I have also purchased Dr Jordan B Peterson's book, The 12 rules. It's very good, though I sense someone with a real feel for the subject could find some inconsistencies which sort of hover around the periphery of my thoughts while I'm reading it, but I just could not pin them down if you ask me!
It's very easy to read because I listen to Jordan in so many videos that it's just like he's in my head speaking to me!
I've also brought the Russian guys book The Gulag Archipelago, as suggested by Peterson.
This chap Philip Dodd seems to have a chip on his shoulder regarding Jordan Peterson! So I think I found my first anti Jordan contender, In the sense that it is a lead to follow up to find views which are contrary or at least disagree with Jordan. "You Irritate Me" Jordan Peterson And Philip Dodd Interview Section Get Heated!
I found a bit of time today to read some more of 12 rules for life. Got on to the bit where Jordan tries to discover what "Good" is. He couldn't really say, however I like his thinking, he took the idea that if you can't identify good, well you can probably identify bad. And he did, from Auschwitz and the Russian versions, and the Nuremberg Trials, (I think it was something the judge said) Peterson realised that "bad", or "hell", was where torture was used, as an art form, as something to degrade, for no good reason, (if there ever is a good reason) .. And I discovered something new about these torturing people.... They actually tortured children! I never heard that before. So that's it, he's found the real bad the real hell, and then worked back to find what is the opposite of that? And that is, to everyday try and make something better, try and improve something. It won't take you to to Nevada, heaven, not necessarily a good feeling, it's hard work, you work at it and you just do good, and by default become good. I realise that's a much too simple explanation will try and explain it better later!
Oh I forgot the main piece, what I actually came here to tell you.I believe Jordan started out as a socialist, but he came disillusioned with it, just as much as he became disillusioned with the church. I think he described the problem with socialism as the fact that the socialists are no better than the capitalists in that they're only interested in the money, they just want to distribute it differently. Again this is a much too simple description of what he said, I've only read it once, and I need to Mull it over and pick out the bones! Nevertheless, it's very interesting.
I suppose I knew that some people were stupid? I don't mean that in a derogatory way, I mean it as an observation. But I never knew that people couldn't do something... That just doesn't compute with me. So I can understand why neither the left or the right are addressing it. But how would you address it? I suppose the first thing is to study these people below the 83 percent IQ and see what they do do, see if they can work under supervision? I don't know really it just odd, I don't get it..
It's also very interesting his observations on how IQ is increasing and how jobs of increasing IQ are becoming more common and how this will move jobs out of the reach of more and more of the population. It occurred to me that this lack of people with a high enough IQ, means that we will need to import more people from other countries. So in a way it will go some way to address the poverty-stricken third world. I wonder if thats the solution, send the lower IQ people to the third world!
Jordan usually says that 10% of the population have IQ's too low for them to do any meaningful work. This brings an inherent problem as society has to then support them, forever! I say bring in some gene editing. Give them a cognitive boost with a bit of Crispr gene editing and slap one of those cranial brain stimulator things on them when they go to work!!
The left doesn't address it because it counters the "everybody is equal" viewpoint, when clearly everybody isn't equal.
I find it odd that people don't get my "voting is futile" hypothesis, but I digress.