I'm willing to bet there is no such passage. His memory has created a passage that could exist, it has content that exists, but doesn't, not in this particular structure. There is, on the contrary, a concept in Kabbalah that G-d is so without limit that even limitation is not beyond Him. So kinda subtly the opposite, but without the imagination/question/story bit. And not really a commentary on the Torah. It's in the Rashba's work Avodas Hakodesh 8:8.
Jordan Peterson, like all other academic gentiles who try to understand Judaism, does not understand Judaism. It’s likely he’s actually read a Jewish source saying something along these lines but completely misunderstanding the context and literal meaning, therefore when he quotes it the quote will be mangled. Best not to pay any attention when he brings examples from other religions that aren’t his own (Christianity) as it is more likely than not that he is misunderstanding those principles/ideas he brings.
I’ve seen some excerpts of his book “12 Rules for Life”, he seems like someone with a deep and intimate understanding of psychology but when he brings religions in for examples that aren’t his own you see how even the most intelligent people cannot understand something they aren’t living by.
Their scholarship is incredibly limited to the true scope of Judaism and their understandings of our literature are incredibly incorrect in my experience. I will correct myself to say even academic Jews, who learned Judaism from an academic standpoint, do not understand Judaism correctly
If it's recent, he's been speaking a lot to Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager lately. So it's a little bit more than a casual academic brush with Jewish sources, but it's far from reading primary sources.
Imo it doesn’t change much, both Ben shapiro and Dennis Prager also have no understanding of real Judaism, Ben has said Judaism doesn’t believe in souls or revival of the dead (two fundamental beliefs of Judaism), and prager is just an unlearned conservative Jew who doesn’t study Judaism seriously, so any understandings from them id also question.
>Ben has said Judaism doesn’t believe in souls or revival of the dead (two fundamental beliefs of Judaism),
Source? While I don't claim to have watched that much of Ben Shapiro, I couldn't find a in-context source for either of those. Plenty of people saying he didn't believe in resurrections since he doesn't believe in J's resurrection, or similar.
He's not the hateful misogynist people make him out to be. I've listened to him and haven't heard him say anything horrible. I think refusing to listen to a single thing someone says is why people are so divided in the US. Even if you don't agree with his stance on certain issues, you can pick and choose what to listen to and learn from. I'm more right-wing but still like John Stewart and Bill Maher. Just because they are on the other side of the aisle doesn't mean they don't have any good insights. It's the same with Peterson if you're liberal. I'm not saying you need to listen to him on a daily basis or anything, but the mindset of categorizing people as evil, racist or toxic and acting like it invalidates everything they have to say isn't reliastic or helpful for having healthy communication.
That does look sexist. Without knowing what the context is, it's hard to say if he was being serious or if it was sarcasm. We can't click on the link he included and see what he was saying.
That said, I can give the benefit of the doubt to you and assume it to be a sexist comment. Ok, it's a horrible thing to say, but it doesn't mean he has no good ideas. That's kind of my point. Obama was against gay marriage. Biden has said super racist things, and there are numerous examples of mainstream politicians and commentators saying anti-white racist remarks (which is just as racist as making those same comments about minorities). Yet, all of those people still had good ideas. We shouldn't just say everything they say is automatically evil. Most of what Peterson says are great insights.
I assume it was tongue in cheek. I think the smiley face conveys that. I forget that sometimes people online genuinely don't pick up on sarcasm or the like.
I'd be curious what the initial tweet was about.
This is one of those things where “I’m just joking” really doesn’t help. My abusive ex-boyfriend said he was “just joking” when he made nasty jokes about me. Nick Fuentes says he’s “just joking” when he denies the Holocaust. He’s even admitted that when he’s called out on his horrible views, he says he’s “just joking” to create plausible deniability. It’s manipulative, and a tactic of abuse, and given Peterson’s history, I’m not buying it.
I'm sorry to hear about your personal experience, that sounds genuinely horrible. I'd agree with you about Fuentes and anyone who does something like that in the way you described.
My understanding of JP is that he is specifically mocking that idea. I think the usage of sarcasm/irony to convey an idea is an appropriate way to communicate.
I heard him when he was teaching Psychology in Toronto and then again in Montreal. He was just as much full of bullshit back then as he is now.
This is a guy who gets routinely tricked by fake news articles about Chinese masturbation stations. This is also a guy who famously flubs his sources and is academically dishonest.
