Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
While I agree that this has so far been happening in a limited amount of schools, it is certainly an example of a policy towards equality of outcome. The preferred result is to have a diversity in the school that resembles society, and in order to achieve that position of equity, equality of opportunity goes out the door. In general, equity and equality of opportunity are mutually exclusive.
Equity however is certainly a focus of many humanities studies, as can even be found in the title of said studies. Equity is not posed as one of many theories there, but as the only acceptable outcome. If you hold a different view, you'd better not mention it on your exam or you will fail.
I do not have sufficient information to claim that this is a wide spread practice, like professor Peterson claims, but that it's happening on multiple schools is certainly beyond debate.
I'm not defending my own views on the matter here; we're discussing professor Peterson's views. I've already stated in previous posts that I think this lawsuit was not one of his better moves, and I think there's an alternative motive behind it. He doesn't appear to be too quick to sue people for defamation though, considering all the things people yell at him, but for one reason or another he has drawn a line here. We'll have to see how this one plays out.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
Let's start with one: equality of outcome.
Please explain to me why it's not racist that in some schools, Asian students need 450 more points than Black students on their SATS in order to get admitted?
While I understand the wish for diversity by these schools, I can also see how these measures can cause enormous resentment in Asian students. I'm all for equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome can have some serious consequences for the future.
You see similar issues when it comes to gender equity or salary equity.
Professor Peterson is hardly the only one warning about the idea of equality of outcome (often called equity) as the only acceptable solution in many humanities studies. He just seems better than most at attracting people's attention to the matter.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
My apologies; it was just meant as a light-hearted reaction to the views that some people hold. It was not meant to derail the conversation.
Perhaps this article is more to your liking: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-11/spigelman-free-speech-hate-speech-balance/4420410 Some people appear to be pushing very hard to make offending someone illegal by law. Doing so would have a profound impact on freedom of speech. You may also have read recent articles regarding the dismissal of teachers for offending students, often even without intending to do so. Such changes in society worry me. Professor Peterson claims that such views are often taught as doctrine in the humanities studies. From what I've read in the news over the past years, he may have a point.
That's your opinion of course, but I've seen him adjust his views on several occasions based on counter arguments he heard. He genuinely seems to listen to other people's arguments, and seems prepared to change his mind if such arguments are convincing.
From what I recall, the website was supposed to only mention those instances of courses where doctrine was taught; not an overview of every humanities studies. Basically the difference between critical thinking and critical theory. I'm pretty sure he would do the same if extreme right-wing ideas were pushed as doctrine in the classroom.
If someone sued professor Peterson for knowingly making false statements and he had actually done so, I would support such a lawsuit. IMHO there is a difference between freedom of speech regarding opinion and knowingly making false statements to defame someone. From what I've seen though, he generally considers his words very carefully before uttering them, so I doubt he would knowingly make false statements to defame someone.
Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
I think if you ask 10 people about the definition of "safe space", you'll get at least 4 different answers. I'm talking about the one where people believe they have a right to not being offended, so any ideas deviating from their own should be kept out. If you don't know what I mean, please Google safe space campus. I'm not saying all people feel that way; just a large enough group on some campuses to really ruin it for the rest of us.
Bonus point for using a Princess Bride quote on me though. :)
If professor Peterson was indeed leading an "indoctrination cult" I would be supporting them. Professor Peterson however encourages people to think for themselves; to question everything, and use scientific evidence rather than subjective thought as the basis of your arguments. There's a huge difference between agreeing with someone's views, and using everything someone says as gospel, and disregard everything else. I'm pretty sure some of his fans use his views as gospel; I think he wouldn't like those fans very much. He strikes me as someone who would be deeply unhappy in an echo chamber; he enjoys the debate, and getting new insights into matter. Rule 9 from his book: Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't.
Personally I think that his views on the movie Frozen are wrong; I truly enjoy that movie, as does the rest of my family, and I seriously doubt the Disney creators had a political agenda in mind when they came up with the deviation of the standard solution to the princess' problem.
