro social outcomes, this is certainly not on Dr.Phils agenda.
Is Dr. Phil even really a doctor or does he just call himself that like Dr. Schlesinger or Queen Latifa? If he really wanted to help people he wouldn't put them on TV and shame them.
@@undeadpresident he's not a real doctor, he was stripped. He can call himself a doctor because its 'entertainment'
@@undeadpresident He is a real doctor in that he has a PhD, so he can use that title. He is not currently licensed to practice though, and he hasn't been for quite some time.
"Dr Peterson, what do you think of Jordan Peterson?"
"It depends on what you mean by Jordan, and what you mean by Peterson."
Ha! 😂
Of course, it matters what you mean by Dr too!
Perfect example of his word salad.
That would be true if the word Jordan or Peterson is the word that's been used to identify half of the human population.
@@MariGolds2 Ha, ha... Indeed, I've sometimes seen Dr. Peterson talk a lot without saying anything meaningful. Or use verbose statement to make something trite seem profound. Dr. Grande was unduly modest in saying that he is willing to accept that he may not be smart enough to understand what Dr. Peterson is sometimes saying.
This critique is a whole lesson on how to appreciate the intellectual work of someone, with equanimity and fairness. I stand schooled and happy to have learned a lot, not only about how to assess someone's ableness and depth but mostly on how to be a serious critic. Thank you,
This critique is worth a flunking grade on an undergraduate paper as far as I am concerned. If some student handed it to me, I would give him or her a failing grade and a sharp note that he or she was being so mentally lazy that I suspect they're not the sort that should bother taking up space in a university. Anyone who thinks this is any kind of credible critique simply does not have the level of critical thinking skills of a smart high schooler student.
@@vancouverterry9142 the irony is palpable
@@MrMalkraz Ha Ha...
@@vancouverterry9142 you should examine your personal bias.
A teacher such as you should not bother taking up space in a university.
@@An-fi8is Don't try to pretend or sound like you're a competent thinker because you're obviously not -- WAKE UP and try to learn how to use your brains. People need WAKE UP calls sometimes. Your comment indicates that your standards are pathetically low, and your expectations of yourself are pathetic and self-fulfilling. WAKE UP AND START USING YOUR BRAINS. Maybe start by reading "The Dumbest Generation" by Max Bauerlein. And check out the TH-cam videos by Richard Arum. If you've got the brains to take in and consider some data and competent reasoning, you'll be able to WAKE UP to how PATHETICALLY LOW your standards are in making your pathetically-vacuous comment, and hopefully that'll inspire you to try to learn how to think.
You are so on point while being non emotional or biased. Much appreciated.
Peterson wants to be “Jung again.”
Looool
Well said!!
That sounds right if read in an Irish dialect.
🤣
Lou Alcaraz: but he's guilty of mass-Freud.
I think this is a very fair critique of Mr Peterson. Well done Dr Grande.
hilarious
sorry to hear that you have lost the ability to think. "12 rules for life is rules for how young men should act" -clear bias before he even begins teh actual critique
@@immortalwombat10 ok
Why do you call him Mr.?
@@immortalwombat10 Peterson has said that the rules don't just apply to men but everyone. A list to become a better person. A guide to moral fortitude, and a foundation grounded in strong basic ethics
I haven't seen every Jordan Peterson lecture or interview. I haven't read every book or paper he has written either. The things I have seen and read really impress me. I think he is extremely insightful. I think he has a very practical way of looking at people and the world at large. He has earned my respect.
I agree, i admire Peterson better than Grande
@@wolflarsen1900 Can you give any examples to support what you're saying? Specifically, please give some examples of what is "astonishing far away from any academic standard", and give some examples of what is "senseless and inconsistent" or is "rubbish, outdated or just nonsense". Do you know how the various "five factor" models have been derived? Peterson's lab produced the two senior authors (Colin DeYoung and Linda Quilty) of the best-ever version of the five factor model (called the "Big Five Aspects Scale" in their version) and it's based on factor analysis of many thousands of personality adjectives. Peterson was the third author of the foundational paper for that highly-refined, best-ever formulation of the five factors. The various five factor models look to be so solidly grounded that they reconcile with genetics research and now with the developing field of personality neuroscience. In other words, Peterson and his former students have gone a very, very, very long way with an area of linguistics that's been hugely validated (now in something like 30 languages, maybe more) and they've produced the best-ever formulation of it. Not all linguists have a clue about the five factor model and its derivation -- so perhaps you don't understand that aspect of Peterson's work. Whatever the case, please substantiate your statements about his comments about "language, meaning, etc." to be "rubbish, outdated or just nonsense". A friend of mine did his Ph.D. under Chomsky and he said that Chomsky was badly over-confident in many of his linguistic pronouncements, and one can see a kind of extreme or even delusional, detached, self-satisfied over-confidence in his political pontifications as well. I wouldn't like to think that linguists as a group suffer from that kind of delusional, smug, over-confidence and tendency to make sweeping pontifications that are just self-satisfied hot air. So please, Mr. German Philosopher of Language, instead of your non-specific, grand slurs, and sweeping dismissals, show us enough evidence to prove that you're not just pontificating and full of hot air like all the others who try to score points for themselves by knocking Peterson.
@Wolf Larsen damn you wrote a lot but didn’t give any evidence to support your original point. Please let us know which Peterson comments in the linguistic field you were referring to
@@wolflarsen1900 Who's afraid of the big bad wolf? Especially a philosopher who confesses to having the attention span and intellectual integrity of a goldfish. Huff and puff as might, but you didn't substantiate your sweeping slurs with anything worth any respect. You are so inept in linguistics that you don't realize that you're disclosing your amateur status by constantly harping on status themes, and ONLY on status themes. Stay away from the callings that require competence in thinking -- you'd have no future in any of them.
@@wolflarsen1900 You made a point of mentioning the brevity of your attention span and the fact that you said you only read the beginning and the end of my post, and not the middle, indicates a lack of intellectual integrity in our exchange just as the fact that you haven't substantiated any of your sweeping statements and slurs about Peterson suggests a lack of intellectual integrity. It's easy to see your immaturity as you dance around avoiding substantiating your claims, even though I am not the only person who's asked for substantiation and who's pointed out to you that your replies are just empty blither. So yes, you have no intellectual integrity.
Once I was dumped by text. It was a serious relationship. No closure. At the time I was really messed up by it. Years later I suffered a tragic loss, and could see, looking back, that essentially I'd felt a similar level of shock and grief when I'd been dumped so cruelly. Not the same level as my painful bereavement, but the same type of awful feelings and how it floored me.
I am sorry for your loss.
@@constancemccoy6931 thank you, kind words. 😊
@@LenticloudularHealthy people don't break up in this manner. Your ex might have suffered from narcissistic personality disorder. Your breakup sounds like a classic Narcissist discard. I'm very sorry for your loss. ❤
@@Eagles.Fan.Since.Super.Bowl.52 I agree with you. Narcissistic personality disorder = asshole, eh? With retrospect I saw that. Thank to for your kind words. The person I mourn was an angel. ❤️😇
This is almost the only fair critique of Peterson I've ever seen. Well-done.
I knoooowww
I'm not sure what the point of it was. Shouldn't it have been more of an analysis for a psychological understanding channel? I understand the Dr didn't want to go into specific details, but in doing so it didn't address some of the main critiques of Peterson, particularly on giving out "vacuous" self help advice and being the equivalent of a "Rorsach test" where wholly competing views can find their own meaning in what he says. Plus, Peterson's divisive sociological political views are kinda the point. Might have been better to do it, say, from a standpoint of - is this narcissistic behavior? Or something similar.
Anthony Miesel here’s a few other ones about his views on Marxism & Postmodernism. Really educational
th-cam.com/video/V2hhrUHSD6o/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/cU1LhcEh8Ms/w-d-xo.html
@mike gallimore Ya - any grandparent can give you that advice??? Prob say it better tho...
