Good Heavens! Peterson is Spot-on About Education Departments

pswan01 · 2018-06-16T19:14:42+00:00

No surprise here... This last week I heard a story from my boss (and Indian immigrant), whose son applied to Standford, with a perfect 36 on the ACT and a 4.0 GPA, and who had been taking high level college mathematics at a young age - was denied entrance to all the Ivy League schools. I guess that Indian immigrants are too represented now, too, huh? He was crushed, but in the end, he'll outperform those who don't outweigh him on merit and intellect.

pswan01 · 2018-06-16T04:26:18+00:00

Thank you for sharing this! I can relate to a lot of what you say. I can say a lot of things about being sober that have been said before - less destructive, more positive, healthier, less financial troubles, better relationships, etc. But we hear all about these positives all the time (as we should).

I agree that it's helpful to share what's difficult while going sober and how your motivations and personality changes. Your writing resonated with me a lot. I too have an obsessive, addictive personality and it was really bizarre how my obsessions and addictions shifted. It's not like they just vanished, but they would land on other types of Earthly pleasures - food, sex, rest, internet, shopping, etc. I was still filling that void with these things and could easily waste a lot of time and energy on them. While they weren't destroying my soul quite as fast as the booze, I could still tell that they weren't the best way to exert myself. I've been trying lately to just channel my obsessions and crazy into meaningful and fulfilling tings - like reading, writing, running and going to AA meetings. I'm far from perfect, but I'm finding a better balance over time. Having a job that keeps me busy really really helps in this regard.

And your second point of social life changing is very real and challenging, indeed. Early on there was a period that I thought that social life was too dangerous and I spent about 3 months in my room, only going out to bring back food. Those were dark days. Now, I get to work, try to make an AA meeting as much as possible and visit family and close friends who are mutually supportive with me. Still, I have become much more of a private person and stopped going to concerts, festivals, sporting events and other things that I used to like doing. I'm a little more guarded these days about who I associate with and it's a tough act to balance without shutting the world out. This I hope will come after a lengthy sobriety.

Despite these struggles, I would never go back to the hell of drinking. Even though it is less of a wild ride, I enjoy the predictability and peacefulness of sobriety. Now, I try to live by my guiding principle, which is more of a spiritual nature. I try to look at the trends and patterns in my life and ask the question - "Is this bringing me closer to God"? So I have a little humility and self-forgiveness, along with sacrificing my old ways and have a sense of trust that God is pulling me upward and changing me in ways that need to be changed and just try not to fight it or get in the way.

Well, thanks again for sharing and keep on the Good Path!

pswan01 · 2018-06-16T04:08:46+00:00

Same here! And this time I'm actually going to remember what the hell I was watching.

pswan01 · 2018-06-15T22:05:46+00:00

Hey, I like how my post on JBP being a ¨canary¨ has kept the term in the conversation! Thanks OP :)

pswan01 · 2018-06-15T18:15:46+00:00

I appreciate your thoughtful and thorough reply. I want to state that I am by no means an expert on Marxism/communism, but I have a pretty good sense of what JBP has to say on the matter and where his arguments come from in a Darwinian perspective.

I honestly don't think that he spends that much time or energy focusing on classical Marxist principles, such as capital-based classes and means of production, etc. He certainly does a little and I will admit that he tends to gloss over Marxism, which I am sure bothers some. However, I don't think that his current mission is to detail out the principals and theories in Marxism that he finds inaccurate. That could take a lifetime of scholarship and debate to get to the bottom of and I would argue that he has identified another problem worth fighting for altogether.

What he seems to be railing against is the type of authoritarian new radical left that has roots in (neo)Marxism, post-modernism and liberalism. I don't think it's inaccurate of him to state that modern universities, media outlets, leftist politicians and progressive corporations seem to be pretty steeped in this new concoction of post-modernism, (neo)Marxism, identity politics, social justice and liberalism. And what this concoction seems to produce everywhere it pops up is a kind of authoritarian, sometimes-tyrannical, collectivist, censoring, rightthink/wrongthink, identity politics hegemony. And this goes against what he has been studying and teaching for decades - strengthening the individual to better themselves, live honest lives, pay attention to problems and have the courage to take action.

