Dr. Jordan B Peterson - Professor and clinical psychologist

Uncle Gizmo

Uncle Gizmo

Founding Member
#23
#23
The pathology of ideological possession
This is such an insight into all of the shall I say idiots on Facebook and other such places! Now I have a better idea of what I am dealing with, now I know why I see an argument and say "NO" don't bother. I thought I was becoming jaded, unwilling to argue with people. Now I think I understand, you've got ideological systems fighting at each other not people. In other words you cannot enter into an argument with somebody. You are not arguing with the person you are arguing with a whole belief system.


Jordan's take on Oppression


Jordan says here people are tribal by Nature
Jordan says here people are tribal by Nature, now is this another angle on offensiveness? Like, people taking offence at what you say. Now this is the only example of that immediately springs to mind, if I was black, then I could say the N word, is this because I would be in my tribe? Someone outside the Tribe saying it is offensive.


The psychological utility of religion

If I understand this correctly, it's exactly what I've been thinking for a long time, yes religion has been corrupted by man, but it's also very good for Society, everybody meeting at the church, drawing Society together. If scientists destroy it, discredit it, then what do we replace it with? I'm writing a science fiction story and I have invented my own religion which I call the "Congregation" it brings all religions together, and also scientists and unbelievers. When I unbelievers I'm not implying I'm a Believer! Although......


 
Jon

Jon

Administrator
Staff member
#26
#26
There's nothing better that watching logic trump irrationality. Something of a Roman gladiator battle about it.
 
Uncle Gizmo

Uncle Gizmo

Founding Member
#27
#27
Jon said:
He has a course called Future Authoring Program
https://www.patreon.com/jordanbpeterson
Click to expand...
From this time index in this video:-


Jordan hints at some of the technology in the authoring program. I'm beginning to think it's something I need to look at. Something of note, (I'm not sure I'd have to check it out), but I think by becoming a patron, you get access to the authoring program at a better rate? I need to double check that ,but that's the impression I got.
 
Uncle Gizmo

Uncle Gizmo

Founding Member
#28
#28
I've just listened to this interview
as a podcast on my phone. (Headphones) very handy way of absorbing information while you're doing the washing up, etc! Can make you very popular with the wife over Christmas. Mind you, you've got remember to take the headphones off when she's speaking to you! One of the comments in the YouTube version says something like "have you ever watched a two and a half hour interview and wished it were longer?" That's exactly my thoughts. I have always been interested in psychology and evolution and in this interview Jordan B Peterson pulls it all together. Peterson's podcast feed is here (RSS Feed):- https://feeds.blubrry.com/feeds/jordanbpeterson.xml I used "Simple Podcatcher" on my Android phone. It has the ability to download them for offline use.

Like I said I've always been fascinated buy this sort of thing, I'm no expert, just picked up little bits and pieces which would best be described as old wife tales for the amount of Truth they probably contain.

However I know what Jordan B Peterson is saying is correct. I know this because not only does he speak the truth, but if you look at his YouTube feed, there's no one offering a substantial challenge to what he said.

I said that because this is what I glean from this particular podcast. I've watched 4, and I am just ready to start number 5 there are 59 audio podcast all together! I'm going to be a little while. I've had a few hours of listening to Jordan, and I'm not fed up yet! Actually the contrary is true, I am becoming very interested in learning as much as I can about this subject.

My observations so far:-
I think Jung and Freud although friends, fought over certain aspects of their discoveries. Like I said I'm a beginner at this, but my impression is that Jung thought that the human psychology had evolved. He also thought there was a universal psychology, and in this video of him speaking late in his life he mentioned one particular observation where two patients over a period of years appeared to have the same experience.

The case that that obviously made an impression on him!

He didn't believe there was anyway these 2 patients could have been in contact with each other and this and other things confirmed his belief that there was a universal psychology.