@mike gallimore ha ha😊... sassy comeback & I do appreciate your facetious parley, BUT... to expound on xyzz Doe's point which is the crux to your comment: 1) As a proclaimed "Self-Help" guru w/ books titled "Maps of Meaning" & "12 Rules..." the ire the Dr.'s ideas invoke in academic & intellectual circles is well deserved. His ideas: often hackneyed, using superfluous verbosity to exclaim the obvious. When Bill Maher exclaimed, "Why do I feel what this guy says is just common sense?" it's bc that's precisely his m.o. & that extends to almost all he spouts (esp. "Life advice") put under a scrutinous microscope. And the mental acrobats the reader (listener) has to perform to make sense of the Dr.'s long-winded, hifalutin proclamations leaves one (groupies) to acquiesce an undeserved appeal to authority. 2) Since the Dr. has been a constant critic of Marxist/Communist/Socialist philosophies to then flee to Russia in search of some rehab not available in the "post-modern" west is unabashedly hypocritical. Your anecdote about a fitness instructor is spot-on 👍(better than my ethical commitee politician recently found cheating analogy). His personal trails are inconsequential to his ideas & conclusions, (like dismissing Nietzsche due to his mental dissipation) & to hastily claim, "Well look how many people he's helped!" is an unwarranted appeal to emotion to the issues he's espousing. Taken on their own, his precepts & "Rules" (at face value) may seem wise, but held to any exegesis are found invalid & lacking integrity. ( Like advice to mimick the hierarchy of male lobsters? One may as well take Meine Kampf arguments about the master race seriously, ergo the Nazi comparisons among other radically conservative stances.) This can't be overstated enough esp. for someone called the "Intellectual of our Time" & who has been undeservedly crowned a "Messiah" in the Pscho/Self-help community. If there's any argument that we are not in the realm of the Bizarro - well here we are folks! And as far as our grandparents are concerned Mike G.😉, when they complain about the latest medication they've been prescribed, change the subject to one of the most meaningful events in their life & listen humbly.
I love the way you keep ego out of your analysis.
Dispassionate!!! 👌
Like a good judge should be.
jordan is egoic. not narcissist yet.
ordan Peterson's behaviour/ mannerisms reminds me of someone diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder....but he seems like a narcissist who has studied psychology, philosophy and scientific politics and has identified himself as somone who has experienced emotional/psychological abuse as a child. His behaviour and mannerisms seems like his struggling inside. His ego comes out alot
@@imoeazy agreed. I think you are a better psychologist than JP. he cannot even sort out his issue and went into depression. 😂😂 can a depressed patient trust a depressed clinical psychologist ? lmao
@@imoeazy From this comment it is clear you haven't consumed much of JP's content. The ego is an integral part of the complete self. I find it difficult to trust anyone who doesn't show us their true selves every now and then. Especially someone who speaks publicly and on podcasts as much as JP. I'm glad he gets vulnerable and shows us his passion/love for humanity.
Your analysis is reasonable, articulate and balanced. Thank you for grounding us.
I do believe that ends of relationships can be traumatic, depending on the relationships and how they end. I also think his philosophical theories are well-grounded in what he's read and that he's given Jung's work contemporary relevance. Maybe because I happen to be a lawyer, I do appreciate his logical reason. As a feminist, I was initially turned off to him because of things I'd gleaned from feminist media. I was wrong. When I actually began listening to his lectures and books, I found him to be informed, insightful and curiously open to new thinking, despite his adherence to the values of orderliness. Moreover, I find myself completely unoffended by his acknowledgment of the biological difference between men and women, and the inherent differences of physical, experiential and motivational aspects of gender that they entail. I think he's a genius, most of all, in his attempts to wed the benefits of order with the possible progress that can emerge from chaos.
Well said.
I couldn't have put it in better words. Completely agree with you.
Great take.
@ Sandra Young Hall Who are you talking about?
Very well said. I also appreciate your ability to admit when you are wrong. A rare trait in today's world. If you don't mind a question, do you still consider yourself to be a feminist after listening to Jordan Peterson or has that changed somewhat? Even if ever so slightly?
“He seems like he’s high.......... in openness to experience.” 😆
Freudian SLIPPERS ;)
Bahahaha
What does that mean?
Daddy Peterson is high on benzos. He is a stupid man's idea of an intelligent man.
@@mabaker ....and presumably you are the opposite?
His lectures are pretty fast forward, but I`ve recently seen some of his interviews and was blown away by such an engaged listener, so patient and supportive, and though suspicious at first, I now feel his motivational messages come from deep concern for changing the tragic human condition. A very fair and informed critique from dr.Grande
I don't know. At first I was captivated by Dr. P. Then, as I watched more and more lectures of his, I started to question his motiffs more and more often. When asked about certain topics, he seems to be deliberately disingenuine. Other times he ommits certain crucial facts or is incredibly uncharitable when speaking about his political opponents. I still attributed it all to his flawed human nature, but the deal-breaker was probably actually reading his work. It was far from what I expected it to be: unprofessional, sloppy and outright dumb at some points. I still appreciate the fact that he seems to be helping people (precisely young men), but other than that, I don't have much admiration for him.
I sooo agree Marijana! He is an exceptionally genuine and kind man. I pray for him often.
@@MrKosobi Your loss, IMHO.
Why are you imputing motives rather than considering the message?
@Rick Lane {{Citation needed|date=July 2020}}
:-(
@Rick Lane Really classy, "Lobsterson" doesn't detract from your supposed points at all, Rick Lame.
I enjoyed this man’s points. They don’t feel attacking, they feel good. Good job, you get a like
I disagree that a person can not suffer PTSD after a relationship ending. It depends on the ending. Some people have lived a lie in a relationship and everything they thought their life was in fact was indeed a farce. I work with many women who have experienced this and it destroys them. Some never recover.
He is referring to the DSM criteria though - it is very clear. Maybe JP advocates for a change to the criteria. I am not going to copy and paste the criteria here but by definition, a person can't.
@@bethbeth5122 I have CPTSD. Yes I know there isn't a diagnosis stating specifically the C in the DSM. It just means it is chronic. I feel like PTSD is the latest buzz word that people attach themselves to. Like bipolar was a few years ago. Unfortunately I have that too. I don't know when mental illness became fashionable but if someone really has it, it can be crippling. PTSD attacks cause me to be extremely anxious, hypervigilant even in my home, panic attacks that are so severe I cannot breathe or talk, fight or flight (usually flight). I've got so many alarms my house has been named Fort Knox by my sister. Those are but a few symptoms. I would not wish true PTSD on anyone.
Exactly!!
I have PTSD dealing with boomers for the past 4 decades.
I am not sure Peterson aims to be ‘entertaining’ 😐 at all. His rambling style seems to be actually his natural thought process.
A lot of people ‘gets’ him. A lot of people don’t.
Peterson is quite the fan of Carl Jung, and among the things Jung has talked about are "archetypes" which are basically images and motifs Jung thought were some sort of innate knowledge all humans have in some form such as the archetype of the hero or the father, etc. This is particularly relevant for storytelling, and Peterson has said he does aim to tell stories and keep people interested. From there I would say he does intend to be entertaining in the sense of keeping attention on him when he's trying to convey whatever thoughts he has.
@@jackalopegaming4948 i think that everyone that is teaching something should aim to be entretaining, without detriement of the knowleadge itself of course
Yes he does, he admitted such to Russel Brand
Sometimes people associate the word ‘entertaining’ to evoking extreme emotions or reactions or to performing clownish acts. I think Peterson’s style evokes curiosity and thought. I think he’s entertaining in that manner.
@@jackalopegaming4948 to further that, a lot of the theorised interpretations of archetypes focus on how an archetype (Great Father, Anima/Animus, etc) can be of merit for humans in explaining. Peterson follows Jung to a high degree, so I feel he takes influence from Jung in this sense. He isn't afraid to enter the realm of storytelling in an educational setting because he sees the utulity in it from a Jungian theoretical standpoint.