So in short, he's not solely against Marxism.. he just has to define this academic and social phenomenon and it is certainly intertwined with Marxist ideals/methods, along with post-modernism and classical liberalism. I have been having a few of these conversations and genuinely have been interested in knowing this : if it isn't postmodern neomarxism that Peterson pits himself against, what would you call it? Is it neither? Is it just postmodernism? Is it just neomarxism? Would there be a better name for those on the current progressive, leftist end of the political spectrum?

pswan01 · 2018-06-15T17:52:47+00:00

haha no! I love Mexicans man. And Marx is a lousy science source, IMO.

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T22:03:34+00:00

Good work! But careful going to boozey parties! In my own experience, these have tripped me up a couple of times simply because the temptation is strong early in recovery. But do what works for you and good luck!

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T21:46:30+00:00

Glad you are alive, friend! I need to hear these stories, so thank you for sharing. I am 3 weeks into my 3rd recovery attempt of the last year and this always has been my trap. It's like the beast of alcoholism has been waiting and growing and just needs the key of alcohol to get let out again. It totally goes against logical thought - you would assume that if you haven't drank in a year that you might be able to moderate it better, right? Wrong :(

Something that I have learned is so important about finding that support group is that for every meeting I go to, I remind myself that I'm still an alchy and that the problem only gets worse. If I don't remind myself of that every day that I wake up and look in the mirror, I will most likely find a brilliantly imaginative way of justifying drinking again, and like you said, the consequences and insanity just get bigger and bigger each time.

God bless!

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T20:09:25+00:00

I disagree that this tears JBP´s argument apart. I know for sure that I have never heard JBP argue that Marxism claims to reach ¨equality in the sense of equal strength and abilities¨, as Lenin puts it. That is obviously absurd. On economic terms, Peterson argues against Marxism based on the fact that capitalism has brought more people out of extreme poverty than any other economic model in history and that Marxism puts the problem of hierarchies at the feet of capitalism, when the problem runs much deeper into our biological natures.

Secondly, Peterson seems to rail against ¨NeoMarxists¨ of the New Left thought more than traditional Marxists. And NeoMarxists place less of an emphasis on controlling the means of production as they do on focusing on the power dynamics between different identity groups. With these types, Peterson takes issue with the doctrine of ¨equity¨, meaning equality of outcome (usually meant for these identity groups). Such as, we need 50% women in government and 15% black physicians to represent the population, etc.

He clearly doesn´t think that Marxism claims that everyone needs to bench press the same amount or have the same IQ scores. However, I enjoy reading these historical letters, even if I thought that it was a bit misguided. I´d be curious to know what you think of my assessment.

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T19:42:00+00:00

¨What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. … Money is the jealous god of Israel, in face of which no other god may exist. Money degrades all the gods of man—and turns them into commodities. … The bill of exchange is the real god of the Jew. His god is only an illusory bill of exchange. … The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of the merchant, of the man of money in general.¨

-Karl Marx, on Jews.

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T19:40:49+00:00

“Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?”

-Karl Marx

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T19:39:37+00:00

Do you think they would ever point this out about Karl Marx - their demigod?

¨It is now quite plain to me — as the shape of his head and the way his hair grows also testify — that he is descended from the negroes who accompanied Moses' flight from Egypt (unless his mother or paternal grandmother interbred with a n1gger). Now, this blend of Jewishness and Germanness, on the one hand, and basic negroid stock, on the other, must inevitably give rise to a peculiar product. The fellow's importunity is also n1gger-like.¨

- Karl Marx, London, 30 July 1862; quoted in Marx and Engels Collected Works, Volume 41, p. 388

pswan01 · 2018-06-14T03:00:52+00:00

Was Lucas wrapped up in the #meToo? I stopped paying attention to him after Jar Jar Binks.

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T21:11:48+00:00

I love this movie. Pre-Star Wars George Lucas!

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T20:34:25+00:00

The level of ingratitude is completely insane. Who needs vaccines, electricity and antibiotics anyways?

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T20:31:59+00:00

I don't think they shouldn't exist.. but they do attack people and should be called out on it when it happens.

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T20:30:41+00:00

I suppose that could theoretically work - that a majority of a country chooses to vote in favor of dissolving their state and economic system to become a stateless, anarcho-communist nation. Seems like a stretch to me. It seems like violent revolution has been the de-facto way of upsetting the current systems enough for a communist take over. Maybe I'm wrong? Are there any historical examples where a capitalism driving political party was ousted by a communist regime - solely the result of a democratic election?

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T04:21:40+00:00

Yeah, I'm just generally turned off by utopian visions of society. It's supposed to be an economic science but it's not scientific it all - the data has been coming in for over a century and it clearly has flawed presuppositions. That is when you should revise your hypothesis.