From what I've understood from his lectures, he feels that the same kind of identity politics and totalitarian views are at the base of all these atrocities. To some of these people, deviating even a little from the common view can result in being viewed as a nazi, biggot or misogynist, which is sufficient reason to prevent you from speaking at all. Just look at what happened to professor Weinstein.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
This part of the discussion is not so much about which direction the population is leaning, but what is being taught as doctrine in schools. I think if extreme right-wing ideas were being used as doctrine in schools, professor Peterson would be just as up in arms as he is now. He has studied the results of such doctrines, both on the left and on the right, for decades, and it scares him deeply. Perhaps we should be scared as well.
Looking at my own country, it is clear that extreme ideas, both on the left and on the right, are becoming more popular. After the last election we had a hell of a time forming a government without including parties from the end of the political spectrum. Professor Peterson is actually warning about that too: if you push extreme leftist ideas too far, people who are left out tend to be pushed farther to the right. I think his popularity has actually prevented many people, especially young men, from embracing far right-wing ideas.
As for Trump? I just hope people are starting to realize what he's doing to the world, the country and their lives. I think many people hoped for something different, since the same as before wouldn't have improved their lives either. I guess they can see now that different is not necessarily better...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
Didn't I just say that already? I don't know enough about postmodernism to determine if professor Peterson is correct in his statements. Luckily we're not debating my views but his views on this matter. :)
Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
Perhaps, though I think it's more that these professors are lying to protect an identity politics agenda that he despises and fears since it reminds him of the results of totalitarian regimes in the past.
Blaming patriarchal oppression for many of the problems in society today is actually a very common view in many of the humanities, like women's studies. Professor Peterson regards these views as post-modern/neo-marxist, and has explained how these political views have come to life. I don't have sufficient knowledge of this field to determine whether he's correct here. I have however seen the results of these extreme left views, and it scares me more than a little.
In a recent debate, professor Peterson asked a, in my opinion, very relevant question: at what point does the left go too far? As a society, we have set relatively clear boundaries on when the right goes too far, but we seem hardly able to do the same on the left. Professor Peterson draws the line at identity politics, and ideas like pushing for equity. As a left voting Dutch person (a country where Democrats are considered right wing (somewhere between D66 and VVD)), I think he has a valid point here.
While I agree that some of his fanboys are often as derailed as some of the people protesting his speeches, I'm curious to hear more about some of his points that you find "nutty". Would you care to elaborate?
Rightly or wrongly, he feels that these ideas regarding identity politics follow the same doctrines that have lead to the deaths of hundreds of millions over the past century, and should be stopped in their tracks if in any reasonable way possible. It does not matter to him whether it's the left or right that plays these identity politic games, but since it's mostly the left pushing them in universities these days (and because similar ideas from the right are discarded by the general population as ridiculous) his main focus is on the games played by the extreme left.
I don't know whether his fears are true in a way that should concern us all, but the man has studied the results of these kinds of ideas for decades, so I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt. I've also seen where these ideas are leading at the moment, and if this is just the start then we are indeed heading for some very unpleasant things in the future.
I think one of the reasons he's chosen this example is to counter the thought that hierarchical structures in society are solely caused by patriarchal oppression as some people claim. Though it's true that not all species live in a hierarchical structure, we humans are hardly the only species that do. The lobster is one of the oldest species still alive today that shows similar patterns to humans in this regard.
Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
I respectfully disagree here. People are allowed to have grievances and express them, but I draw the line when people (sometimes violently) prevent others from speaking. Real life doesn't have "safe spaces" where no-one will ever offend you, since it's impossible to utter even a single sentence without offending at least someone somewhere.
You may also notice that professor Peterson has never filed suit against the any of the protestors that come to his speeches, and try to drown him out using megaphones and other equipment. He's apparently drawn the line at professors who deliberately make false statements about him in order to punish a teaching assistant on bogus charges.
True, and he's used this argument to counter the thought that hierarchies in humanity can only come from patriarchal oppression. Many species live in some form of hierarchy, so we humans are far from unique in that.