I think Dr. Grande might be my favourite TH-camr. This channel is such a rare gem of objectivity 😌
It's literally 100% subjective.
@@unitedfools3493 And Jordan Peterson isn't? How much of "psychology" is "science," and how much "social science"?
@@jnagarya519 It is 100% social science. The question is "how scientific is social science?". Dr. Peterson quotes extensive studies that show that men and women differ in preferences and that these differences produce unequal outcomes in the percent of men and women in nursing vs. engineering. This seems to me to be science, though not as rigorous as testing theories of physics. He has also stated that IQ and success in life are highly correlated. He quotes the correlation coefficients. This sounds like science, but again, not as rigorous as physics or chemistry. But certainly not 100% subjective or anything close to it.
I've waited a long time for someone else to say that they sometimes have no idea what Jordan Petersen is talking about! Lol I thought it was just me. Thanks Dr Grande for your honesty!
Truly, he makes little sense to me either.♥️
Yes!!! At the request of a friend, I checked out some of his videos, and in one he was almost ...manic for lack of a better word? He was talking very fast and making no sense. Now my IQ is high enough that I can keep up with him, and catch him in extreme ideas, but I even doubted my own reality for a split second, which is a huge red flag. I even slowed the video down, and he was creepily incoherent. In other videos, not so much. But he is not consistant from interview to interview. I was really excited to see Dr Grande review him! He has some good points, and great ideas, but then will say something so ridiculous- like feminism is ruining the ideology of manhood. (Paraphrased) or that Ann Frank's diary is fiction :o I keep watching him, not as a fan, but out of interest and specticism. He's def not consistant. My friend is paying $100 to see him speak later this month. That's her thing tho.
I think Jordan structures his ideas in a very linear fashion. It’s as if he’s building a giant structure with his ideas which isn’t how a lot of people think. Instead of freely floating between related points, he uses each idea to expand upon the previous. I’m sure there’s a much more nuanced explanation but this is just my two cents
@@beaujones5124 Your 2 cents is as welcome as mine🌷
@@cdow9032 Which videos are you talking about? I would love to analyze them.
Honestly, his words did kickstart me improving my life. I wouldn't ever suggest putting your faith in a single person, though, and his behavior since in the political sphere is concerning and disappointing, especially considering how kind he comes off as.
Me and my gf found his book very useful in our lives. We may have been both not been living our best lives, I think that's who he appeals too most. The forgotten people of this world.
Very interesting critique from someone that I know personally, and who was my psychology professor in 2002 way before he had achieved his fame. It always seems so surreal that some that I know personally become this world famous intellectual
How was he as a professor back then? Do you still listen or read any of his work? Just wondering, thanks :)
@@guillermoromero3071 That is a very good question. For starters, back in 2001 he wasn’t effected by fame, so Prof. Jordan Peterson actually very much like himself and was able to see how he really was. I in fact, could see immediately that he had that intense intellectual spark in the very first class that I attended; -and unlike what most people think, he was actually quite extraverted, and was always energized around people. This contrasted me, whom was always very introverted
I had a number of excellent professors at junior college and later at UCLA, but none so engaging, challenging, interesting, or clear as Dr. Peterson. I have watched hundreds of hours of his lectures and I've often thought "Man . . . I wonder how many of those students realize how fortunate they are to have a professor of this caliber!" Nice to see one of them sharing here! :)
@@primalcritters Agreed there! Also, there have been other great men of genius, but don’t really know how to teach. One of the reasons as to why Albert Einstein had such difficulties in getting a faculty position, was because he wasn’t good at teaching and sounded more like a monologue according to the other professors who audited his lectures (or mock lectures). Einstein was very introverted like myself, but Jordan Peterson had the great advantage that he was an extrovert
@@jubjub2112 Yes I do consider myself very fortunate! I’ve been known also for having quite a catalogue of colorful and interesting acquaintances. Unlike with most of the other intellectuals, Jordan Peterson was an extrovert, which allowed him to lecture without difficulties, be very energetic and even entertaining. Albert Einstein, whom was known to be one of humanity’s greatest geniuses was not known to be a great lecturer, abs even had a very difficult time finding a job as a professor due to his rather monotoned and monologue-like way of of teaching. Unlike Jordan, he was an introvert like myself
Im very fond of Jordan Peterson's work, but Im always worried about not getting to attached to any one thinker, so Im always on the lookout for reasonable criticism. All the critique that I had found till now seemed to me to be either not very well informed or stemming from the need to defend a pre held beleif. This is the first reasonable and objective critique that Ive found, kudos for that! Suscribed!
He is a man, not a devil.
@@lucaswilhelmmeyer6943 if you like thinkers who don't defend pre-held beliefs, then maybe you should find a guy who doesn't believe in god or racial IQ science? Because those have been around for awhile, and they're definitely "beliefs," not facts based on the science.
@@d.m.collins1501
It’s not Nike Peterson had made a particularly big deal out of what his religious beliefs may be , and frankly it’s not like Athieism has proven immune to ideological preconceptions either.
And has he particularly “defended racial IQ science”? How?
Well you should see his talk with Sam Harris. That's very interesting
@@cainemangakahia4842 he hasn't defended racial IQ. He used the fact that if you see the people who come into the extreme ends of top IQ range, are dominated by Jews (statistics), and used that to make the point against equity.
I stumbled across JP several years ago when I was going through a lot changes and difficulties and a lot of what he had to say then helped me tremendously. I don’t think I would’ve advanced and grown as much as I have on all fronts if I hadn’t seen those videos years ago. Glad to see one of my favorite people critiquing another one of my favorite people. Thank you! 🙂
Jordan Peterson makes everything so simplified when not everything is so simplistic.He talks in circles, & if that does it for ya,God bless you.
I see people say this a lot, and I believe them, but it's kind of irrelevant to whether or not Peterson is actually insightful in any way. Many people find Islam in prison and it genuinely makes them much better people, it's still a fictional immoral religion though. Much like Petersons advice might actually do something for you, but it's still kind of a pile of bullshit.
@@johnroop9625 What so hard about cleaning your room? People like you like to criticize for the sake of judging someone. Peterson has helped millions of people, how many people have you helped?
@@PC4ever possible rebuttals to your comment:
1. How many lives has Peterson damaged, destroyed, insult, steamrolled and just afflicted with psychological stress severe enough to cause sequela?
2. You said helped, what do you consider helped to entail? As a psychologist he knows about “reckless help”. Has he helped you? Why respond to a comment expressing their freedom of opinion and they weren’t even mean; but did you help with the personal offense you feel on his behalf?
3. Obviously suffering brain insults during his russian medically induced coma is nothing related to intelligence but what about his whining?
Yep, same here.
One danger area for smart people is that some of them may tend to overestimate how smart they are. This is understandable, as they are often the smartest person in the room. But they're not _always_ the smartest person in the room.
Thank goodness!!
Smart people tend to know their limits...
Jordan Peterson is just some dude who sells self-help books to a demographic that used to be reluctant to buy them...
I think dumber people more often overestimate :p
@@u1rtc7t5f64t157856v8 I think you need to research Jordan Peterson a little more. He's not just some "dude".
@@u1rtc7t5f64t157856v8 You're absolutely clueless to say such a thing -- absolutely clueless, beyond ignorant -- more like a threat to the gene pool.
Sometimes the unusual pauses in the middle of your sentences really get me
"He seems like he's really high-"
"- in openness to experience."
Like... I think you can imagine where my head went with what you meant for a moment lmao
albelnoxroxursox well he was high on pain killers the whole time and he's paying for it now unfortunately.
@@faustianrevival3816 Incorrect.