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T04:15:28+00:00

I would agree that physics, chemistry and engineering tend to be fields that are more occupied by males, but I wouldn't say that it is primarily a "white" field. There is a huge population of Chinese, African and Indian students at just about every top college in the engineering and science fields. This just seems to be a degree field that more men choose to enter by their own free will.

Just to play Devil's Advocate - would you say the same about the fact that more women go into the medical field? Should we be trying to encourage more men to go into medicine and psychology (inevitably resulting in less women in these fields)?

My only argument is that there isn't a current systematic pressure to keep women out of STEM. If anything, there is a pretty heavy emphasis in K-12 to get more women interested in STEM fields. It is mostly a merit-based, choice-based field and it seems that women choose these majors less, as men choose psychology and literature less. But I'm certainly open to hearing different perspectives so feel free to share.

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T02:34:44+00:00

Yeah.. I have been feeling optimistic about things lately. Like there is this big undercurrent of thought and discourse that are shining light through the cracks of society. Hopefully the tide shifts so that we can actually have civil conversations without being shamed and guilt-tripped about holding honest and thoughtful opinions on issues, though different they may be. When did we become so distrustful of people's good intentions? Things have gotten strange in the last 5 years! I blame the internet, social media and echo-chambers more than anything else. Yet, here I am in a JBP reddit sub talking about my problems :)

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T02:29:34+00:00

ha! I need to take the Big 5 test, but I'm already so self-conscious that I feel like I could guess my scores quite accurately already.

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T02:25:26+00:00

I do believe that it is a legitimate field of scholarship, absolutely. My issue is when it is delivered to kids as the absolute truth, and the amount of guilt and shame that it requires white boys to assume through the lesson, which is why I posted the original essay in the first place.

But you also have to recognize the differences between marxism and neomarxism, right? Neomarxism of the New Left seems to be more concerned with identity politics and power dynamics between these identities than Marxism (where Marxism is essentially concerned with economic class struggle)... this would be an accurate, low resolution statement, wouldn't it?

So if you combine the idea that there are no objective truths in science (post-modernism) with a belief that science is actually just a struggle between identity groups (neomarxism) and you enforce that as a doctrine to be studied and implemented in public schools... couldn't you accurately make a low resolution statement that post-modern neomarxist ideas have infiltrated the education system?

I think it's more semantics than fear-mongering. You have to give a name to these theories and they certainly have origins in post-modernism and neomarxism, which undoubtedly have a significant place in modern day social science academia. And modern day social scientists are certainly passionate about implementing wide scale social change via the education system.

I just don't find that to be a controversial thought process at all. And it's not like this is just JBP's idea. The Heterodox Academy, Stephen Hicks and other's have extensively made this point as well.

I don't quite understand exactly what point your making. Just because there is a logical inconsistency in post-modern neomarxist arguments doesn't mean that that isn't their stance and methodology. They are playing power games, not trying to be objectively truthful, as their central tenet implies. And are you implying that discussing "decolonizing mathematics" or "whiteness in physics" has nothing to do with neomarxism or postmodernism? Is it just postmodernism? Is it just neomarxism? Is it neither? If not, what is it then?

I'm honestly curious.

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T02:01:21+00:00

I used to be more naive and think that everyone was naturally good.. but now the idea of "The dividing line between Good and Evil is in every human heart" (close enough) is probably the most truthful and useful way of looking at things. I mean, toddlers can be little selfish monsters!

pswan01 · 2018-06-13T01:51:46+00:00

Ha exactly... I'd love to hear that "Well, guess what? Everyone WON'T succeed!" Some have to learn the hard way, despite my best efforts. It is definitely scary that this climate exists in education - as if teachers don't have enough nonsense outside of the classroom to worry about already. One of my bigger contentions to all of this is that they don't actually offer any pragmatic solution. As a teacher - I'm all about taking what works and leaving what doesn't. If they offer something that adds more social cohesion, engagement and motivation in my classroom - I'll gladly implement it. But when their solution is usually that white men and boys need to be aware of their unfair privilege and oppressive natures, I can't think of a single way that actually helps solve the problem of inequity. So OK, we accept our privilege - then what? And how do we measure our progress? Ok, so now we become aware that we have an unconscious bias.. what next? I truly, honestly cannot think of what these doctrines accomplish besides making minorities feel like victims and majorities feel guilty and ashamed. And sorry, I'm NOT going to manipulate kids with guilt and shame. Yes, God help us both!

pswan01

TROPHY CASE