The Jordan Peterson Thread

If they’ve found what worked to alleviate symptoms, stick with it. Some people have real issues with vegetables that are toxic to them and cause autoimmune flair ups.

This doctor gives a good explanation of why people would do this and benefit although there are also concerns. But it’s not like it’s worst than what most eating are eating if you think about it with processed food every day. Is eating beef everyday that insane when you consider all the BS people eat daily these days?

And non-alcoholic apple cider.

It does sound fishy to me, like that lightarian human who conceded that she also “occasionally” added cookies and herbal tea to her diet.
:cookie: :tea: :innocent:

Aha! I knew something was up. :apple:

1 Like

Apparently you can inherit this kind of thing from an ancestor who suffered DNA damage from a chemical weapon attack, like mustard gas in WWI. :skull_and_crossbones:

Something similar can also be a side effect of painkillers, though I don’t recall which ones.

It’s a scary thought DNA damage can be passed down.

But we are just beginning to understand autoimmune issues that seems to have correlation with mental health issues. We also know there seem to be some correlation with inflammation with depression, and even gut bacterial having correlations with depression.

For someone who has those autoimmune issues, an elimination diet can really help them.

Case in point.

This is not the first time I’ve noticed it. If you use they as your default 3rd person singular pronoun, you may end up using it even when you are trying to refer unambiguously to a person whose gender is known to you. Come on, people! :wall:

1 Like

A publisher is not a Kinkos. Penguin Random House rejects far more books than it accepts, and it does not treat all points of view equally. It does not publish works of Holocaust denial or phrenology. It has standards, and it’s reasonable for employees to argue that Peterson does not meet those standards. After all, he has suggested that gay marriage might be a plot by cultural Marxists, that women wearing makeup in the workplace is “sexually provocative”, that trans women aren’t women because they’re not “capable of having babies”, that women cannot handle truth, and that transgender activists are comparable to mass-murdering Maoists. He peddles debunked scientific theories and dangerously dodgy diets. I have gone through his work myself and shown that he is a crackpot, whose writing is devoid of basic reasoning and full of wild unsubstantiated claims. When Pankaj Mishra wrote a critical review of Peterson’s work in the New York Review of Books, Peterson called Mishra a “prick” and said he’d “slap [Mishra] happily”. The things he says are often false, prejudiced and dangerous. What possible obligation does a publisher have to publish the ravings of bigots?

1 Like

hahaha jordan peterson ahahah total xanarchy

Nice strawman you got there man. Sure they’re not obliged, but 4 million people were interested in reading his previous book. Capitalism goes brrrr.

3 Likes

The desperation to discredit JP by the left has only made him a bigger star. People already see through the incredibly ridiculous strawman arguments they have presented as his.

At a company town hall meeting, some employees were reportedly in tears as they described how Peterson had radicalized people in their lives.

This is beyond silly. The more outraged people get and even actually crying…the more people will buy his book and read it. I can’t see how normal human beings can read about people crying at a meeting over a book and think this is normal behavior.

5 Likes

He’s classical liberalism. He’s also a bit of an odd chap. But Far Right my arse.

8 Likes

Which of the points are strawmen?

Yeah, well, that’s the thing. Shouldn’t a good capitalist say okay I’ma take my business elsewhere and keep doing that until they all reject him and then say okay I’ma found my own publishing house and sell handmade copies on the street for $0.25 or whatever until he has enough money to buy a fancy printing press?

Or is Random House taxpayer funded (moreso than any other big business that can take advantage of convenient tax rules)?

He has more than enough money to self-publish, and the interwebs could distribute his book faster than any traditional store or lemonade stand ever could.

1 Like

Now who’s doing strawmen?

The article only mentions “right” in the political sense once, in this paragraph:

We should hope for more revolts like the one against Peterson, and the one that occurred when Simon & Schuster dropped racist provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos. Of course, there are strategic calculations, because a huge part of the conservative “brand” is the feigning of persecution. If book contracts are canceled, rightwingers will claim that they are being silenced for expressing “disagreement”, when the truth is that private parties are simply declining to financially reward noxious views. The best solution is for publishers to not offer contracts to war criminals and transphobes in the first place, but this is unlikely to occur, because profit-seeking companies find it hard to turn down bestsellers. (We will soon see whether any of the Big 5 publishers can resist the windfall that would come from publishing Donald Trump’s presidential memoir.)

1 Like

That being published is a human right. That’s just diverting the perspective that is: Peterson has a product to sell and the publishing house (the capitalist in my message) sees a way to make money off it.

1 Like

Isn’t it implied in the characterization of the publisher’s refusal as censorship?

My understanding is that the publisher is not refusing to publish, so what is characterized as censorship is rather the totalitarian attitude of a minority of employees who demand that the whole house conforms with their arbitrary choice of what is publishable and what is not.

5 Likes

Care to address any of the specifics? They’re laid out above.

I was thinking childish. Crying at a meeting to not publish the book sounds like what a 5 year old would do.

2 Likes

It’s funny how people here trying to silence critics of JP are the same ones on other threads claiming they respect all free speech. Why is it not free speech when the employee expresses concern with the content of JPs book? You just call it cancel culture then you can silence anyone you want?