Jordan Peterson

He is an extremely effective communicator. He is well read, articulate, and able to take complex ideas and explain them in a way that resonates with a given audience. I truly wish I had his depth and breadth of knowledge as well as his skill in conveying his ideas and defending his positions.

The extent to which I agree or disagree with his ideas is another matter.

Yeah his level and depth of knowledge is like nothing I've seen before. I believe he is definitely a force for good in this world.

Peterson is smart and knowledgeable but he is also extremely depressed and confuses aggression with assertiveness.
He is maybe aware of his shadow but I think his shadow is bigger (when he is on tv at least) than his healthier side.
He is intelligent though and can provide a lot of complex issues in easy to understand language like PTSD.

Infinite wrote:Peterson is smart and knowledgeable but he is also extremely depressed and confuses aggression with assertiveness.
He is maybe aware of his shadow but I think his shadow is bigger (when he is on tv at least) than his healthier side.
He is intelligent though and can provide a lot of complex issues in easy to understand language like PTSD.

You would have to give an example of where he confused aggression with assertiveness.

I think there is a big problem in the western world with people projecting their negative aspects onto others. Some people don't seem to see what is happening when he talks about the radical left. So some may think hes being over the top, including me at one point. However I think he's right, in-fact it's difficult to believe some of the things that are happening, but they are.

For one a guy who is clinically depressed and a psychologist, his ideas of depression and how to get over it are sure way to show just like everybody else he is unconscious and his aggression toward depression when he cannot do it himself or his daughter's is sort of the reason some people do not like him. BTW, it is also OK not to like him for everything about him. I like some of his stuff esp about PTSD and trauma but he has many blind spots and it is OK to acknowledge that. I am not western but one of the issue there are so many gurus making millions of dollars in the west is precisely your comment - must follow a person blindly. No we are all human, fallible, and full of blind spots and yet genius and great people. both are true for each individual. Peterson is on TV so his are a bit louder than average person.

With his depression it's said to run in the family, meaning it's caused by biological factors, not psychological. It's the same with anxiety, some people are born more sensitive to negative emotions in general.

If you and others don't understand that there are biological causes, separate from psychological causes, then your interpretation of him will obviously be distorted due to your own blind spots.

Septimus wrote:With his depression it's said to run in the family, meaning it's caused by biological factors, not psychological.

Not necessarily, Septimus.

All sorts of things that appear to be genetically passed down are learned behaviours, ie. closer to psychological than biological. If you're the child of one or two depressed people you're unlikely to be a little ray of sunshine yourself, because your environment would not support it.

Candid wrote:

Septimus wrote:With his depression it's said to run in the family, meaning it's caused by biological factors, not psychological.

Not necessarily, Septimus.

All sorts of things that appear to be genetically passed down are learned behaviours, ie. closer to psychological than biological. If you're the child of one or two depressed people you're unlikely to be a little ray of sunshine yourself, because your environment would not support it.

Learned behaviors are real, however some seem to assign too much importance to them. Especially when it comes to serious issues. If both parents were high in negative emotions(neuroticism), then it's likely to be inherited genetics, with learned behaviors maybe being a contributor. He even said himself that he believes the depression that runs in his family is more genetic.

Septimus wrote:Learned behaviors are real, however some seem to assign too much importance to them. Especially when it comes to serious issues.

So what are you proposing? What do you believe is the difference in whether more importance is assigned to a learned behavior versus a genetic predisposition?

Can you provide an example?

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:
So what are you proposing? What do you believe is the difference in whether more importance is assigned to a learned behavior versus a genetic predisposition?

Can you provide an example?

I have spoken to people as well as counselors who believe everything is a learned behaviour, which I believe is wrong, even dangerous. I spoke to a counselor recently and she had never even heard of the Big Five Traits. These are genetic traits. I believe in the nature aspect as well as the nurture aspect.

Their seems to be a connection between far left wing thinking, believing compassion solves almost all problems, and suggesting everything is a learned behaviour.

I agree with you that not all behavior is learned behavior. I also agree that there are plenty of "social constructionists" that promote the idea that every behavior is largely a product of society.

So let's, for purposes of discussion, agree that they are wrong. Why do you believe that it is dangerous?

Septimus wrote:... she had never even heard of the Big Five Traits. These are genetic traits.