Peterson also explains how stories evolved, some in Egyptian times but how all of the stories must have built on what came before, in other words an "evolution of stories". How some stories evolved into the Bible, insistently "Bible" means a collection of books! Jordan is fascinated how the learned men put together such an effective collection of stories in the books that made up the Bible.

He explains in detail the meanings of these stories, he shows how the stories evolved, how they came from fundamental truths about humans. Anyway I'm not going to say anymore! If you're going to watch/listen to anything of Jordan B Peterson listen to this!
 
Jon

Jon

Administrator
Staff member
#29
#29
Great post Uncle. I've never heard Jung speak before. Never even knew they had him on video! Thought perhaps he was before our era.
 
Uncle Gizmo

Uncle Gizmo

Founding Member
#30
#30
Jon said:
Never even knew they had him on video!.
Click to expand...
There's at least one more YouTube video which I've seen, it was quite poor quality though. This one, very good quality, and I was impressed, the quality of his conversation. You could sense the statue of the man.
 
Bee

Bee

Founding Member
#31
#31
Jung has largely been debunked by academics however. In fact, I had a conversation with my ex-next-door neighbour on Christmas night about this very topic. He's a Professor of Psychology and runs his own business doing personality type testing and has worked with the likes of Isabel Briggs-Myers, and Dr Meredith Belbin.

I wish I could remember what he said... but we'd both had some bubbly at that point and it was late in the evening!

I will try to get him to join the forum - very interesting man and I'm sure he'd have a lot to say.
 
Jon

Jon

Administrator
Staff member
#34
#34
Ah I remember now. So if academics have debunked Jung, why did this academic go work for a debunked philosophy?

Was it his dirty secret?
 
Bee

Bee

Founding Member
#37
#37
I'm saying that his thinking when he was fresh out of uni with his undergrad degree and no work experience in his chosen field, is different to his thinking 40 years on, with several post grad degrees.
 
Jon

Jon

Administrator
Staff member
#38
#38
Hehe

Edit: Let me add something more substantial...Do you know why Jung is allegedly debunked?

I think all academics can make errors of judgement, even the more experienced ones. That is why psychologists themselves study cognitive biases. Perhaps Jung will be like the butter versus margarine debate.
 
Last edited:
Bee

Bee

Founding Member
#40
#40
Jon said:
Let me add something more substantial...Do you know why Jung is allegedly debunked?
Click to expand...
That was the conversation I was having on Christmas night. From what I recall, it's something to do with the pairings of the indicators. Each pair of indicators is supposed to be the opposite end of a continuum. So to establish your Jungian Type, the Myers-Briggs test evaluates whether you will be:
[E or I] + [N or S] + [T or F] + [J or P].

So for example, you will either be E or I (extroverted or introverted) in terms of stimulus. Psychologists largely agree that E or I is valid to assess because people do tend to either take stimulus from the world outside themselves, or from within.

The next pairing is N or S (Intuition or Sensing). Now the boundaries are a little more blurred. Where does intuition stop and sensing begin? This pairing gives pyschologists difficulty in terms of definition, but also means of assessment.

The third pairing is T or F (Thinking or Feeling). Thinking seems to be straightforward - when handed a problem, do you apply logic, or do you go with your gut feeling? But, Feeling also overlaps with Intuition and Sensing. Now it's getting very muddled - as is the potential for bias and inaccuracy in the testing and results.

The final pairing is J or P (Judgement or Perception). When you consider the problems already thrown up by N, S, and F, adding J and P into the mix muddies the waters further as there is considerable overlap between N, S, F, and P. Whereas J and T also have considerable overlap.

Clearly the Myers-Briggs test has its faults - but the Jungian Types it is based on are the root of the problem.

I also think that it's important to remember that psychology is a relatively new science. Both Freud and Jung were the founding fathers, but as time has passed and more research has been carried out, there is now a deeper/better understanding of the subject. Some of their ideas still have some weight and legitimacy, but there is also a portion of their work which has been superseded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top