• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Jordan Peterson

Hey, haven't you heard that statistically the millenials are the most intelligent generation ever?:rofl2::glum:
They're certainly very facile at regurgitating information, in much the same manner as performing seals. None of that means they're smart.
 
Saw a professor in a zombie movie (Patient Zero) who reminded me of Peterson (not an insult), will do a review.
 
...millenials are the most intelligent generation ever? ..

How do they work that out ? They haven't been around long enough.

How to induce a complete mental breakdown in the millenniums ?

Blow up all the cell phone 'lollypop' towers.

'Help me, babes, my phone shows 'no signal'. it's been like that for ten minutes'

'Sorry babe, guess this is it, Armageddon. It was nice knowing you'.

INT21.
 
Thing is, he is usually right.
What people need to do most is some deep introspection. First step in solving a problem is to know what the real problem is.

Better first lock away all the sharp knifes and put away that bottle of cyanide you were keeping for a rainy day.

Having plumbed the depths, you then have to work out how you are going to climb back out of the pit.

But first ('Goddamn it', as he might say) STOP DIGGING.

That could be the hard part.

INT21.
 
They're certainly very facile at regurgitating information, in much the same manner as performing seals. None of that means they're smart.

As I understand it, IQs have consistent improved generation by generation in "The West", I don't know if there are any signs of decline, yet. It's thought to be better nutrition and healthcare, as well as 100ish years of compulsory, free, education. I imagine much of the rest of the World is experiencing a similar "improvement". If you believe in IQ tests, and Jordy certainly appears to, then you should probably accept this. I say "probably" as the jury is very much out for me on what constitutes "intelligent" and I don't know how seriously I take IQ tests. Also people tend to believe "intelligence" is people thinking the same things they do. Old farts pissing and moaning about the young is old as the hills and almost as old as the old farts themselves.

I am not calling you an old fart, I am fast becoming one myself.
 
As I understand it, IQs have consistent improved generation by generation in "The West", I don't know if there are any signs of decline, yet. It's thought to be better nutrition and healthcare, as well as 100ish years of compulsory, free, education. I imagine much of the rest of the World is experiencing a similar "improvement". If you believe in IQ tests, and Jordy certainly appears to, then you should probably accept this. I say "probably" as the jury is very much out for me on what constitutes "intelligent" and I don't know how seriously I take IQ tests. Also people tend to believe "intelligence" is people thinking the same things they do. Old farts pissing and moaning about the young is old as the hills and almost as old as the old farts themselves.

I am not calling you an old fart, I am fast becoming one myself.
Well, here's the thing. I guess I'm basing my worldview on a limited set of data - i.e., the few young people I know. They have all excelled at school and university, yet seem to know and understand very little about the world. This isn't just because they're young and have had limited experience of the world... I seem to recall knowing more when I was a similar age. This may be because I've read a LOT more books than they have. My youngest nephew has a masters degree, yet he doesn't read books at all. You'd expect someone with academic excellence to be a bit bookish, but no.
I am quite willing to hold my hands up and admit to being an old fart.
 
..I am not calling you an old fart, I am fast becoming one myself. ..

We had noticed.
 
Isn't the IQ test supposed to make allowances for things like ethnic grouping and education levels ?

INT21.
 
The only criticism I can level against Peterson is that his advice on improving ones situation doesn't appear to take into consideration that any change you make will have an effect on the person you live with and the people around you that you interact with.

INT21
 
Regardless of IQ scores, any society which develops a total dependence on one single commodity is bound for failure.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Then (3) you have a rudderless younger generation of (mostly) males who are seeking an Obi Wan Kennobi to ideaslise/idolise and seems, almost anyone will do providing they look like a father/ grandfather and can spout a few generalisations (cf Jeremy Corbyn).
..and what of people closer to his own age, with already settled lives and life experience, who are interested and engage with his theories and opinions, even if they reserve the right to disagree with him?

As I've said, I like him. I don't always agree with him, but he makes his points well, and vitally invites the reader to make their own mind up. This is where he varies from Dawkins' approach who often has the tone of "if you don't agree with me you're clearly a fool upon whom I will waste no more time."

Peterson doesn't claim to have all of the answers, or a sure-fire formula to magically repair X, Y or Z, but he has well-thought-out suggestions, which you are invited to take or leave. As I said, much of what people get from Peterson is a reflective exercise.
 
..and what of people closer to his own age, with already settled lives and life experience, who are interested and engage with his theories and opinions, even if they reserve the right to disagree with him?
I know several such.
 