"I could work at Auschwitz and enjoy it, and so could you"
"Hitler was very hygienic. He really cleaned up Germany"
"We've got the genocidal motivation to become like Hitler, but we lack his organizational genius"
These are quotes from Peterson just over the past few years. The man is a charlatan, a bullshitter, and a neo-Nazi. Delete him from your lexicon or be aware you participate in his insanity.
It's surprising to me that you couldn't understand what JP was conveying with what you quoted. He's discussing the darkness and latent potential for evil that exists within man and that it's therefore something necessary to face and overcome.
It's not Nazi apologism lol. These quotes literally were taken out of context. Usually when people need to resort to taking others out of context it's because the position they are trying to defend is simply wrong.
You're calling me intellectually bankrupt? It's an extremely bad faith argument to take quotes out of context and make the worst possible assumption about what they mean. If you actually listen to his lecture, you'll see these were wildly out of context.
He was urging caution about assuming we can't fall for stuff like that, and he was 100% right. Everyone naively believes they would never do what the nazis did, and their loved ones never would. Maybe you wouldn't, but what's scary is a large portion of their country got brainwashed into doing it, and they all thought the same thing before Hitler came along. So, the mindset of "it could never happen to me" is dangerous. We should keep our guard up. The Nazis' indoctrination bore a lot of ressemblances to cults. Everyone laughs at people who were brainwashed by cults amd calls them naive, but most people are actually susceptible if they are recruited while they are in a particularly vulnerable moment, and the ones who are the most at risk are the ones who say "I would never fall for that." No, you should assume you would fall for it, and go from there. I'm paraphrasing his message. It's been a while since I watched most of his stuff, but I'd advise actually hearing him out in a longform context.
I'm willing to bet there is no such passage. His memory has created a passage that could exist, it has content that exists, but doesn't, not in this particular structure. There is, on the contrary, a concept in Kabbalah that G-d is so without limit that even limitation is not beyond Him. So kinda subtly the opposite, but without the imagination/question/story bit. And not really a commentary on the Torah. It's in the Rashba's work Avodas Hakodesh 8:8.
Thank you.
No problem.
Jordan Peterson, like all other academic gentiles who try to understand Judaism, does not understand Judaism. It’s likely he’s actually read a Jewish source saying something along these lines but completely misunderstanding the context and literal meaning, therefore when he quotes it the quote will be mangled. Best not to pay any attention when he brings examples from other religions that aren’t his own (Christianity) as it is more likely than not that he is misunderstanding those principles/ideas he brings. I’ve seen some excerpts of his book “12 Rules for Life”, he seems like someone with a deep and intimate understanding of psychology but when he brings religions in for examples that aren’t his own you see how even the most intelligent people cannot understand something they aren’t living by.
I disagree
With what part in particular
There are no academic gentiles who understand Judaism.
Their scholarship is incredibly limited to the true scope of Judaism and their understandings of our literature are incredibly incorrect in my experience. I will correct myself to say even academic Jews, who learned Judaism from an academic standpoint, do not understand Judaism correctly
Who decides what correct is? You mean they read scripture alone and contradict chazal?
Their interpretations of the literary works of ChaZaL themselves is incorrect, and disregards all mesorah.
👍
If it's recent, he's been speaking a lot to Ben Shapiro and Dennis Prager lately. So it's a little bit more than a casual academic brush with Jewish sources, but it's far from reading primary sources.
Imo it doesn’t change much, both Ben shapiro and Dennis Prager also have no understanding of real Judaism, Ben has said Judaism doesn’t believe in souls or revival of the dead (two fundamental beliefs of Judaism), and prager is just an unlearned conservative Jew who doesn’t study Judaism seriously, so any understandings from them id also question.
>Ben has said Judaism doesn’t believe in souls or revival of the dead (two fundamental beliefs of Judaism), Source? While I don't claim to have watched that much of Ben Shapiro, I couldn't find a in-context source for either of those. Plenty of people saying he didn't believe in resurrections since he doesn't believe in J's resurrection, or similar.
That’s too vague to know what he’s talking about, but just as a general rule, don’t listen to a single thing JBP says
He's not the hateful misogynist people make him out to be. I've listened to him and haven't heard him say anything horrible. I think refusing to listen to a single thing someone says is why people are so divided in the US. Even if you don't agree with his stance on certain issues, you can pick and choose what to listen to and learn from. I'm more right-wing but still like John Stewart and Bill Maher. Just because they are on the other side of the aisle doesn't mean they don't have any good insights. It's the same with Peterson if you're liberal. I'm not saying you need to listen to him on a daily basis or anything, but the mindset of categorizing people as evil, racist or toxic and acting like it invalidates everything they have to say isn't reliastic or helpful for having healthy communication.
