Support NeoGAF

[FreedomOfSpeech]

He's back writing in the National Post.

Jordan Peterson: The activists are now stalking the hard scientists

Expert researchers in STEM fields are already in great danger of being pushed aside by activists of the proper opinion. The rest of us will pay in the longer run

nationalpost.com

It's a version of wht he wrote on his blog

Missives of Appalling Idiocy and Envy Embarrassing to Behold – Jordan Peterson

www.jordanbpeterson.com

 

[Dontero]

So why the fuck, he act like this, irresponsibly? He reminds me of "woke" people, that they are preching one thing, but they act in a opposite way. You don't need any rehab for Benzo's if you are not an idiot, but obviously he thought very high of himself, if he thinks he just going to beat it cold turkey. This shit is something, which should never have been done.

I am not againts Peterson or anything like that, but my question is simply WHY?

He spoke about it in one JRE. He has clinical depression since he was kid. Outside of that he has severe health issues with his immune system which is connected to his depression too.

Lately his wife fought with cancer.

So you would think that he wasn't in best shape.

 

[M1chl]

He spoke about it in one JRE. He has clinical depression since he was kid. Outside of that he has severe health issues with his immune system which is connected to his depression too.

Lately his wife fought with cancer.

So you would think that he wasn't in best shape.

Sure but benzos are different kind of best, I have history with them and it did not ended up well.

Spoiler: Context

PSA: Don't drink alcohol too much. Liver transplant experience. NeoGAF special edition.

Prequel: So.... I've been planning to write this in here for some time, but let's say it's not that easy to talk about that. I've been preparing this in my head, how to write something for this wonderfull community, which imrpoved my mental state a lot. I was abstinent, till my 22 years old. I...

www.neogaf.com

Anti-depressants are pretty harmless, weight gain is kind of problem, but that's about it. Benzos can fuck your whole life. They are sneaky fucker, which works in a very "harmless" way, that you are just "calm", but when you want to get off of them, you can simply die from W/D and clinical psychiatric should know that, He was on Clonazepam for 2 years and that's really massive health risk.

 

[DragoonKain]

Glad to see him back, he will get back to 100% I have no doubts. I wouldn't wish what he went through on my worst enemy, looking forward to listening to this.

 

[Woo-Fu]

Glad he's on the mend, he's one of the few people who saw this mess coming and was willing to make himself a target by trying to warn others.

 

[MacReady13]

Glad he's on the mend, he's one of the few people who saw this mess coming and was willing to make himself a target by trying to warn others.

Same. Glad he is on the mend and ready to get back out there speaking the truth. I believe the only 2 academics willing to speak out on this shit going on now are the great Bret Weinstein and the great JP.

 

[asustitan]

Drugs are scary when you read up on them. They literally alter your brain chemistry and probably everyone is different in how it changes. Research can also say some of the changes to the balances can be permanent, this is just even with anti depressants ssri's.

I urge you all to try anything before medications like diet changes, exercise. Whether it was placebo or not, Orange juice helped my anxiety.
Vitamin C lowers the Cortisol levels apparently. I was probably lacking that.

 

[gow3isben]

It sickens me how much people at Reshitera cream their pants at someone almost dying.

Get better. I disagree with a lot of what he says but he is very articulate and I have a tremendous amount of respect for him.

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

He probably won't be doing public speaking anytime soon. He'll recover and write a new book while getting healthy. Less straining physically. Also, he's been lost from the world for months. He has to catch up to what's going on.

 

[BadBurger]

I don't agree with the guy's politics, but I am glad he's OK. Last I heard he was on death's door after being placed into a coma. Scary stuff. Wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

 

[Tesseract]

I don't agree with the guy's politics, but I am glad he's OK. Last I heard he was on death's door after being placed into a coma. Scary stuff. Wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

he's not really a political figure, psychology and philosophy

 

[Stiflers Mom]

Yep, it's a bit hard to compute why someone like him with all this knowledge about this kind of stuff fell into this trap.

 

[eot]

He's back writing in the National Post.

Jordan Peterson: The activists are now stalking the hard scientists

Expert researchers in STEM fields are already in great danger of being pushed aside by activists of the proper opinion. The rest of us will pay in the longer run

nationalpost.com

As someone in STEM this is starting to worry me. For now the madness is worse across the pond though.

