Ontario and Manitoba courts were unsparing in their assessment rejecting Peterson's "expert" testimony. And it's a pattern when it comes to Peterson's pronouncements.
I worked for many years as a public member of the Board and Investigative Committee for the Colledge of Psychologists in BC. Over the years I came to know a great deal about Jordan Peterson, and none of it was good. Still can’t understand why the Ontario Colledge didn’t pull his registration, and remove his ability to call himself a psychologist.
He truly is one of these people who sees himself as a towering intellect. In his own mind he is the smartest person on the planet, yet even is simple conversations it becomes very apparent he doesn’t have a clue what he is talking about. He wows people with very long words and compiles them into almost verbal assaults that sound fascinating but mean nothing. Yet to those who have no intellectual, science or philosophy backgrounds, he sounds like a genius. And he has convinced himself now that he actually is a genius and is being persecuted because of that as opposed to people who DO understand the issues condemning him because he’s a raging idiot!
And because he presents the way he does and expounds on subjects near and dear to the Right, who also have very little understanding of science or psychology, they love him, because he makes idiocy sound smart!
The statement that those on the political right have very little understanding of science is offensive, biased, and false. Of course there are people with little knowledge of science, but that is no less true on the left than the right. There are areas of science and engineering where I’m an expert, and there are areas (including psychology) where I am not. In my areas of expertise I often encounter people on the left (and the right) who say things like “follow the science,” yet a two minute conversation is enough to demonstrate clearly that they haven’t got a clue what they’re talking about. It is extremely unhelpful to human progress or problem-solving to suggest that scientific knowledge is the exclusive purview of those with any particular political viewpoint.
And what exactly are YOUR qualifications to say that? Have you spent the last 10 years asking people questions about their educational backgrounds, their understanding of complex issues, how governments work, which layer of government is responsible for what etc?
Have you done a PhD on sociological expressions based on political leanings? How about how racism and bigotry as expressed as a political point of view?
When all these studies are put together they show a decided difference in the acceptance of new ideas, scientific findings, equity, equality forward thinking, and change. And the people who come out worst in all these findings are on the right side of the spectrum. That isn’t to say that they also don’t exist on the left, but by a far smaller number.
And your qualifications as an engineer don’t in any way make you qualified to make that assumption. Anymore than my qualifications as a Psychologist, Political Science, Botanist or Historian make me qualified to make assumptions about an engineering issue.
Wow! Vileness? Character assassination masquerading as critical commentary. Anything of substance to offer other than your negative personal feelings about the man?
It is interesting to see how someone who presents as an expert psychologist demonstrates characteristics of a Narcissistic personality. This sort of behavior is not only self-serving, but ultimately harmful. It would be curious to see how the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) would score this individual. Unfortunately I am certain he is well aware of it and would no doubt tailor his responses to cheat the test. Knowledge and pathology are terrible companions
Donald, this is an excellent analytical essay. While I never joined the cult of Peterson, and I found his views not supported by any credible evidence, this essay confirms that this man is no public intellectual. Or even a serious thinker. He seems like a person deeply seeking attention, one whom will say anything to achieve such a goal.
Glad to see That Peterson got slammed dunked.. he's is very similar to Rfkjr.. both are of such egotistical fiends they become experts ' Charlatans' and far too many people fall for it.
Peterson seems to behave in a manner similar to Musk: so astounded by their own "intelligence" that they feel they have nothing left to learn, about anything. "It's time to learn from me now." There lies the downfall of the "intelligent": one loses all integrity when they feel they have nothing left to learn, yet they hold up their "qualifications" to the uninformed as absolute validation of all they speak. This is how they gain a following and what I believe makes them very dangerous. They're leading masses of people off the cliffs of logic and reason.
I have truly never understood how Peterson commands the respect and is given the credibility he has. He is an opportunistic narcissist who spouts off carelessly about so many topics. It drives me nuts when credible people cite him to back their point.
“Universities are conspicuous by their absence from the list of institutions where the Charter of Rights applies. While this might seem paradoxical, one reason is that it out of respect for the autonomy of universities to self-govern, and that free inquiry can take place there, and the courts have generally found that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply. “
Parsing…individuals at a university- staff and students- may be covered by university policies when it comes to rights rather than the Charter, but universities as a public entity have been held to account over rights.
1. The Vriend Decision very specifically included a university and its hiring policies.
2. Trinity Western and the BC law society had rights reviewed by SCC. The appeal based on religious rights and the Charter was certainly cited in the decision which sided with the law society.
I worked for many years as a public member of the Board and Investigative Committee for the Colledge of Psychologists in BC. Over the years I came to know a great deal about Jordan Peterson, and none of it was good. Still can’t understand why the Ontario Colledge didn’t pull his registration, and remove his ability to call himself a psychologist.