He went on anxiety relief medication because the light of his life and his literal soulmate, his wife, came down with a very volatile type of cancer relatively suddenly and he spent months suffering with the very real and likely possibility that he might lose his other half. Everyone has a breaking point where they are no longer strong enough to rely on themselves alone, and sometimes there's nothing people in one's immediate support systems can do. His philosophy couldn't save him from the unbearable suffering of facing one of his worst fears, and so he turned to medication.
When his wife recovered, he realized he couldn't come off it by himself so he took responsibility and sought out the help he needed.
Idk what the hell is up with all the people demonizing him for this.
@@albelnoxroxursox, well said.
I wanted to point that out too, that had me pause for a second and then snicker. Well played!
@@faustianrevival3816 I didn't hear any thing about pain killers but I definitely heard about him being on benzodiazepines and abusing them. I'm on pain killers most of the time for permanently damaged proximal hamstring and adductors tendons (groin). But I've managed to keep my overall doses low by sticking to the recommended doses, and when I know my pain is significant and steady, by cutting my pills into quarters and dosing on the half life so I get stable effects. There's nothing unfortunate for Peterson though. He's a United Nations agent acting to prevent white males from thinking to form political identity groups to protect themselves, their countries and their interests. Try digging deeper. He's a shill for judeo-masonry.
As a single mother of adolescent boys, Dr P has been invaluable to us.i love his realistic, yet uplifting approach. 😀
I hope your boys do not listen to his views on women in the workplace. He’s a sexist. Be careful.
@@_letstartariot good thanks for your opinion
@@_letstartariot He isn't but well....
@@_letstartariot no, he's not. You however probably are.
@@_letstartariot oh, yeah. I just posted about his views on women, in general
When Peterson lectures and draws on biblical texts, and examines and explains them through his modern lens of psychology I sometimes get the feeling he is looking at a Rorschach ink blot, and that his “interpretation” says as much about him as it says about the meaning of the text.
Thanks for your meaningful comment.
I would dare to say that most texts, especially those with a strong philosophical context, are literally material for interpretation - based on the fact that we all have different backgrounds and have gone through different things that have shaped us and the way how we see the world.
Jordan Peterson is undoubtedly an interesting person, and his approach is quite unique in the western part of the western world. What I mean by that is approximately this.
If you read the comments here (even from educated professionals), many of them praised JP for his help, wisdom, knowledge, insight, etc.
I would agree with that (although I disagree with JP on some points), but I have one, I think, significant objection.
To most Americans, maybe even Canadians (IDK, I can't judge that since I don't have enough data or experience to do so, thus, I'm speaking more from an "American perspective"), JP is super educated.
That's an American view reflecting the overall quality of the American education system. I'm pretty sure that, e.g., the European audience sees JP similarly, however not exactly in the same way.
European education is very different from American, and although I am sure JP is seen as a well-versed, thoughtful, and well-educated gentleman in Europe too, the gap between him and his audience in America and Europe is discrepant.
Most European high schools teach history and civics as an organic part of the school curriculum. (This also applies to middle grades = children aged 11-15.) Europeans are used to critical thinking and a much wider range of subjects that schools generally teach.
E.g., Civics is divided into several years (depending on the type of school/graduate profile), and the curriculum usually includes philosophy, psychology, sociology, economics, political science, and law.
Briefly - the European audience would probably agree with these scholars, who point out that JP's view and advice are not so unique, but rather a matter of the common sense that has somehow been lost in America, and a person who educates himself, reads, analyzes and talks about that can easily give the impression he is almost from another planet.
Yes, Americans can read, and Carl Jung, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Leo Tolstoy, and others are translated into English. But how many Americans read them...?
The general reluctance of Americans to read and learn even their own history is infamous and outrageous.
Then, someone like JP comes along and looks like a supernova. I am not trying to belittle him, but if Americans read (more), they wouldn't be so overwhelmed by his knowledge.
JP is or was (...?; he currently has some health issues...) considered a supernova in America. In Europe, he would face many such supernovas, and the European audience wouldn't look at them as some alien supermen...
America should seriously rethink its values, the separation of church and state, and invest tons of money into the education of our children, so they can be more educated than generations of their parents and grandparents.
@@xpsxps1339 You make some very interesting and important points!
I often wonder why so many commenters argue from angles that omit aspects I at least deem obvious, and this impression stems from the education I experienced in Germany during the last quarter of the 20th century (what my grade 8 daughter's is being taught now in Switzerland is different, but not in a good way).
Sadly the educational standards in Europe are also declining and decidedly "woked up", which does nothing to enhance the content.
Furthermore the funds for schools and universities are successsively diminished - in many schools the parents are even friendly coerced to help renovate the buildings, or e.g. toilets are simply closed if they do not function properly or have been vandalised (even here in CH this is an increasing problem - in my daughter's school [in a village with ca. 4.500 inhabitants!] a toilet was DETONATED and is now closed since ca. three months, instead of being repaired).
Due to increasing residential poverty (job losses and diminished incoming taxes due to the pandemic exaggerating the effect) and immigrant influx the communities are financially depleted, and this reflects on the funding for education, as this seems to be the "easiest accessible" department for financial cuts.
The US are trendsetters for Europe, we will be following your path rather sooner than later. This is shameful, as ALL (young) people deserve and should get the best possible education, regardless of where they live.
Uninformed people make uninformed decisions. But maybe this is the plan. A good read on topic: "Bullsh*t Jobs" by David Graeber.
If you have not seen the movie "Idiocracy", i strongly recommend it. This intended satire has evolved into a documentary IMO. Good day.
More than I learn about JP, I learned and appreciated how Dr G calmly, brilliantly, and fairly analyzed/critiqued JP. Too rare.
can you make an analysis of Oprah Winfrey? I mean PLEASE!!
Smiles
'A money making' MACHINE... :(
Chris Creaser misspelt sellout
A self centered narcissist
A grandiose nutjob who pushes snake oil salesmen through her show....who made a career turning suburban white women dumber and ended up being a 'Black Icon'. Okay she had to wear a sack to school and thats terrible but throughout her adult life she mostly distanced herself from pressing issues most black people in her country faced. She and her crew of quacks have to be taken off the pedestal
Summary
+ A good debater: he's polite and listens carefully and generously to the views of his conversation partners. He's speaks articulately, precisely and deliberately. He doesn't let people put words in his mouth.
+ He's intelligent and productive and has thought very deeply about his opinions and conclusions.
+ His mix of subject areas makes him interesting and knowledgeable.
+ His conclusions are interesting and engaging.
- Many academics consider his 12 rules to be "simplistic and obvious."
- He often "moves a little too far beyond" what his evidence supports when making a conclusion. He arrives at those stretched conclusions via experience and personal opinion without explicitly stating he's doing so, giving him an undeserved air of validity. The example given is a time he gave a conclusion that defied an accepted medical definition without explicitly stating he was doing so.
- Some of his lectures, especially some philosophy ones, are too abstract and removed from his source literature to make sense or to have a coherent meaning.
- He is hard to follow.
- He rarely makes it clear when he is crossing the line between philosophy (opinion) and science.
Unsubstantiated criticisms
1. He has rude mannerisms: Todd thinks that's just his deliberate and attentive style.
2. He is unqualified to speak about politics: no one should be barred from political discussion, and JP backs up his views with subjects he is well versed on.
3. He's "ambiguous, murky, and unfocused.": Todd believes this is a product of his multiple subject areas. Though I'm personally not convinced it provides an excuse for it.
Very good and interesting summary, thank you.
thats one grip I've had with listening to JP he seemed to be a bit vague or beat about the bush somewhat, maybe I'm being ignorant but its just how I feel.
Why are you passing off your personal opinions as a 'summary'?
Please deconflate and repost.
@@Jorpando Anything that attempts to bridge academic philosophy and/or psychology and everyday life application and experience, will be criticised from both sides.