 

[Stiflers Mom]

As someone in STEM this is starting to worry me. For now the madness is worse across the pond though.

Have you seen the Joe Rogan podcast with Bret Weinstein in it?
Shit is escalating quickly.

Them fools want to cancel the enlightenment now.

 

[eot]

Have you seen the Joe Rogan podcast with Bret Weinstein in it?
Shit is escalating quickly.

Them fools want to cancel the enlightenment now.

Yeah I watched parts of it, I listen to his podcast and he was repeating a lot of stuff he's already said. The enlightenment thing was specifically about Evergreen. To me the #shutdownstem discussion was more concerning because it hints that the scientific journals might be affected by the mind virus. In many parts of Europe though I feel like the political climate is quite different from the US, and to some extent there's less kindling for these types of movements since the economic inequality is generally lower.

Also, as much as I enjoy listening to him, I do take him (and his brother even more so) with a grain of salt. They're clever people, but they think a little too highly of themselves and their own opinions. Sometimes there are stupid things that only a very smart person could convince themselves of.

 

[pel1300]

I find it pretty common that really intelligent people tend to be very vulnerable to drug or alcohol addiction.

That's just my experience. They seem to struggle to be stimulated/excited by anything. I find it hard discussing entertainment with my friends who I consider intellectuals. They tend to have a very nihilistic view of everything.

 

[manfestival]

Yep, it's a bit hard to compute why someone like him with all this knowledge about this kind of stuff fell into this trap.

I think the answer is far easier than one may traditionally think. He is human. He ultimately made that statement in this podcast. It was basically, if you are mad at me you are right and if you forgive me then continue to support me then that makes me happy... something along those lines. I will gladly take the advice from a blatantly flawed human that is trying to do better but honest. Than the overly righteous that only will collapse upon their own facade(David Pakman for lack of another name to manifest in this moment).

Yeah I watched parts of it, I listen to his podcast and he was repeating a lot of stuff he's already said. The enlightenment thing was specifically about Evergreen. To me the #shutdownstem discussion was more concerning because it hints that the scientific journals might be affected by the mind virus. In many parts of Europe though I feel like the political climate is quite different from the US, and to some extent there's less kindling for these types of movements since the economic equality is generally lower.

Also, as much as I enjoy listening to him, I do take him (and his brother even more so) with a grain of salt. They're clever people, but they think a little too highly of themselves and their own opinions. Sometimes there are stupid things that only a very smart person could convince themselves of.

Yeah I agree with you on your whole post. I guess to add to your points with my own, I like listening to Weinstein myself but I always take him with a grain of salt since I disagree with many of his points. Heck even Joe in the last podcast(going from recent memory here) even questioned and disagreed with him. Though I do like the different perspective he brings and respect it. Weinstein does suffer from that "arrogance" and that might be his biggest weakness without actually knowing him.

 

[eot]

Yeah I agree with you on your whole post. I guess to add to your points with my own, I like listening to Weinstein myself but I always take him with a grain of salt since I disagree with many of his points. Heck even Joe in the last podcast(going from recent memory here) even questioned and disagreed with him. Though I do like the different perspective he brings and respect it. Weinstein does suffer from that "arrogance" and that might be his biggest weakness without actually knowing him.

This video from today kind of illustrates it:


I think he expresses the points he's trying to get communicate extremely well, especially given how little time he's allotted to do so. Then he reveals his plan which comes across as utterly facile. I'm sure the thought process that led him to that idea wasn't as simple as the idea itself is, but in the end it's little more than "let's have a centrist independent ticket", yet you can kind of tell that he thinks he's come up with something special.

 

[DragoonKain]

I never got a sense of arrogance from Bret. I don’t think he thinks his idea is some amazing revolutionary idea, but I think he thinks that we need some alternative to Trump or Biden when no one is suggesting one, so he’s trying to push the narrative to hopefully get it to spread. If you want it to spread, you gotta be confident in it, otherwise no one will take it seriously.

Bret is legitimately scared for our future. Not just saying it. I don’t think his idea is bad, except for the swapping of positions idea. But I’d be fine with a left center and right center combo in the White House so they can keep each other in check and learn from one another.