He truly is one of these people who sees himself as a towering intellect. In his own mind he is the smartest person on the planet, yet even is simple conversations it becomes very apparent he doesn’t have a clue what he is talking about. He wows people with very long words and compiles them into almost verbal assaults that sound fascinating but mean nothing. Yet to those who have no intellectual, science or philosophy backgrounds, he sounds like a genius. And he has convinced himself now that he actually is a genius and is being persecuted because of that as opposed to people who DO understand the issues condemning him because he’s a raging idiot!
And because he presents the way he does and expounds on subjects near and dear to the Right, who also have very little understanding of science or psychology, they love him, because he makes idiocy sound smart!
The statement that those on the political right have very little understanding of science is offensive, biased, and false. Of course there are people with little knowledge of science, but that is no less true on the left than the right. There are areas of science and engineering where I’m an expert, and there are areas (including psychology) where I am not. In my areas of expertise I often encounter people on the left (and the right) who say things like “follow the science,” yet a two minute conversation is enough to demonstrate clearly that they haven’t got a clue what they’re talking about. It is extremely unhelpful to human progress or problem-solving to suggest that scientific knowledge is the exclusive purview of those with any particular political viewpoint.
And what exactly are YOUR qualifications to say that? Have you spent the last 10 years asking people questions about their educational backgrounds, their understanding of complex issues, how governments work, which layer of government is responsible for what etc?
Have you done a PhD on sociological expressions based on political leanings? How about how racism and bigotry as expressed as a political point of view?
When all these studies are put together they show a decided difference in the acceptance of new ideas, scientific findings, equity, equality forward thinking, and change. And the people who come out worst in all these findings are on the right side of the spectrum. That isn’t to say that they also don’t exist on the left, but by a far smaller number.
And your qualifications as an engineer don’t in any way make you qualified to make that assumption. Anymore than my qualifications as a Psychologist, Political Science, Botanist or Historian make me qualified to make assumptions about an engineering issue.
Thanks for this rundown of petersons vileness, I always felt like he was a bad actor and this confirms it, in excruciating detail.
Wow! Vileness? Character assassination masquerading as critical commentary. Anything of substance to offer other than your negative personal feelings about the man?
Delusions of intellectual grandeur
Peterson is Polly-evil's JFK, Jr. equivalent! Batshit crazy.
He is Canada’s Dr. Phil.
It is interesting to see how someone who presents as an expert psychologist demonstrates characteristics of a Narcissistic personality. This sort of behavior is not only self-serving, but ultimately harmful. It would be curious to see how the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) would score this individual. Unfortunately I am certain he is well aware of it and would no doubt tailor his responses to cheat the test. Knowledge and pathology are terrible companions
I'd like to comment on how I feel about Peterson but my gag reflex is kicking in.
Donald, this is an excellent analytical essay. While I never joined the cult of Peterson, and I found his views not supported by any credible evidence, this essay confirms that this man is no public intellectual. Or even a serious thinker. He seems like a person deeply seeking attention, one whom will say anything to achieve such a goal.
Glad to see That Peterson got slammed dunked.. he's is very similar to Rfkjr.. both are of such egotistical fiends they become experts ' Charlatans' and far too many people fall for it.
Very insightful are conversations Peterson has with Sam Harris. Peterson gets to sputtering every time while Harris is knowledgeable and polite.
Peterson seems to behave in a manner similar to Musk: so astounded by their own "intelligence" that they feel they have nothing left to learn, about anything. "It's time to learn from me now." There lies the downfall of the "intelligent": one loses all integrity when they feel they have nothing left to learn, yet they hold up their "qualifications" to the uninformed as absolute validation of all they speak. This is how they gain a following and what I believe makes them very dangerous. They're leading masses of people off the cliffs of logic and reason.
Outstanding!
Garbage in, garbage out. Total waste of human space.
I have truly never understood how Peterson commands the respect and is given the credibility he has. He is an opportunistic narcissist who spouts off carelessly about so many topics. It drives me nuts when credible people cite him to back their point.
He’s the king of the word salad
“Universities are conspicuous by their absence from the list of institutions where the Charter of Rights applies. While this might seem paradoxical, one reason is that it out of respect for the autonomy of universities to self-govern, and that free inquiry can take place there, and the courts have generally found that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply. “
Parsing…individuals at a university- staff and students- may be covered by university policies when it comes to rights rather than the Charter, but universities as a public entity have been held to account over rights.
1. The Vriend Decision very specifically included a university and its hiring policies.
2. Trinity Western and the BC law society had rights reviewed by SCC. The appeal based on religious rights and the Charter was certainly cited in the decision which sided with the law society.
Oh and great job on the junk science of one self declared intellectual.