In my opinion, the clear pros outweigh the incredibly meticulous negative points
I stayed away from Jordan Peterson for a long time because of his politics, but I have recently started listening to his podcast and some videos where he was interviewed. Much of his podcasts do not address the problematic political views he is known for. Instead, he covers a wide range of topics and I find his thoughts and insights very interesting and concept expanding. I wish my education base was greater in those areas so I could contextualize his thoughts better instead of just accepting what he says. You mentioned that Peterson appeals to doctors and lawyers. I'm fairly certain he also appeals to the large majority of engineers (engineering is also an applied science).
For the interviews, he is a highly skilled debater and while he can become very irritated/angry, he maintains confidence in his position and rarely loses ground. I wonder how much benzo use has allowed him to stay calm under pressure. His success in interviews can be strongly attributed to his debating approach, which has aggressive undertones and can throw off an interviewer. It is easy to attribute him "winning" in interviews to his position instead of his debating style, but it is important to recognize that his debating style plays a very large part in his interview success and that his position should be evaluated on it's own merit.
Name one or two of his "problematic political views"? I find the label "problematic" rather pretentious - as it's always used by people who think their position is somehow unassailably correct and righteous. Also, you say he seems to win in interviews due to style not substance. Oh sure -- which interviewer did he beat only on style not substance? Cathy Newman? Somehow I think it's your political views that may be . . . "problematic."
@MichaelDamianPHD he uses every logical fallacy to win arguments, from refusing to clearly define anything so he can always claim he was misunderstood to strawman arguments to aggressively attacking the other person when challenged to shifting the goal posts to meaningless word salad to denying he's said things he's been documented saying- this is the style that wins him the arguments. He argues dishonestly like a typical narcissist which is why he's impossible to beat
“There’s a difference between opinions and science”. I could not agree more. As a recovering alcoholic, we talk about sharing our experience, strength, and hope with each other. NOT opinions. The definition of “opinion” is, an idea formed in the mind not necessarily based in fact. When both pilots become incapacitated at altitude, the flight attendants don’t ask for someone with an opinion about flying the plane...they want EXPERIENCE! : ) I really enjoy your TH-cam videos Dr. Grande. Thank you.
I would characterise it differently: An informed opinion is always based on at least a sub-set of facts (i.e. empirical data). These facts then get interpreted in order to form a model of reality (-> opinion). Now the interesting part is that individuals reach different conclusions, even if they are derived from the same facts, for a multitude of reasons. To figure out the differences in interpretation, in order to find out were the real disagreement originates, can be a very stimulating and interesting exercise. Science is full of opinions, when you look at it like that. :-)
Hello, pilot! Aviation enthusiast here
@@stephanklein257 Any hypothesis is based in experience, education and intuition.
Without hypotheses, there would be no science.
Dr Peterson totally changed my life. 2 years ago I was extremely depressed and suicidal. My life and health were falling apart and I was letting it happen. I was in an abusive relationship and not able to care about myself enough to stop it.
Then I found Dr. Peterson’s YT channel. I watched every single lecture. His challenge to “rescue my dead father from the abyss” struck a deep emotional chord. I took the challenge and have not looked back.
Now I’m getting healthy. No contact with my abusive ex and mother for a year now and life keeps getting better!
I can’t thank Dr. Peterson enough for his boldness and for his message. I would not be on this channel today if not for his words breaking through the fog first.
There are hundreds of thousands if not millions who feel the same way you do about Jordan Peterson. I'm one of them, too.
@@briangerrits1454 Me too.
If the relationship that ended was particularly abusive, one could indeed be leaving it with a case of PTSD.
Lynnie Lew I think so too.
@Hugh mungous Dildeaux yup, and said bad relationship may well be the reason for the breakup. Thus, as JP said, some people who have broken a relationship may have PTSD. That was my initial understanding when he said that.
I have no desire to offend, but I wonder what experience you have with people who are effected by PTSD? I was diagnosed with it ( combat vet ) and have found a lot of people have lose definitions of what the disorder is.
@@wotmot223 I have been diagnosed with both "regular" PTSD and Complex PTSD. Struggled with it for decades.
@@lylew7 Then you come from a place of understanding, I respect that. And for what it is worth I extend my best wishes and prayers to you.
I am a "follower" of Jordan's, and I agree and disagree with him, but he is always interesting and thought-provoking. Your analysis of Jordan is, IMO, both balanced and accurate. Great video.
If you listen to Dr. Petersons older lectures at universities you will see why people think he's highly intelligent and why they love to listen to him. He really is brilliant.
He also really comes across like he really cares about his students. He does an excellent job listening to them and validating them when they ask a question.
Pre-culture war Jordan Peterson is really brilliant
I guess if you think word salad is brilliant lol
@@wolfy1 ... He is brilliant when it comes to understading human nature.
@@wolfy1 From what I've seen so far, he does toss a lot of word salad, but he usually has a point that he fiercely and deeply feels, and usually has a well-reasoned and research argument to support it. This does not protect him from inherent biases and dissonances, though.
On the issues of his lectures, he’s said that his lectures are more about exploring ideas publicly and less about presenting and arguing for various positions.
That must be why they go nowhere and say nothing.
@@esstee9595 I get a good deal out of them.
@@esstee9595 they say nothing to people who either lack openness to ideas or lack the capacity to grasp at them. Are you going to get something out of all lectures? No. But if you're going into a lecture with the mentality that you will get nothing or you lack the capacity to engage in the content then you lose credibility in measurement.
@@sxlg_32 Please don't make me out to be a dolt who can't appreciate Peterson. Listening to him speak is like listening to nails on a black board, and after he rambles on and on, he makes either no point, or a simplistic point. He's not articulate, just verbose. He should stick to research and not lectures. He lacks congruity and continuity. Maybe he's better now after rehab. Maybe you need rehab too with an attitude like yours. The emperor has no clothes.
@@esstee9595 If you don't want to be critiqued on your inability to comprehend material perhaps you should spend more time actually thinking about and trying to understand the material to begin with instead of plastering incoherant politicized ideologies in the comments of educational content. There's no point to an argument with an ill-educated fool stuck on ideals of the past who thinks it appropriate or even logically sound to insist on "rehab". And crass, poorly constructed criticisms with no contextual validity nor logical grounds to stand on reside squarely in the realm of a "dolt" as you put it.
Peterson, in my mind, is a person who synthesizes and combines a lot of different branches of knowledge. So yes, he will sometimes seem a little bit "out there". But that is also what makes him great. It allows us to perceive new perspectives.
As for the criticism that his advice books are simplistic, well yes, they are really just a form of folk wisdom that most of us should already know, however, most modern audiences do NOT know it. So the work is important. Also, he does not just give the advice but gives a detailed reasoning behind the advice.
Yes his reader are young people who are lost. Not for professor to learn more.
He also has a habit of overgeneralizing research or expanding it beyond the scope of what has actually been shown. His discussion on dream interpretation is a perfect example of this as he takes bits and pieces of research and synthesizes it into a statement about dreams that is misleading at best and most likely simply inaccurate.
That’s good for people who don’t like to read books but still like to pretend they are educated . Tell me that’s not what every Jordan Peterson fan is .
@@dinosore4782 That is not treating your audience here in good faith. It comes across as "I'm better than you because I'm educated." Hubris, in other words. You don't need to do that. You don't need to say that. Because, if you do, if you really think that you need to point that out, you are making clear your insecurity, that's all.
@@brendanh8193 blah blah blah. You said everything except that I’m wrong . Becuase you know it’s true, deep down, that’s how you are . Just be honest, it takes alot less sentences to just accept the truth .
The best thing about Jordan Peterson is that he has original, well reasoned, and well intentioned thought. He will explain and defend his stance so long as he thinks it’s reasonable.
I think he has identified that people need simplistic truths to live by in order to live, fulfilling, purposeful lives.
I think academia doesn’t like him generally, because he’s a threat to their general narrative. He’s a well-educated, well spoken, and seemingly authentic human being at a time when being both an authentic and good person is increasingly rare.