I finished the Peterson interview today and I teared up when he got choked up. He’s been through so much. I’m glad the support was almost all positive and pisses me off that vindictive cunts were happy to see him struggle. Shows what kinda people they are and what their values are all about. He’s a good guy, and I don’t agree with him on everything, but so what. He backs his ideas up with logic and he’s really smart and I respect him a ton. He saw the free speech issues coming before anyone.

 

[Tesseract]

bret's plan is fucking retarded

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

The outcome of Brett's plan would be 16 years of the same governance. The question is why? His nominees don't fill me with confidence.

 

[eot]

I never got a sense of arrogance from Bret.

I don't think he comes across as arrogant either, it's more a form of myopia about their own ideas. Both Bret and Eric talk a lot about science, and to some extent they fancy themselves scientists even though they don't work in academia (I know Bret works or worked for a uni but he doesn't publish). Now I'm not saying you can't do research outside academia, lots of companies do research that is released publicly and sometimes single individuals produce great results in isolation too. However, their self proclaimed reasons for being outside the system don't stand up to scrutiny.

Eric goes on Joe Rogan to talk about his grand unification theory for physics, but has some kind of persecution complex where he justifies not actually releasing his results in written form by suggesting that if he tried to publish them they would be rejected on the basis of being too radical, while simultaneously saying that his ideas would get stolen and someone else would claim the credit for them (this is my understanding based on various podcasts/talkshows). He has suggested that Ed Witten, who is arguably the greatest physics genius alive today, got the credit for an idea of his, but he has no receipts. He's also talked about him and Bret having Nobel worthy ideas, despite them both basically never having produced anything of substance. Bret has some similar thing where he once submitted a paper and it got trashed in review (this happens all the time!!), and he seems to base much of his understanding of peer review on this incident.

The thing is that they have reasonable criticisms of academia, of publishing and so on, but they are armchair analysts while purporting to be overlooked geniuses (Eric much more so than Bret). And again, I find their conversations on a lot of political issues enjoyable, it's just that sometimes they're sniffing their own farts a little too much.

 

[Ornlu]

I don't think he comes across as arrogant either, it's more a form of myopia about their own ideas. Both Bret and Eric talk a lot about science, and to some extent they fancy themselves scientists even though they don't work in academia (I know Bret works or worked for a uni but he doesn't publish). Now I'm not saying you can't do research outside academia, lots of companies do research that is released publicly and sometimes single individuals produce great results in isolation too. However, their self proclaimed reasons for being outside the system don't stand up to scrutiny.

Eric goes on Joe Rogan to talk about his grand unification theory for physics, but has some kind of persecution complex where he justifies not actually releasing his results in written form by suggesting that if he tried to publish them they would be rejected on the basis of being too radical, while simultaneously saying that his ideas would get stolen and someone else would claim the credit for them (this is my understanding based on various podcasts/talkshows). He has suggested that Ed Witten, who is arguably the greatest physics genius alive today, got the credit for an idea of his, but he has no receipts. He's also talked about him and Bret having Nobel worthy ideas, despite them both basically never having produced anything of substance. Bret has some similar thing where he once submitted a paper and it got trashed in review (this happens all the time!!), and he seems to base much of his understanding of peer review on this incident.

The thing is that they have reasonable criticisms of academia, of publishing and so on, but they are armchair analysts while purporting to be overlooked geniuses (Eric much more so than Bret). And again, I find their conversations on a lot of political issues enjoyable, it's just that sometimes they're sniffing their own farts a little too much.

Eric usually rubs me the way you've described; haven't heard enough of Bret to really know.

 

[Relativ9]

I don't think he comes across as arrogant either, it's more a form of myopia about their own ideas. Both Bret and Eric talk a lot about science, and to some extent they fancy themselves scientists even though they don't work in academia (I know Bret works or worked for a uni but he doesn't publish). Now I'm not saying you can't do research outside academia, lots of companies do research that is released publicly and sometimes single individuals produce great results in isolation too. However, their self proclaimed reasons for being outside the system don't stand up to scrutiny.