As I understand it, IQs have consistent improved generation by generation in "The West", I don't know if there are any signs of decline, yet. It's thought to be better nutrition and healthcare, as well as 100ish years of compulsory, free, education. ...

As a general effect evident for the population overall, it is not true that IQ's / 'intelligence' (as some sort of definitive factor(s) or capability) have been demonstrated to be universally increasing.

As an effect evident within more specifically defined sub-populations (as delimited geographically; demographically by cohorts; by age; by timeframe; etc.) it is true that IQ scores (ratings derived from normed IQ test instruments) have been shifting.

The general label for this phenomenon is the Flynn Effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

This was first noted circa 40 years ago, when it was discovered that later groups taking older IQ tests scored higher (as a group) than groups who'd taken the old tests back when they were the latest / current standard.

It's critical to bear in mind that IQ scores are relative rankings mapped onto a presumed normal (Bell Curve) distribution. It's the collective test performances of the entire group that are used to establish the mean / average, after which individuals' scores are plotted in relation to the mean thus established.

It's generally accepted that there's been a positive shift in the mean for certain populations of children for which there's sufficient data to make comparisons. The situation is much murkier for adults.

It's also generally accepted that this positive shift - if / when evident - is probably influenced by improvements in (e.g.) general health, general nutrition, more cognitive / intellectual stimulation occurring earlier, and improved access to - and quality of - educational opportunities.

Speaking broadly, and solely in the context of those studies based on substantial evidence ... The shift isn't universally apparent, and it's not uniform across the range of IQ scores. There are cases where IQ scores for a given population or sub-population have been stable or even declined. The bulk of the positive shift seems to consistently pertain to the lower reaches of the scores' range. The most apparent upward shift occurs among the lower scores, and the most apparent non-shift or decline occurs among the higher scores. Phrased another way - the most demonstrable aspect of the rising mean / average is that it represents improved performance in the 'relatively low' range rather than improved performance across the entire range. Phrased even more simply - the mean is floating upward because the lower scores are trending higher, not because all scores are trending higher.
 
...Regardless of IQ scores, any society which develops a total dependence on one single commodity is bound for failure...

This was brought into full view when the British monopoly of goods produced during and shortly after the Industrial Revolution was gradually eroded as other countries began producing the same products but with a much cheaper labour force.
Something that the latest 'Made in America' movement does not yet appear to be understanding.

In my home town we were very dependent upon the textile industry and engineering. We made many different machine tools. all world famous in the day.

But now most of it is gone. The foundries gone.

All moved to countries with lower labour costs.

Ironic thing is we also made the machines that caused this shift. And sold them to the people who caused the shut downs.

This wasn't a failure of IQ on behalf of the people. It was simply the advancement of technology worldwide.

INT21
 
There is a certain conceit involved in IQ tests. Namely that the people who design them actually know what they mean by intelligence, and that they can capture a "snapshot" of it by getting other people to take their tests. In effect every person who designs an IQ test secretly believes they are the smartest people alive, and their IQ test will vindicate that. In fact IQ tests have a very chequered history if you dig a bit. Fraud, racism, sexism, you name it.
 
As a general effect evident for the population overall, it is not true that IQ's / 'intelligence' (as some sort of definitive factor(s) or capability) have been demonstrated to be universally increasing.

As an effect evident within more specifically defined sub-populations (as delimited geographically; demographically by cohorts; by age; by timeframe; etc.) it is true that IQ scores (ratings derived from normed IQ test instruments) have been shifting.

The general label for this phenomenon is the Flynn Effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

This was first noted circa 40 years ago, when it was discovered that later groups taking older IQ tests scored higher (as a group) than groups who'd taken the old tests back when they were the latest / current standard.

It's critical to bear in mind that IQ scores are relative rankings mapped onto a presumed normal (Bell Curve) distribution. It's the collective test performances of the entire group that are used to establish the mean / average, after which individuals' scores are plotted in relation to the mean thus established.

It's generally accepted that there's been a positive shift in the mean for certain populations of children for which there's sufficient data to make comparisons. The situation is much murkier for adults.

It's also generally accepted that this positive shift - if / when evident - is probably influenced by improvements in (e.g.) general health, general nutrition, more cognitive / intellectual stimulation occurring earlier, and improved access to - and quality of - educational opportunities.

Speaking broadly, and solely in the context of those studies based on substantial evidence ... The shift isn't universally apparent, and it's not uniform across the range of IQ scores. There are cases where IQ scores for a given population or sub-population have been stable or even declined. The bulk of the positive shift seems to consistently pertain to the lower reaches of the scores' range. The most apparent upward shift occurs among the lower scores, and the most apparent non-shift or decline occurs among the higher scores. Phrased another way - the most demonstrable aspect of the rising mean / average is that it represents improved performance in the 'relatively low' range rather than improved performance across the entire range. Phrased even more simply - the mean is floating upward because the lower scores are trending higher, not because all scores are trending higher.
Nicely put.
 