He explains his thought pattern as to why phenomenon are occurring and proposes solutions that makes sense to him.
I honestly believe that people hate him because he speaks that if you are downtrodden, you should empower yourself, and because he left it open ended as to who would be downtrodden, a bunch of young men who have been told they are toxic and patriarchal, and generally evil and privileged just by their existence, have gravitated towards him, and found truth and help in his words.
Everybody else seems to have messages of empowerment in society right now, and he stands against the grain and speaks the truth he has experienced.
Agreed. A fairly significant issue I have with Jordan Peterson is his failure to draw the line between scientific facts and his own theories. I do want to hear his ideas but I would appreciate it if he presents them as such. That said, I personally believe he does not do this with intent to deceive. Rather, I think he assumes his audience can draw the line for themselves (which to me is a faulty assumption).
a great deal of science is just theory and all had beginning as opinion. as we learn more and more that accumulated knowledge increases understanding and the definitions of science and what entails
Even Pavlov had to analyze his dog a few times before he understood his behavior.
He usually does draw a distinction between what he thinks/his opinions from data and facts. Often by saying things like "I think it's something like..." or "I have thought a lot about this..." then he cites stats and studies as facts. If it ever gets blurry it's probably during lectures on symbolism and religion where facts aren't as much measurable empirically.
If you are teaching people you will always mix your own understandings and other older theories in science. Is all theories you know! Is just that your brain been washed to accept some and not others you are an authoritarian be,I ever and so blindly believe any theory from your school or what You think is a common truth in science to be more true than something new to you that Peterson Happens to educate on in some video you happened to see with your narrow mindset to what is science and what is not, is you here that is the issue,not the theories of Peterson vs “science”….
@alrick3000 - personally, I cannot recall an instance where he has not prefaced "his own theories" with the fact that they are only his own theories. I cannot remember when his theories have been presented as scientific fact.
This was a very fair and balanced look at Dr. Peterson and his work.
Dr Peterson...give me a break.
mabaker Someone with a phd has the honour of being called "Dr."
@@btat16 Yep, given to him by the very institution that Peterson hates the most - give me a break. He is a blatant charlatan who loves the money he got off young, helpless youth online who couldn't be bothered to read real psychological advice or literature.
@@mabaker Thats what I sense too man.
@@mabaker Or actual philosophy.
What I love about Todd is that he’s always straightforward, honest and candid. There’s no nonsense with him.
That is Dr. Grande to you ;)
Deliberate.
We'll see.
Todd
There is some nonsense. An acceptable amount. He got jokes lol
I too was moved by your analyses of the subjects , and it's great too critically look at who we watch ,especially in serious matters. Very compelling and I'm hooked . all my best
You're a great person. I dont have a stance yet on Mr.Peterson but I would just like to say that your critique was fair, constructive, and positive. You seem from first impressions a person of major integrity.
A very decent critique - clear, without envy or "animosity". Thank you!
I don't necessarily agree a 100% with you, but I also love the fact that your points are so nuanced and qualified. I can't feel anything but respect for the way you analyze his work.
I found that Jordan Peterson has consistently provided meaningful paths in the forests of ambiguity. I think your unique, lucid take on his wanderings has a refreshing outlook that invites different ways to see them. Thanks
Bravo! Someone that is capable of a RESPECTFUL critique. Well done.
Meine Meinung du Falafel You’re right! Critique doesn’t have to be respectful, nice, politically or socially correct. Absolutely! Every other critique of Peterson’s work seems to be driven by ideological nonsense. I simply pointed out that this guy did not do that and what he did do, he did with class. So what point are you trying to make?
Hopefully Peterson never comes back to a world stage. He doesn't deserve a platform.
09BiGDylan He doesn’t deserve a platform? Can you explain why that is? Or is it simply that you are intimidated by someone who has opposing views to your own?
I am an orthodox Muslim with a BPD wife and I admire both of you.
@@09BiGDylan you don't get a "platform" because you deserve it, but instead because someone/somewhere wants to hear what you have to say. Your use of "deserve" implies you need permission, and in your case permission from a social Marxist and all that entails.
His willingness to have live debates with people who have an apparent desire to discredit him is stupendous. The fact he tends to come out unscathed is amazing to me.
So true
Maybe it's because he is able to decorate them with rarely used but beautiful sounded vocabularies, and avoid answering yes/no questions directly.
"Does he believe in god?", looked.for his videos, he never directly answer this, not even with "I'm not sure".
@@williampan29 I agree that he has a an excellent command of the lexicon, however he is very precise in his speech and generally uses the words that correctly defines the subject matter. Words are often nuanced in a way the words such say for instance dog, or pet, or even canine might reflect different ideas depending on context.
@mohammed mohiuddin he tries to follow them, also for a guy who dislikes him you certainly talk like him
@mohammed mohiuddin can you present evidence that he ever accepted an interview with him?
He’s a mixed bag for me. He doesn’t always get it right, but he does offer young people a lot of useful advice that works. His book 12 rules of life helped me a lot. He is like a father figure to those who didn’t have one.
"father figure" is an outdated concept. Humans can be taught raised by anyone. The sperm donor is not THAT important.
Compare it to the bible. Strikingly similar
I agree. Especially since he is mostly talking about stuff he understands. He gets that right. But he also talked about the NS dictatorship in Germany once. He made so many mistakes do to not knowing things. I really like his attribute towards honesty though. I somewhat modefied that and try to only speak the truth, beinv humble whenever I am wrong and never let anyone who is in my environment klaim false information as valide.
@@SinMore no,fathers are extremely important,even more now than before
@@Србомбоница86 true! I suffered from being a fatherless person.
Dr. Grande very gently says that Peterson often doesn't make sense. He gives Peterson an out by saying it could be because Dr. Grande is not smart enough to grasp the nonsensical lectures. This would beg the question that if someone as sharp as Grande finds the lectures nonsensical who the heck are they for? Around the 13:55 mark he notes a common criticism is that Peterson is "ambiguous, murky, and unfocused", which supports the original assertion. Somehow Grande doesn't make that connection and calls the criticism unfounded, despite that often being his personal experience as well.
I do feel you missed a very vital positive. Temperment. The ability to stay calm in some of the appearances where others have a very clear disdain or agenda is consistent and lends credence to be mindful of what you say.
So, what you’re saying is he doesn’t crumble under unintelligent interrogation?
And you believe that Jordan Peterson doesn't have an agenda?
@@jnagarya519 What agenda do you suppose that he has?
I agree, perhaps that is one of his greatest qualities: I wish I was at that level.
You don't know what all those words mean, do you @robert williams? Ironically, what you said brought my
mindful consideration to the idea of quality over quantity in language ( yours, because my temperament is what clinicians describe as "bitchy," and "logorrheic in occasional explosive bouts." Some of the pressure has been released, credible sources report.
Greetings from Finland. Having watched a number of Peterson's videos here and having wondered about these same questions, I found your eloquent and clear summary very useful!
I am a67 yr old Grandmother---Jordan B Peterson has helped me with life lessons I wish I had learnt earlier in life...I am now listening to an audio on The Gulag Archapalego...not something I would generally read though I did read the Russians in my 20s.I think his total presence with a person when he listens or speaks..He gives people his total time and attention..this is very compelling. He shows he really cares for those ,moments...He is totally authentic...He is a great positive influence in my life
Julie-Anne Hansen he’s a crack head in rehab
Great, I'm glad it helped you 👍
Why is it always gullible women that flock to the drivel of pretentious men who use expensive words in order to sound sophisticated while saying nothing new or relevant? I wish I could say I was surprised that you fell for this conman but alas, even someone with your last name is vulnerable to utter stupidity.
Thank you for this discussion. I too have a PHD in one area. When I listen to Jordon Peterson there are times when I find his videos very engaging and other times very confusing. I'm pleased to learn that I am not alone in this. In
I have common sense and cant be tricked in to calling him smart or deep lol he isn't hurting anybody but hell my Dad said all the same stuff as a factory worker lol Socrates he is not.