I want to be careful with the wording here. "ARE" genetic traits is much different than saying that scientists have found tentative links between the Big Five Personality Traits and certain genes. Scientists have correlated certain genes with certain traits.

The above paragraph is very important. Scientists are not saying that gene X causes the personality trait "openness to experience". They are only saying that they have reason to believe gene X might be related to that personality trait, that it might have some influence on that trait.

This means that even if a person might not have the "openness to experience" gene, they can still learn behaviors that are consistent with this personality trait. Put another way, people can learn to be more extraverted or more introverted, regardless of their genetic markers.

Again, what is your concern? Can you be more specific as to why you think there is a danger? I agree with you that failing to acknowledge the influence of genetics is wrong, but I'm not sure exactly why you think it is a problem.

Septimus wrote:If both parents were high in negative emotions(neuroticism), then it's likely to be inherited genetics, with learned behaviors maybe being a contributor.

If "inherited genetics" are the diagnosis, there's nothing to be done other than see your GP regularly and take whatever meds are currently being touted as the cure. To be sure, you're going to feel much worse for the first few weeks, probably suicidal if you weren't already, but we urge you to stick with the program, because once that passes you'll be zombified to a greater or lesser degree, so you won't care that you're lethargic, gaining masses of weight, and at much greater risk of several potentially lethal conditions. If you feel bad about that, it's safe to increase the dose you're taking until you barely know time is passing. Your GP will always be looking at the computer screen rather than at you, and can prescribe other substances to counteract the side-effects of The Cure.

Occasionally you'll have to see another doctor, who knows all about you because it's all on your country's interlinked medical system. Your original doctor has had to accept a time-limited all expenses paid holiday s/he gets from the pharmaceutical company for recruiting 100 more takers. But above all, DO NOT STOP TAKING YOUR PILLS unless advised by your medical practitioner, or you'll face agitation, anxiety, restlessness, acute insomnia, suicidal ideation etc. viewtopic.php?t=108543, and will probably at some stage have to be admitted to your friendly local nuthouse, where things will get very much worse.

Lambs to the slaughter, just for their rogue genes.

If "learned behaviours" are the diagnosis, a counsellor will question your tendency to look on the dark side of any and every situation, a habit you acquired from your parents, older siblings, and virtually all the people who comprise your/their social world. Your counsellor will question every negative idea you express, simply by paraphrasing. That will make you feel truly heard, so much so that you wonder how your counsellor knows you so much better than all those who "know" you by looking (on a screen) at your medical history.

There is so much POWER in feeling thoroughly known, understood, and seen in an unfailingly positive light by just one other human being. One step backwards and three steps forwards you begin questioning what you (and your family) "know" about their "helplessness" in "this terrible world".

You can choose genetic therefore incurable or learned and can be questioned with a view to feeling better. There are, of course, other methods. The most obvious (on this forum) is nutrition. viewtopic.php?t=72017

RIP, Juriaan.

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:This means that even if a person might not have the "openness to experience" gene, they can still learn behaviors that are consistent with this personality trait. Put another way, people can learn to be more extraverted or more introverted, regardless of their genetic markers.

Yes, based on research and experience I would agree, however some traits more than others and with obvious limits to what can be achieved.

Richard@DecisionSkills wrote:Again, what is your concern? Can you be more specific as to why you think there is a danger? I agree with you that failing to acknowledge the influence of genetics is wrong, but I'm not sure exactly why you think it is a problem.

So without acknowledging genetic traits and believing we are born as blank slates seems unbalanced, even extreme. We are seeing the dangers of it now with extreme ideas on gender identity, some are suggesting even gender behaviours and even sexuality are learned. Without a balanced view how far will this go?

If we are born blank slates, then in theory the slate can be wiped clean. This type of thinking can, and believe it already has been used to justify very bad things.

Candid wrote:If "inherited genetics" are the diagnosis, there's nothing to be done other than see your GP regularly and take whatever meds are currently being touted as the cure.

No it doesn't mean nothing can be done, however there will likely be limits. If someone naturally gets stressed or anxious more easily due to being high in trait neuroticism for example, that doesn't mean types of therapy won't help, like exposure therapy, or simply working to improve their self image or confidence.

Just because something is genetic doesn't mean it's rigid and unmovable like you seem to interpret it as.