About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

14 Replies to “Jordan Peterson interlude”

  1. Free people don’t like being forced into anything, the more you try to force a behavior the more they resist.

  2. Any admission of “unconscious bias” is the equivalent of self-condemnation.

    No sane person would ever agree to such a thing. It is a form of intellectual suicide.

  3. For Jordan’s inquisitor to pretend that Peterson’s response was not “concise” makes a mockery of the entire proceeding. A trained professional noting the inadequate scientific basis for something which rational people would find both invasive and tantamount to forcible “reeducation” is about as concise of an answer that anybody could ever hope for. The video is an exercise in evil run rampant.

    • Unconscious bias training? And how one would assure that people who give this training do not have “unconscious bias” themselves?
      In fact I may have seen such “unconscious bias” in a guy who questioned Dr. Peterson’s, perhaps he needs some training?

      • Unconscious bias training? And how one would assure that people who give this training do not have “unconscious bias” themselves?

        Fecking brilliant, kathy! Brava, lassie. It’s this sort of turnabout that must become—not just the proverbial “fair play”—but de rigueur if the West has any hope of surviving Cultural Marxism.

        At every opportunity, turn their Newspeak and doubletalk against them with a vengeance.

        From the link:

        The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought — that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc — should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words. Its vocabulary was so constructed as to give exact and often very subtle expression to every meaning that a Party member could properly wish to express, while excluding all other meanings and also the possibility of arriving at them by indirect methods. This was done partly by the invention of new words, but chiefly by eliminating undesirable words and by stripping such words as remained of unorthodox meanings, and so far as possible of all secondary meanings whatever. To give a single example. The word free still existed in Newspeak, but it could only be used in such statements as ‘This dog is free from lice’ or ‘This field is free from weeds’. It could not be used in its old sense of ‘politically free’ or ‘intellectually free’ since political and intellectual freedom no longer existed even as concepts, and were therefore of necessity nameless. Quite apart from the suppression of definitely heretical words, reduction of vocabulary was regarded as an end in itself, and no word that could be dispensed with was allowed to survive. Newspeak was designed not to extend but to diminish the range of thought, and this purpose was indirectly assisted by cutting the choice of words down to a minimum.

        As should be clear, the West is well on its way to this curtailment of thought.

        • This paragraph you posted put me in mind of a “discussion group” I attended about a decade ago. It was a woman’s circle with participants young and old from many walks of life. Really, the only things we had in common were all being female and relative geographic proximity.
          One young woman in the group had such a limited vocabulary that she could not express herself in a coherent way. Her language was absolutely foul but I believe those were some of the few words she knew. It seemed at times that she couldn’t even think because she didn’t have the words to do so.
          Newspeak would have been proud of her.

          • It seemed at times that she couldn’t even think because she didn’t have the words to do so.

            Newspeak would have been proud of her.

            Why does this bring to mind nearly the entire genre of (c)rap “music”?

      • You’re displaying evidence of a resistance to conform to “reality” which is far more dangerous. By now we all know the Progressive’s view is the “natural” view … um, hater.

        • By now we all know the Progressive’s view is the “natural” view … um, hater.

          You say “hater” like it’s a bad thing.

          There are things which not only are worth hating but that must be hated. Islam and Communism are right at the top of that proverbial “Christmas list”.