Great video. Devoid of emotion and ego, the most important attributes of a great analysis.
Incorrect
Great input by everyone, great job guys!
I wonder how much the globalist death cult pays him?
Devoid of emotion usually means nap time
@@876r876rf maybe you should delete it then?
I’m fascinated with this.. I typically agree with your evaluations and I have been binge watching for a while now..
I never heard of this man until recently on the YT shorts.. and I was absolutely CONFLICTED on how I felt about him.. initially I was totally on board with what I saw, but… after I saw several more clips… I was definitely brought back a step..
I’m really appreciating having your perspective on his material and output..
It’s a disservice to yourself to not watch his long form discussions. Snippets here and there do not do the man justice. Watch his Dr. Oz interview, compelling stuff with an interviewer that I figured would be a detractor initially. His interview with Russel Brand is also interesting, as they aren’t necessarily of the same opinion but the discussion is productive regardless. Dr. Peterson is a “liberal” by the classic definition, which turns off a lot of those that consider themselves “liberal” but don’t really know what that means.
Can you provide examples of what conflicting things you saw?
He's a dear fellow. Good heart. He doesn't fawn nor pretend to be nice, but that's what makes him a good man, not a _nice_ one. Honest and stout.
Follow your own instincts on J. Peterson
@@absolince I was instinctively a bit bored.
I was ready for another one-sided hit piece...that never came. And now I'm subscribed here.
Me too!😊
Same.
@The Judge assumptions aren't wrong if you are willing to challenge them. You can't survive without assumptions.
@@suckieduckie oh hush
@@suckieduckie Assumptions can be wrong, which is why they must be critically evaluated, and if wrong corrected or rejected.
Well, I found that chappie interesting until he said that there is no poor people in the United States. Such an outrageous lie took my respect from him. To be so immune to other peoples suffering and to brush their tragedies off so carelessly is just mindblowing. Anyone can say what they want about that person, I just dont want to hear anything related to him.
Some people have never been to skid row or under any bridge in any large city in the US.
@The Insatiably Curious Skeptic The poverty in the states is different, but it still exists. For example in certain parts of the US people freeze to death because of poverty, that is not something that you would see in the slums of Bombay India. The suffering is different but it is still there.
@The Insatiably Curious Skeptic No what he says is not true, there is poverty and poor in the US and people that die from impoverished conditions. However not all poverty or the poor in the US are entitled like you say, some are that way from genetic dispositions of low IQ, congenital disorders, inbreeding.
The thing that separates the US from India is that the US does not have a Cast system. If an individual in the US is born into poverty with a high IQ, they have opportunities to climb the ladder of education and become successful and get out of poverty. This foundation of education for all was laid down by the Calvanists since the New England colonies and is what makes the US unique.
If anyone thinks that delving into the world of psychology and human behavior behavior will be a streamlined, simple endeavor...buckle up.
It can never be “simplified”, and to discuss (REALLY discuss) psychology with interest requires a LOT of information.
I remember reading a criticism of Peterson regarding how much he adds too much to a discussion involving psychology and philosophy. That one made me chuckle a little. A real discussion of psychology will never be short and sweet, not if you seek to ground your points.
I can say with confidence that some of Peterson’s dialogue goes way over my head. I’ve had to look up certain vocabulary while listening to him. But I CAN say, for the most part, I can grasp the context. He is very intelligent, undoubtedly. He also discusses matters on a level many don’t tend to do. Even when I disagree with him though, he does present his cases without devolving into intense emotional reactions, and I can respect that.
I find him very emotional
These videos keep getting better and better. I really appreciate them. They are a good balance of opinion and science. You do an excellent job of integrating complex literature and your clinical experience without sounding pretentious. Thank you
Considering his own credentials, it’s amazing he isn’t the least bit pretentious. Check his bio sometime. I love his new format using sarcasm and humor. 💯.
“Either I’m not smart enough to know what he’s saying or some of these lectures just don’t make sense.” Exactly how I feel! 10:00 +/-
Probably the former
I've never had any issue in following the logic Jordan uses, I think he is very good at explaining things as simply as possible, but inevitably when you are talking really deep things, the only way most people can understand them is with analogies and even then, they may get the general point, but they won't necessarily understand the "why".
BTW's that not meant as something to belittle you or them, it's more about realising that there are some people out there who are so smart, 99.99% of people will never be able to understand some of the things they understand.
The best way I've found of explaining it, is consider the following. If you have an IQ of say 125, that means you are easily in the top 10% of smartness, but if you look at someone who is 35 points below you at 90, they are about as dumb as a rock, now consider how smart someone 35 points above you truly is, they are as much smarter than you, than you are than the dumb as a rock person.
You have to take psychedelics to understand imo
@@kiratorres8805 haha. I’ve found reading his books a few times and listening to his lectures allows time for it al to sink in. He’s an extremely deep and profound thinker and has thought deeply about these existential topics for decades. 🍄 ✌️
I watched a clip where Joe Rogan was talking to Lawrence Krauss , and Krauss said that the reason why the Universe has a diameter of 96 billion Light Years despite only being 14.5 billion years old is because Space travels expands faster than Light. That's simultaneously mind blowing yet easy to understand.
I think two things which add to Peterson's credibility are the many thousands of hours of clinical work that he has done and presumably drawn on in developing his views, and how helpful his writings appear to have been to a great many people.
This is by far, the most fair-minded and honest critique of him I've ever heard. I would love to know which videos or arguments of his confused you! Thank you for always being so honest.
As a Jordan Peterson fan it was nice to hear some critiquing that wasn't the typical "he's a fascist, transphobic, resentful misogynist."
@Phi6er Lol.
@@p.as.in.pterodactyl1024 Well, he is though, and it's worth pointing out.
@@cptKamina ...
@@cptKamina yea this was not a critique of him at all, very soft-handed. He might be afraid of JP's rabid fanbase which is fair
Thanks for an excellent critique. I do agree that Dr. Peterson does occasionally talk beyond his expertise in certain areas, but overall he does a good job.
@Anthony Mendoza I agree with you! Personally I feel he goes beyond his expertise when discussing biblical accounts as if he is a biblical scholar which he is not.
God, Jesus and biblical accounts are not to be explained through psychology or philosophy. They are best understood through belief and faith. I realize he is grappling with his beliefs and of course as everyone, has every right to do so. My peeve is that he weeves his ideas in his videos on psychology as if he is qualified theologian.
The danger in this is high as many people respect his thoughts, of which I am one, but a person who may be on the fence as to their beliefs will look to his teaching as sound just because he is Jordan Peterson. They may fail to research biblical pastors as a result..pastors who are able to transform you and change your life (i.e.David Pawson, Derek Prince, David Wilkinson, Charles Stanley, John Piper, Voddie Baucham just to name a few). At least they did for me! 🤔
He is often the first to say that he is in fact not an expert when discussing certain topics. Especially in his newest content where he talks to very experienced guests about their area of expertise.
I've never seen Dr. Peterson suggest that he is an expert on a given topic when he clearly knows he's not. Quite the opposite.
@@claudiapennisi7987 "God, Jesus and biblical accounts are not to be explained through psychology or philosophy" Now that's simply not true.
@@mambutuomalley2260 Personally, I believe if Jordan Peterson would consider Christian study in a seminary he would blow our mind! 🤯
@@claudiapennisi7987 Actually it is. The guy gave a lecture in Harvard for 6 years discussing myth in the context of Jungian Psychology, and Christianity plays an important role in that discipline (that was developed by Jung himself).
