Philosophical Speculations

YUP!

Funny, because when I look at the comments on Peterson's YouTube videos, something I usually never do on YouTube, they are miraculously civil. The few times I have commented on the videos, the responses have been 100% respectful, even on controversial political issues. That is unheard of online. It simply doesn't happen except on his videos. So... 50 seconds into the video and Dr. Mate is already making false claims. Is there any reason for me to continue with the remaining 3+ minutes?

I would agree with Gabor. What strikes me about Peterson is not what he is saying, but how he is saying it, his psychological and spiritual/energetic state. He speaks about meaning, faith, love and peace, but the spiritual "wavelength" of this message is so toxic, it's full of rage and anger and that is why I just cannot listen to him. But that's only my personal opinion

I am not particularly au fait with JP, but from what I've seen, I agree with Gabor Mate that he is very clever but seems full of repressed anger and that this manifests 'energetically', thus appealing to some people who also feel angry and entitled (but not in full possession of what they think they are entitled to), even though JP is ultra-careful in his use of language.

Strangely I don't see any repression in Peterson when he is angry about things. Some things clearly do wind him up, but he seems quite passionately and openly angry about those things surely?

Eugene I wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:54 pm I would agree with Gabor. What strikes me about Peterson is not what he is saying, but how he is saying it, his psychological and spiritual/energetic state. He speaks about meaning, faith, love and peace, but the spiritual "wavelength" of this message is so toxic, it's full of rage and anger and that is why I just cannot listen to him. But that's only my personal opinion

Well, this sentiment baffles my mind. It cannot be reasonably inferred from any of his full-length lectures or interviews. Even when he started to 'fly off the handle' a bit in those, he quickly regained composure. And that seems to be the consensus by everyone who speaks with him, such as Dr. Gad Saad (who, for my money, is a much more insightful psychologist than Dr. Mate, but that's a separate issue).

Therefore, it seems much more likely to me that people who feel this way are concerned with his decidedly Western metaphysical/spiritual perspective. The Western view is more 'violent', after all, in so far as it places a heavy emphasis on individual ambition and 'overcoming'. It would be interesting to take a poll about it and see if there is any correlation between Eastern spiritual emphasis and vague feelings of "toxic" messaging from Peterson.

I'm sure there is confirmation bias at play as well, since the people who feel this way are the ones who stop listening to him or only listen to short segments that are already curated for them by other people who feel the same way.

Here is the full interview from which the JP focus was extracted.
This larger context is needed if one wants to grok where GM is coming from.



Personally, I can add that as an energetic intuitive I strongly sensed JP's repressed nature and for a while at least it blocked my ability to grok the many valid and wise perspectives he presents.

Curiously, one can say much the same about Gabor, whose own shadow work is still ongoing, and that his 'energy' doesn't come across as one who is at complete unrepressed peace with himself ~ which I suspect he would admit to. So I see both he and JP as wounded healers, and no reason not to listen to either of them. In any case, I'm wondering if the ulterior motive for making this original post is more political than metaphysical.

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:47 pm Curiously, one can say much the same about Gabor, whose own shadow work is still ongoing, and that his 'energy' doesn't come across as one who is at complete unrepressed peace with himself ~ which I suspect he would admit to. So I see both he and JP as wounded healers, and no reason not to listen to either of them. In any case, I'm wondering if the ulterior motive for making this original post is more political than metaphysical.

I agree, and in fact many psychologists came to the practice of psychology motivated by the desire to understand their own psychological problems and shadows. And that is exactly how they become able to gain deeper insights into the human psychology not only from a third-person objective perspectives, but from a first-person perspective of their own experiences with these problems. The difference, however, is that some people are able to admit that they have underlying issues and are able to productively work with them towards the healing, while others go into a denial and suppression mode and tend to focus on the external problems irrelevant to the root causes of their psychological issues and sufferings.