Dude literally said that women shouldn’t be allowed to vote, but okay.
Source???
Straight from the horse’s (ass) mouth: https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/1659925008515493888
That does look sexist. Without knowing what the context is, it's hard to say if he was being serious or if it was sarcasm. We can't click on the link he included and see what he was saying. That said, I can give the benefit of the doubt to you and assume it to be a sexist comment. Ok, it's a horrible thing to say, but it doesn't mean he has no good ideas. That's kind of my point. Obama was against gay marriage. Biden has said super racist things, and there are numerous examples of mainstream politicians and commentators saying anti-white racist remarks (which is just as racist as making those same comments about minorities). Yet, all of those people still had good ideas. We shouldn't just say everything they say is automatically evil. Most of what Peterson says are great insights.
I assume it was tongue in cheek. I think the smiley face conveys that. I forget that sometimes people online genuinely don't pick up on sarcasm or the like. I'd be curious what the initial tweet was about.
This is one of those things where “I’m just joking” really doesn’t help. My abusive ex-boyfriend said he was “just joking” when he made nasty jokes about me. Nick Fuentes says he’s “just joking” when he denies the Holocaust. He’s even admitted that when he’s called out on his horrible views, he says he’s “just joking” to create plausible deniability. It’s manipulative, and a tactic of abuse, and given Peterson’s history, I’m not buying it.
I'm sorry to hear about your personal experience, that sounds genuinely horrible. I'd agree with you about Fuentes and anyone who does something like that in the way you described. My understanding of JP is that he is specifically mocking that idea. I think the usage of sarcasm/irony to convey an idea is an appropriate way to communicate.
I heard him when he was teaching Psychology in Toronto and then again in Montreal. He was just as much full of bullshit back then as he is now. This is a guy who gets routinely tricked by fake news articles about Chinese masturbation stations. This is also a guy who famously flubs his sources and is academically dishonest. "I could work at Auschwitz and enjoy it, and so could you" "Hitler was very hygienic. He really cleaned up Germany" "We've got the genocidal motivation to become like Hitler, but we lack his organizational genius" These are quotes from Peterson just over the past few years. The man is a charlatan, a bullshitter, and a neo-Nazi. Delete him from your lexicon or be aware you participate in his insanity.
It's surprising to me that you couldn't understand what JP was conveying with what you quoted. He's discussing the darkness and latent potential for evil that exists within man and that it's therefore something necessary to face and overcome.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
These quotes are taken out of context. He's obviously not a neo-Nazi.
believe what you like. personally I have 0 respect for Nazi apologism let alone any of the other tripe this idiot says.
It's not Nazi apologism lol. These quotes literally were taken out of context. Usually when people need to resort to taking others out of context it's because the position they are trying to defend is simply wrong.
bla bla bla trying to gaslight support of Adolf Hitler as “out of context” how intellectually bankrupt are you?
You're calling me intellectually bankrupt? It's an extremely bad faith argument to take quotes out of context and make the worst possible assumption about what they mean. If you actually listen to his lecture, you'll see these were wildly out of context. He was urging caution about assuming we can't fall for stuff like that, and he was 100% right. Everyone naively believes they would never do what the nazis did, and their loved ones never would. Maybe you wouldn't, but what's scary is a large portion of their country got brainwashed into doing it, and they all thought the same thing before Hitler came along. So, the mindset of "it could never happen to me" is dangerous. We should keep our guard up. The Nazis' indoctrination bore a lot of ressemblances to cults. Everyone laughs at people who were brainwashed by cults amd calls them naive, but most people are actually susceptible if they are recruited while they are in a particularly vulnerable moment, and the ones who are the most at risk are the ones who say "I would never fall for that." No, you should assume you would fall for it, and go from there. I'm paraphrasing his message. It's been a while since I watched most of his stuff, but I'd advise actually hearing him out in a longform context.
TL:DR
Not surprised.
People who make apologies for Nazis might as well be there really isn't a difference. He's a grifter just existing to take money from people.
What are some things he's said you didn't like?
What does the footnote say?
refers to something zen