Mythopoeika,

..My youngest nephew has a masters degree, yet he doesn't read books at all. You'd expect someone with academic excellence to be a bit bookish, but no. ..

Could be that he actually does read a lot but it is all related to his subject.

If you have gained a Masters (congratulations to him, kudos) you must have done some pretty heavy study.

INT21.
 
Mythopoeika,

..My youngest nephew has a masters degree, yet he doesn't read books at all. You'd expect someone with academic excellence to be a bit bookish, but no. ..

Could be that he actually does read a lot but it is all related to his subject.

If you have gained a Masters (congratulations to him, kudos) you must have done some pretty heavy study.

INT21.
He did study hard, yes. He only reads what he needs to get the qualifications. No reading for pleasure for him. His mum (my sister) is the same.
If I mention something (usually something well-known or in the news) to them that they haven't read about, I have to painstakingly explain it all from the basics. I even have to explain some pretty basic jokes to them.
 
Mythopoekia,

..I have to painstakingly explain it all from the basics. I even have to explain some pretty basic jokes to them.

I find the same thing with some of my family. even my wife at times.

I will mention something that is of interest to me. She will ask what I'm getting at. Then, after the explanation, will shrug and say 'so what ?'.

Won't even listen to any jokes I pick up on the net. 'Oh, another bit of shit from the net. don't want to hear it'.

I often wonder if I married the wrong person.

INT21;)
 
I think he's a bit mad and I certainly don't agree with much of what he has to say, but as you say, he's intensely interesting.

Toronto in April is on the cards, but they need to wade through the details.

Peterson says he's downloaded half a dozen of Zizek's books and is ready to research.
 
I’ve and taught many masters and PhD students and my impression is that young’uns know far less about the practical world than my generation, to the point that they can sometimes come across as quite silly. When it comes to passing exams and IT they’re fantastic but it feels like they missed out on all that outside stuff that leads to the development of a kind of worldliness. Although I was lucky as a kid I played around with chemicals and electricity, burnt myself with acid, blew things up, grew crystals, ate unidentified things from trees, build dens and tunnels, and grew tadpoles into frogs. It was a health and safety nightmare by today’s standards.

I’m not sure about Jordan Peterson TBH. I found his 12 Rules book close to unreadable, but then again I am a bit of a thicky. I’m distrustful of the way some of his followers behave and revere him so religiously, a bit like some atheists do with Richard Dawkins.

On the other hand he seems to be providing some sort of framework of living for disenfranchised young men which I think is much needed at the present time. This is probably why feminists and the hard left hate him so much…for daring to suggest that young straight (white) men could possibly be anything but privileged oppressors.
 
drbastard,

..I found his 12 Rules book close to unreadable, ..

You may find his YouTube presentation based on this book more accessible.

INT21.
 
Although I was lucky as a kid I played around with chemicals and electricity, burnt myself with acid, blew things up, grew crystals, ate unidentified things from trees, build dens and tunnels, and grew tadpoles into frogs. It was a health and safety nightmare by today’s standards.
Check, check, check, check, check, check, check, check. Add 'Made bows and arrows with turkey-fetched steel-broadhead arrows (from The Archer's Craft by Hodgkin )', makeshift matchlocks, hand-wrestled moray eels and received wound from exploding bullet (don't ask).
 
Back in the day one could go to the local chemist shop and ask the man behind the counter for a bottle of Hydrochloric acid. (99%) and he would provide it, no questions asked.

You just can't get the supplies these days, At least not the bits you need to potentially kill yourself and take out half the town.

We made our gunpowder from the soot off the back of the chimney, sulfur and an ingredient I won't list here.

ah, the good old days.

I do miss those two fingers on my left hand though.

(Joking)

INT21 ;)
 
On the other hand he seems to be providing some sort of framework of living for disenfranchised young men which I think is much needed at the present time. This is probably why feminists and the hard left hate him so much…for daring to suggest that young straight (white) men could possibly be anything but privileged oppressors.
Yes indeed. That is why he is so popular.
 
Yes indeed. That is why he is so popular.
Suicide is still the single biggest killer of young British men, and as for Ireland (where 80% of suicides are men) and NI, it's grim (google is your friend). So anyone who provides some hope and clarity to young and middle aged men might be applauded for it.
 
Back
Top