Considering he's been teaching about these types of subjects for decades, that's not surprising. :) Watching all his YouTube lecture videos alone (which I certainly never found the time for) would take up more spare time than I have available. Mike is correct though when saying that there have been a lot of bad articles written about him lately. There are plenty of arguments to be made against his views, but they make none of them, and just push straw man arguments in stead so they can attack him on those.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
Equity however is certainly a focus of many humanities studies, as can even be found in the title of said studies. Equity is not posed as one of many theories there, but as the only acceptable outcome. If you hold a different view, you'd better not mention it on your exam or you will fail.
I do not have sufficient information to claim that this is a wide spread practice, like professor Peterson claims, but that it's happening on multiple schools is certainly beyond debate.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
Please explain to me why it's not racist that in some schools, Asian students need 450 more points than Black students on their SATS in order to get admitted?
While I understand the wish for diversity by these schools, I can also see how these measures can cause enormous resentment in Asian students. I'm all for equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome can have some serious consequences for the future.
You see similar issues when it comes to gender equity or salary equity.
Professor Peterson is hardly the only one warning about the idea of equality of outcome (often called equity) as the only acceptable solution in many humanities studies. He just seems better than most at attracting people's attention to the matter.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
Perhaps this article is more to your liking: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-11/spigelman-free-speech-hate-speech-balance/4420410
Some people appear to be pushing very hard to make offending someone illegal by law. Doing so would have a profound impact on freedom of speech. You may also have read recent articles regarding the dismissal of teachers for offending students, often even without intending to do so. Such changes in society worry me. Professor Peterson claims that such views are often taught as doctrine in the humanities studies. From what I've read in the news over the past years, he may have a point.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If someone sued professor Peterson for knowingly making false statements and he had actually done so, I would support such a lawsuit. IMHO there is a difference between freedom of speech regarding opinion and knowingly making false statements to defame someone. From what I've seen though, he generally considers his words very carefully before uttering them, so I doubt he would knowingly make false statements to defame someone.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
https://youtu.be/fHMoDt3nSHs?t=3m22s
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
Bonus point for using a Princess Bride quote on me though. :)
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Personally I think that his views on the movie Frozen are wrong; I truly enjoy that movie, as does the rest of my family, and I seriously doubt the Disney creators had a political agenda in mind when they came up with the deviation of the standard solution to the princess' problem.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
Looking at my own country, it is clear that extreme ideas, both on the left and on the right, are becoming more popular. After the last election we had a hell of a time forming a government without including parties from the end of the political spectrum. Professor Peterson is actually warning about that too: if you push extreme leftist ideas too far, people who are left out tend to be pushed farther to the right. I think his popularity has actually prevented many people, especially young men, from embracing far right-wing ideas.
As for Trump? I just hope people are starting to realize what he's doing to the world, the country and their lives. I think many people hoped for something different, since the same as before wouldn't have improved their lives either. I guess they can see now that different is not necessarily better...
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
In a recent debate, professor Peterson asked a, in my opinion, very relevant question: at what point does the left go too far? As a society, we have set relatively clear boundaries on when the right goes too far, but we seem hardly able to do the same on the left. Professor Peterson draws the line at identity politics, and ideas like pushing for equity. As a left voting Dutch person (a country where Democrats are considered right wing (somewhere between D66 and VVD)), I think he has a valid point here.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re:
I don't know whether his fears are true in a way that should concern us all, but the man has studied the results of these kinds of ideas for decades, so I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt. I've also seen where these ideas are leading at the moment, and if this is just the start then we are indeed heading for some very unpleasant things in the future.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Crime and sin are what people you don't like do.
You may also notice that professor Peterson has never filed suit against the any of the protestors that come to his speeches, and try to drown him out using megaphones and other equipment. He's apparently drawn the line at professors who deliberately make false statements about him in order to punish a teaching assistant on bogus charges.
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is the Lobster Guy?
Next >>