Thank you, Dr. Grande, for a thorough critique of the force of nature that is Dr. Peterson. I have followed Dr. Peterson on TH-cam for a number of years now, starting with his university lectures, his subsequent much-hyped stance on vocabulary control by the Canadian government, his countless interviews, through his (and his wife's) illnesses and on to his present resurgence. I recall him talking, in several interviews, about his days as a therapist and how the plight of his clients moved him deeply. To me, this was so telling because it is my perception that few therapists ever allow themselves to feel deeply about their clients lest they lose their "clinical perspective," while he seemed to be willing to climb right down into the rabbit hole with them in order to truly understand their anguish. I have seen him become quite emotional, in interviews, when recalling some of his former clients. Dr. Peterson also touched a nerve when he asserted that young men today lack good male role-models, and he exhorted them to not compete with each other, but rather, to compete with themselves by striving each day to do better than the day before. "Make your damn bed!" is one of the absolute best admonishments I have ever heard, as it illustrates that one cannot have control over one's life unless there is a firm foundation, that the foundation to growing up is learning how to take care of yourself and it starts with very basic stuff. It seems that a whole generation has missed learning how to do the most fundamental things in life, and they realize now that they are struggling. Through his lectures and interviews, he is trying to fill this void. In addition to being a clear thinker, he is also a consummate humanitarian.
He just is so well educated! You need the 5 hr conversation to even connect well to these subjects. I’d love to have about a day of his time. I do get most of his references to other works and people. And his love, true love, for others individual and societal is overwhelmingly honest. He isn’t afraid to be vulnerable as a person.
@@joysanders59 You are absolutely right about his love for others. I, too, would dearly love to have some one-on-one time with him.
Your summary is excellent, but I disagree with your "much-hyped vocab" perception.
Birthing person. Menstruating person, Personchester United, personual labour.
Nah, his take isn't over the top, he warned us. I enrolled my python at the kindergarten as it identifies as a child. So far, only three kids have mysteriously disappeared, and the python has gone off his food at home.
@@VaughanMcCue Thanks for your reply. Are you familiar with the controversy surrounding Dr. Peterson's stance regarding "vocabulary control by the Canadian government"? His take wasn't "over the top," but it did contribute to the controversy created by the government's insistence on appropriate vocabulary. I have noted, though, that he seems to have gone through some sort of personality (for lack of a better word) changes since his illnesses. He doesn't seem to be the same person, to me anyway.
@@jbrown2908
His health setback and his wife's imminent death from a cancer scare shook them. She came good, and he has to, but the health and mental challenges took their toll on him; naturally, he will be slow to get back into "it".
I need to remind myself that his recent experience gave me another insight into his life and I _see_ him differently than before.
I am genuinely interested in opinions alleging that he is extremist in his political position, and I am too naive to get what the fuss is.
I frankly find it obscene that people are claiming "PTSD" for everything from a bad breakup to not being picked for team sports as children. Police officers, firefighters, nurses, medics, trauma surgeons, 16:09 servicemen and women who've seen combat and/or the resulting horror, these are the people whom one might expect to suffer from PTSD. Prolonged traumatic events beyond the pale of normal human experience can cause PTSD.
I thought that was a very fair and balanced overview of JP. I could watch him all day long! He’s taught me a lot by modelling HOW to think, not WHAT to think. It’s the mental process clear of emotion. Yet I get the impression he’s a very ethical and empathetic person too. Nice work Dr G!
Yess exactly, people who actually want to develop teach others how to filter and discuss what the good ideas are, not necessarily centered on what they think is best
Jordan Peterson seems to be much better when he's telling people how to think rather than what to think. Any one person will be filled with opinions that are right and wrong, and you shouldn't choose any one person to copy the beliefs of. Some of his beliefs are rather odd, controversial, and in my view, untrue, but a lot of what he teaches about how to go about forming beliefs is very wise.
The fact that his advice regarding how to think has actually led me to disagreeing with him goes to show that it really was good advice - instead of teaching us to think in a way that would make us automically agree with him, he wanted us to think for ourselves.
When I started with Jordan Peterson I was quite a fan. I genuinely have him to thank for improving my way of thinking and becoming more critical. Despite that, nowadays, I take him with a grain of salt. Again, he really is at his best when he's telling people how to think rather than what to think.
“He seems like he’s high. . .”
True.
“. . .in openness to experience.”
Oh.
Extra relevant all the sudden...
Dude was high.
He was always high -it was obvious before but now we have proof
@@SueSue-mp2iu
Yeah, I'm really hoping more comes out. Some people deserve to be shit on. Propagandists for the status-quo especially.
@@erin7800
Yes, that's the story. Do I believe the story of a man who claims he "did not sleep for 25 days"?
No, I don't think I do.
Rules such as patient confidentiality mean we only have his daughter's word that he was on benzoes only. No one knows the source of his addiction. Even in interviews, he always seemed very intense over last three years.
I feel some reassurance myself just from you saying “he’s produced so much content that there would be some errors.”
As a writer I fear people focusing on the errors, not the holistic amalgamation of information I’m writing about.
It makes sense that someone that’s pumped out a giant collection of work would not be 100% correct about everything.
I think you're lucky if you're 80% correct cause correct is more fuzzy than crisp. Then you have to deal with being "correct" (i.e. socially correct). Future generations will judge you based on their own common sense/social conventions. But I guess if you are lucky enough to have future generations judge you, you've probably pretty well.
When one is lauded as a professor and as a treating therapist, I, at least, expect a high degree of accuracy.
David Maybe that is his intent but judging by his ‘army’ he is failing dismally, unfortunately.
His brilliance outshines any unintentional “mistake”. I don’t think y’all get his brilliance or scope and have an opposition to him based on your own political dictates.
Joy Sanders We get that you are mesmerised by his non speak, Peterson is not a complete idiot, more just acting the fool because he can’t get enough attention.
I often have to listen a few times to some of his philosophical lectures…I’m pretty smart too (at least I think so) but even pausing and rewinding a segment to gain understanding, the message is sometimes tough to grasp. This is a very balanced critique!
So happy to have both of you accessible on TH-cam. I have learned a lot from both you and Dr Peterson. This was fun to watch.
I walk everyday and listen him and he has helped me a lot in many ways
I was in an abusive relationship for many years an he was able to explain what happened.
I soon realized that the other therapists I saw knew exactly what was wrong and what I needed to do but wasted my time for years
I was also in an abusive relationship, and I have not found a therapist that has helped me with that. Can you share with me what it is I need to do to move past this trauma?
Well obviously you were willing to listen to the great JP but not mere everyday psychologists. Sometimes people won’t hear what their mother, good friend, GP or psychologist are telling them. Then a prominent person full of his own importance comes along and essentially says the same as the others did. You are willing to believe him even though he is essentially saying the same things others have said.
@@kb8511 you can try trauma therapy. If you can find a trustworthy practitioner of this intervention and are ready for it. It was one of the best things I ever did for myself.
@@jdr9419 you are projecting your own issues all over this person in a really egregious way.
This person said she spent years trying to fix her trauma. How dismissive and obnoxious for you to immediately assume, with no evidence whatsoever, that she paid that money and spent all that time but didn’t bother to actually listen or learn anything, because the people with the educations she doesn’t have that she paid lots of money too didn’t seem “self important” enough to stroke her need to hero worship.
JP is most certainly not self important. You should consider more how envious you are of the man, and instead of assuming people like him because they’re all contemptible, maybe actually try to understand what makes the man so damned appealing to the people that love him?
You can’t learn when you hate the people you need to learn from, and when you feel like people ought to worship you and they don’t so you have serious sour grape energy pervading your life.
I hope you open your mind and consider this, and help yourself see past your envy and grow so that you become a more powerful, helpful peraon
@@jdr9419 when the time is right u understand i guess
Thank you for your fair and reasonable analysis of Jordan Peterson and criticisms surrounding him. I'm so glad you objectively viewed him without a certain bias. We need more therapists and thinkers like you.
Peterson demystifies areas of thought, teaches that people can think for themselves and that they should never be afraid to take responsibility for their own actions and thoughts.