EricRounce

Well let me just begin with the popular premise stating those of us who develop an interest in psychology do so because we selfishly want to fix our own shite.

I recently came across a YouTube comment by Doctor Gabor Mate of UBC. He was not entirely fond of JP. Perhaps a little jealous of JP's appeal on social media. I found the comment on JP's personal issues to be much more refreshing than a lot of the knee jerk interest based attacks on him.

So to the JP dissenters out there, I have to say, he never seemed to say he was perfect in any way. He simply backs his opinion with his sources and openly recognizes that he too has his bias. What more can a social scientist do? Especially one who

I was just watching a video, and heard a gentleman of my vintage discussion what the liberal left used to mean. According to him it meant those who stood up for freedom of speach and improving the lot of their own interests and the lot of "everyperson".

Then it shifted. Perhaps this left is now like unto being at the South Pole. Every direction is North and you are wrong every step you take. Effectively you are in exile.

So, I am really not that smart (a legend in my own mind) and would be interested in your views on those ideas. Perhaps the definitions are wrong? Perhaps your world view and perceptions are not like mine? I know what is in my mind and am truly interested in sparking dis

According to Plato, a philosopher king is a ruler who possesses both a love of wisdom, as well as intelligence, reliability, and a willingness to live a simple life. Such are the rulers of his utopian city Kallipolis. For such a community to ever come into being, "philosophers [must] become kings…or those now called kings [must]…genuinely and adequately philosophize" (Plato The Republic, 5.473d).

Are we as a society at that point?

Is Jordan Peterson a polymath?

Does it take more than a social media presence to become a strong voice of rational thought?

Have we so lost the classical education of everyman to no longer study rhetoric or stoic philosophy?

Have we drifted so far into the re

What I do not see or hear in JP's material are broad sweeping generalizations, partly reasoned conclusions or an overreaching use of I'll defined terminology or acronyms. You cannot do other than respect the arguments of one with a clear agenda of promoting self improvement beginning with a high standard of clarity of meaning, an insistence on semantics, if you will.

Pretty good prose, that! Right?

Too many seem to think that their pet opinions, based on little more than their personal brain fog of the day or better still, derivative ideas, are proper grist for the redit publication mill. Frankly most pseudo-intellectual drivel on this thread appears written by people or bots posing as int

First step of becoming mature and sober is to accept that there is no such thing as free speach. Running your mouth, publishing your opininion, venting your spleen, however you wish to call it has a very real personal cost. The Cliff Notes version is simply: you first need to embrace personal responsibility for all foreseeable consequences of your speach. Second, unless you are willing to submit your posited statement and argument to the purifying forge of your own internal revisionist review, then why even bother publishing externally. You have to know that the much more intelligent Court of Them is about to introduce your idea a the patented Kaytel hopper with a chopper, slicer and dicer.