Social media and discussion - A Musky odour - The Bear and Badger

Armitage_Shankburn

I'm guessing his interest in achieving peace in Ukraine is motivated mostly by his interest in interest rates, supply chain and so on.

Yossarian

Hmm.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/oct/06/elon-musk-twitter-takeover-delaware-court

Seems that Musk wanted Twitter to drop the lawsuit before he would pay, which certainly sounds sus to me.

regmcfly

Musk remains king cunt and snake oil merchant of highest order. His cult is strong.

RedDave2

Not sure who has the worst overly defensive fan base- elon musk or Jordan Peterson? There's probably about a 95% cross over.

Yossarian

I’d say Musk’s is worse as Peterson’s fan base, much like Peterson himself, is far more easily ignorable.

poprock

Fucking terrified me to see a mate sharing Peterson on social media lately and saying he’s really worth checking out.

LivDiv

Defending Peterson is far worse which instantly makes his fans worse.
Musk has at least done something with his life. I'm not some fanboy but he put money into electric cars and space stuff that moved forward industries that had become sluggish.

Peterson is pure leach.

RedDave2

I think Elon does seem quite smart (not withstanding his troll shit) where as Peterston is just word salad backed by assumptions which he dresses as 100% confirmed and agreed by all "truths" which are usually anything but.

Think I hate the JP fan boys more. They really love to fawn over him. Also he's done so many video clips he feels much more omnipresent.

Gremill

poprock wrote:

Fucking terrified me to see a mate sharing Peterson on social media lately and saying he’s really worth checking out.

Point him at this:

LivDiv

Gonna be honest if I was a true believer I wouldn't get more than a minute into that video.
Its not a great approach to change people's minds.

In fact I got a few minutes in and found the guy to be really fucking annoying.

Gremill

I get that - he's not for everyone, but the entirety of the video is actually quite well balanced and objective (as far as these things go).

That said, if you are at the point where you take anything that the Nazi-adjacent, right wing, transphobic, Ben Shapiro admiring JBP says seriously then you're probably beyond help.

LivDiv

I was a bit tough there but it seems to be a thing with these response videos.

The wrongun (Peterson, Musk, whoever) presents themselves as having a a calm, sensible discussion. Then responses are all "woooaaaah check THIS guy out" LOLOLOLOL.
Its no wonder the argument is being lost.

That guy comes across as someone I would be trying to get rid of at a party.

Unlikely

Gremill wrote:

poprock wrote:

Fucking terrified me to see a mate sharing Peterson on social media lately and saying he’s really worth checking out.

Point him at this:

I am an hour into this and he seems to be deconstructing things the other man says quite effectively. I don't really know who the other man is so maybe he should do a very long video in response.

djchump

FWIW, I’ve not watched that debunk video, but I don’t think it’s worth bothering with the whole “I will point-by-point deconstruct arguments this pseudo-philosophy tool bag has been making”, because that makes an initial mistake of treating whatever the toolbag is saying in the first place as anything of merit worth analysing, and opens up as a “dialogue” whereby the fan can reply with “oh well, but here he says this, and they’ve misinterpreted point X here and blah blah blah”.

IMHO I think more useful is point at the group behaviour and characteristics of the toolbag’s fans and ask “these are the types of people that believe that shit - this is where those beliefs lead you - do you really want to be part of that group?”.
So if someone’s really getting into Star Wars, point them at a load of hardcore Star Wars nerds and ask “is this what you want for your future? Are these ‘your people’?”

GurtTractor

The world is very complex, and our lives are very finite and our time incredibly precious. So usually I try to briefly but accurately generalise anything that isn't very important to me, so I can focus on the stuff that is.

JP is one of those people that I have no interest in and no reason to look into in the first place, what I've heard and seen of him leads me to believe that's he's a fairly typical 'intellectual' self help grifter type, though I wouldn't tend to assert that too much without a bit more research. If I had a friend that was getting sucked into it I'd have to arm myself more I guess.