Eric goes on Joe Rogan to talk about his grand unification theory for physics, but has some kind of persecution complex where he justifies not actually releasing his results in written form by suggesting that if he tried to publish them they would be rejected on the basis of being too radical, while simultaneously saying that his ideas would get stolen and someone else would claim the credit for them (this is my understanding based on various podcasts/talkshows). He has suggested that Ed Witten, who is arguably the greatest physics genius alive today, got the credit for an idea of his, but he has no receipts. He's also talked about him and Bret having Nobel worthy ideas, despite them both basically never having produced anything of substance. Bret has some similar thing where he once submitted a paper and it got trashed in review (this happens all the time!!), and he seems to base much of his understanding of peer review on this incident.

The thing is that they have reasonable criticisms of academia, of publishing and so on, but they are armchair analysts while purporting to be overlooked geniuses (Eric much more so than Bret). And again, I find their conversations on a lot of political issues enjoyable, it's just that sometimes they're sniffing their own farts a little too much.

Yeah Eric in particular kind of needs to put up or shut up when it comes to his unification theory. Its when Joe has him on that I really wish Joe was a bit more knowledge on physics to be able to call him on some of his more unsubstantiated claims. Bret on the other hand seems to mostly be an educator and talks about already well established and well documented ideas. It mostly seems to be Eric talking him up.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

I find it pretty common that really intelligent people tend to be very vulnerable to drug or alcohol addiction.

That's just my experience. They seem to struggle to be stimulated/excited by anything. I find it hard discussing entertainment with my friends who I consider intellectuals. They tend to have a very nihilistic view of everything.

Intelligent people are extremely logical and very emotionless. Nihilism is the most logical outlook on life and death. The reality is, in the end, nothing matters. We fade to black and no memory remains, from the disposable heros to the master of puppets. We are all One, Frantic in our journey Through the Never. Sad but True.

 

[EviLore]

High IQ individuals are more likely to experience emotional disorders like depression, anxiety, bipolar, etc., by a factor of 2-3x the national average. If we were emotionless that would not be the case.

Bad News for the Highly Intelligent

Superior IQs are associated with mental and physical disorders, research suggests

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[Slings and Arrows]

High IQ individuals are more likely to experience emotional disorders like depression, anxiety, bipolar, etc., by a factor of 2-3x the national average. If we were emotionless that would not be the case.

Bad News for the Highly Intelligent

Superior IQs are associated with mental and physical disorders, research suggests

www.scientificamerican.com

slyly slyly

I think that's the issue though, highly intelligent people aren't emotional and don't know how to deal with emotions when they come around. It's like 'blue screen of death' but for the thought process. Plus, all highly intelligent people are more often than not, high-functioning autists or at least on the spectrum and a lot of them are homosexual. Not having a go, just saying. Derren Brown, Ian Mckellen and Stephen Fry to name a few are super intelligent, suffer from depression and are gay.

I also think that the more you know, the more you realise how little other people know and it becomes very isolating. I'm 3 IQ points above a bowl of snot, but i still find it difficult to talk to people who are either overly emotional or air heads.

 

[Ornlu]

High IQ individuals are more likely to experience emotional disorders like depression, anxiety, bipolar, etc., by a factor of 2-3x the national average. If we were emotionless that would not be the case.

Bad News for the Highly Intelligent

Superior IQs are associated with mental and physical disorders, research suggests

www.scientificamerican.com

slyly slyly

I think that's the issue though, highly intelligent people aren't emotional and don't know how to deal with emotions when they come around. It's like 'blue screen of death' but for the thought process. Plus, all highly intelligent people are more often than not, high-functioning autists or at least on the spectrum and a lot of them are homosexual. Not having a go, just saying. Derren Brown, Ian Mckellen and Stephen Fry to name a few are super intelligent, suffer from depression and are gay.

I also think that the more you know, the more you realise how little other people know and it becomes very isolating. I'm 3 IQ points above a bowl of snot, but i still find it difficult to talk to people who are either overly emotional or air heads.

I've always been a big fan of the "Genius and madness are two sides of the same coin" thought that has been expressed by many great minds throughout history. It really does seem to be true.

 

[manfestival]

I don't think he comes across as arrogant either, it's more a form of myopia about their own ideas. Both Bret and Eric talk a lot about science, and to some extent they fancy themselves scientists even though they don't work in academia (I know Bret works or worked for a uni but he doesn't publish). Now I'm not saying you can't do research outside academia, lots of companies do research that is released publicly and sometimes single individuals produce great results in isolation too. However, their self proclaimed reasons for being outside the system don't stand up to scrutiny.

Eric goes on Joe Rogan to talk about his grand unification theory for physics, but has some kind of persecution complex where he justifies not actually releasing his results in written form by suggesting that if he tried to publish them they would be rejected on the basis of being too radical, while simultaneously saying that his ideas would get stolen and someone else would claim the credit for them (this is my understanding based on various podcasts/talkshows). He has suggested that Ed Witten, who is arguably the greatest physics genius alive today, got the credit for an idea of his, but he has no receipts. He's also talked about him and Bret having Nobel worthy ideas, despite them both basically never having produced anything of substance. Bret has some similar thing where he once submitted a paper and it got trashed in review (this happens all the time!!), and he seems to base much of his understanding of peer review on this incident.

The thing is that they have reasonable criticisms of academia, of publishing and so on, but they are armchair analysts while purporting to be overlooked geniuses (Eric much more so than Bret). And again, I find their conversations on a lot of political issues enjoyable, it's just that sometimes they're sniffing their own farts a little too much.

I like how you put it here. I used the word arrogance in quotes and I think Dragoon may have taken it too literal despite it being in quotes. I only used that for lack of a better term to articulate what I was trying to say but I do like how you picked up on that subtly and put it in better detail.

 

[Stiflers Mom]

Bret on the other hand seems to mostly be an educator and talks about already well established and well documented ideas. It mostly seems to be Eric talking him up.

Yep, this.
I can't really stand Eric, but Bret is fine in my book.

 

[Greedings]

I don't think he comes across as arrogant either, it's more a form of myopia about their own ideas. Both Bret and Eric talk a lot about science, and to some extent they fancy themselves scientists even though they don't work in academia (I know Bret works or worked for a uni but he doesn't publish). Now I'm not saying you can't do research outside academia, lots of companies do research that is released publicly and sometimes single individuals produce great results in isolation too. However, their self proclaimed reasons for being outside the system don't stand up to scrutiny.

Eric goes on Joe Rogan to talk about his grand unification theory for physics, but has some kind of persecution complex where he justifies not actually releasing his results in written form by suggesting that if he tried to publish them they would be rejected on the basis of being too radical, while simultaneously saying that his ideas would get stolen and someone else would claim the credit for them (this is my understanding based on various podcasts/talkshows). He has suggested that Ed Witten, who is arguably the greatest physics genius alive today, got the credit for an idea of his, but he has no receipts. He's also talked about him and Bret having Nobel worthy ideas, despite them both basically never having produced anything of substance. Bret has some similar thing where he once submitted a paper and it got trashed in review (this happens all the time!!), and he seems to base much of his understanding of peer review on this incident.

The thing is that they have reasonable criticisms of academia, of publishing and so on, but they are armchair analysts while purporting to be overlooked geniuses (Eric much more so than Bret). And again, I find their conversations on a lot of political issues enjoyable, it's just that sometimes they're sniffing their own farts a little too much.

You pretty much summed up my feelings on the matter. They're smart people though, and I do enjoy listening to them (Bret more so because he's less arrogant, with less of a persecution complex).
I'd maybe have more time for their "academic science is a farce" stuff if either had risen to the top of their fields and then came crashing out with the realisation. Instead they basically got upset at the difficulties of academic life during their PhD lol.

 

[DragoonKain]

Holy shit that interview now has over a million views.

People really support Jordan Peterson, good for him.

 

[Azurro]

Yeah I watched parts of it, I listen to his podcast and he was repeating a lot of stuff he's already said. The enlightenment thing was specifically about Evergreen. To me the #shutdownstem discussion was more concerning because it hints that the scientific journals might be affected by the mind virus. In many parts of Europe though I feel like the political climate is quite different from the US, and to some extent there's less kindling for these types of movements since the economic inequality is generally lower.

Also, as much as I enjoy listening to him, I do take him (and his brother even more so) with a grain of salt. They're clever people, but they think a little too highly of themselves and their own opinions. Sometimes there are stupid things that only a very smart person could convince themselves of.

There's much less of this ideology depending where you are in Europe, but really, some places aren't all that different. Germany, Sweden and to some extent the UK are infested with this ideology, just a bit less intense than the US.