You must log in or # to comment.
I think Rogan was the smarter one.
Actually, I know Rogan is smarter. Rogan had a craft as a fight commentator; that’s a skill that takes knowledge in both tv presentation and fighting. And I bet you rogan easily talk for a full day about Pride FC without repeating a point.
JP knows how fill an essay up to four paragraphs.
looks like he came down from a benzo-booze binge.
So, I haven’t heard much about JP in a while,and now I’ve heard a podcast and this. Is it just coincidence or is there a reason we’re talking about him again? The podcast mentioned he’d gone on some show debating Christianity with 20 atheists. It went as you might imagine, where jp argued that atheists were Christian because they didn’t understand the thing they say they don’t believe in. Idk. Anyway – any other reason I’m hearing about him again?
It’s mostly just that. The whole thing was a mess. The atheists were told they would be debating a Christian and prepared as such, but he won’t define himself as a Christian. So much time is wasted dancing around that. They had to change the title from Christian debates to Jordan Peterson debates. On top of that he will barely engage properly, saying things like he won’t entertain a hypothetical because he wouldn’t allow himself to get in that situation in the first place. Just generally not acting in good faith.
he was seen crying while have an emotional outburst arguing someone recently.
After not receiving the fried Jordan cries in his car.
define cries
Whom is car?!
Sealioning (source) + whataboutism. A very cheap method of trolling and exhausting the opponent of the argument which relies on the victim being unaware of sealioning and they’re being sealioned. It’s frustrating seeing JP fans think this is proof he’s a genius. it’s like Ben Shapiro, another rightwing “influencer” who constantly speaks fast and gish gallops on purpose and his fans think he’s a genius for that too
Don’t forget the constant motte and bailey.
That, too. For people who don’t know what that is (source)
The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities: one modest and easy to defend (the “motte”) and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the “bailey”).[1] The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, insists that only the more modest position is being advanced.[2][3] Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer may claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte)[1] or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).[4]
Thanks for teaching me something new!
Also your username is very apt for this thread.
Tankie “intelligencia” power houses use this as well.
My dog is an intellectual powerhouse compared to Jordan Peterson fans.
Lol. I just Googled him and his YouTube channel description reads…
“Join intellectual phenomenon Dr. Jordan B. Peterson for enlightening discourse”
It’s a phenomenon how much he lacks any intellectual capabilities.
with the amount of benzos he took, and coma that gave him brain damage, hes been reduced to only able to respond with emotional outbursts.
My father tried to tell me what a “genius” he is. I told my father point blank, Jordan Peterson is only a genius to morons. He even gave me one of Peterson’s self help books, I immediately tossed it in the trash. Though, in retrospect, I probably should have tried to return it to Amazon and used the money to buy something more worthy of reading, like Chick Tracts. 😂 At least they’re entertaining.
JP is what a smart guy sounds like to meatheads. but a moron to anyone else.
False inductive reasoning combined with butwhataboutism and sealinoning. All designed to exhaust the opponent and muddy the argument. Conservatives love this form of argument.
Analyzing the conversation does not the joke get.
Yeah, I got the joke. I was talking about the inspiration for the joke that made it funny in the first place.
Dragging your opponent into the weeds does not a good argument make
Thanks Yoda
You i thank
I genuinely can’t think of a better example of a modern day sophist than Jordan Peterson.
Yeah, though the “intellectual dark web” may as well be the modern sophists guild
Unrealistic. This is way too coherent. Needs more word salad.
Also he should start crying at one point.
Everything I hate is cultural marxism.
“Colloquialism, motherfucker! Do you speak it‽”
Edit: corrected autocorrect incorrection
The “motherfucker” forced me to hear this in Samuel L Jackson’s voice.
He shoots, he scores!
lol the whole quote was a SLJ reference from one of his iconic lines, so you are right on the money
He is a racist and a bigot
Jordan Peterson is a charlatan
So… A good candidate for the next US president?
He’s Canadian.
That didn’t stop Ted Cruz from running a few years back
TIL. Goddamn it Alberta.
So is that worse?
So a good next us president
deleted by creator
Currently watching a Peterson debate… This is just too perfect.
Reading this increased my blood pressure.
See? That means he won the argument. Checkmate, atheists.
deleted by creator