This is fucking good tho -

LivDiv

@chump
Yes

Brooks

Feel like guy like that is a just a symptom of general alienation under late capitalism. Also his daughter trying to kill him with weird diets or whatever is uniquely funny.

GooberTheHat

djchump wrote:

FWIW, I’ve not watched that debunk video, but I don’t think it’s worth bothering with the whole “I will point-by-point deconstruct arguments this pseudo-philosophy tool bag has been making”, because that makes an initial mistake of treating whatever the toolbag is saying in the first place as anything of merit worth analysing, and opens up as a “dialogue” whereby the fan can reply with “oh well, but here he says this, and they’ve misinterpreted point X here and blah blah blah”.

IMHO I think more useful is point at the group behaviour and characteristics of the toolbag’s fans and ask “these are the types of people that believe that shit - this is where those beliefs lead you - do you really want to be part of that group?”.
So if someone’s really getting into Star Wars, point them at a load of hardcore Star Wars nerds and ask “is this what you want for your future? Are these ‘your people’?”

I'm pretty sure that's a point made in the video, that it's a tactic by these grifters to say any old simple shit that sounds logical/reasonable with only a cursory glance, but requires detail time-consuming criticism to debunk.

djchump

Aka “Brandolini’s Law”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini's_law

Which when used in bulk is the “Gish Gallop”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

Unlikely

I'm just watching it because I find it entertaining tbh.

RedDave2

djchump wrote:

Aka “Brandolini’s Law”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini's_law Which when used in bulk is the “Gish Gallop”: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

Gish gallop sums up Petterson for me. He throws out big words, followed up by assertions that really aren't. I imagine it makes it hard to argue with him (I'd also point to it being much modern JP. His earlier stuff you can agree or disagree with but you can see his point. Now it's waffle to sound impressive)

There is a funny clip of a debate between Jordan and Sam Hartis about religion where Harris calls him on it where at the end of a particularly well dressed word salad, Harris rightly points out it is unlikely either him or any of the viewers are any further enlightened on Pettersons position.

It's a load of hot air, and simpletons applaud it in the best modrrn example of the emperors new clothes

Kow

It's pretty bad when Sam Harris is pulling you up on making sense.

LivDiv

I watched that McAfee thing on Netflix last week.
People thought he was some kind of brilliant mind as well. Turns out he was a pathetic crack head with serious paranoia.

RedDave2

Kow wrote:

It's pretty bad when Sam Harris is pulling you up on making sense.

What's the beef with Harris?

Kow

He's a worse dick than Peterson. Same grifting shit, though.

RedDave2

I find most of his anti religion stuff watchable. His moral stuff has too much of a pro US slant to be taken seriously though. His idea that facts always point to a correct outcome always has a simple and generally pro west view alright. No doubt he falls into the same bucket as Peterson but I guess I never found him as grating. I can get his logic even if I don't agree.

He also doesn't have a kermit voice which really helps.

Kow

He famously wrote about why Islam is objectively an evil religion, without actually talking to any Muslims of course. He also says Israeli violence against Palestinians is justified, while Palestinian violent is not. He exists to sell justification to right wingers, to tell them their racism and bigotry can be justified scientifically. His science conveniently points to the answers they want to hear. He's a cunt.

RedDave2

I remember the Islam thing coming up (the famous Ben affleck clip) but never deep dived. Didn't know about the Israel thing but can't say I'm too surprised given his very pro USA view on what is morally ok and not. Certified cunt by the sounds of it so.

Minnesänger

He’s also a shill for some absolutely horrid racists under the guise of just exploring topics without condoning the other members viewpoints - he’s just “Mr Logic” and only cares about things like first principles and yada yada.

Except he softballs and misses easy logical fallacies when talking to massive racists so either he is:
1. Not actually a particularly strong logician
2. A massive racist aiming to indoctrinate and play to his audience under the guise of free thinking

Either way he’s a dangerous cunt.

Kow

I'd say he's primarily a grifter. He's just found an audience that will make him money, and will protect them and his income stream. Doesn't really give a shit who gets hurt along the way.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories