Category Archives: Prof. Jordan Peterson

Revisiting Jordan Peterson testimony to Canadian senate committee on C 16.

Posted on by

Yes, this item was posted a day or two ago as well. But it is a very important and content rich item rife with apparent irony.

The second half of the video deals with the base ideology of the proposed bill Vs. evolutionary biology. And as one listens, at least anyone over 35 or so, one may remember that the background noise of growing up, certainly in the 70s and maybe even the 80s and 90s, was the political left constantly hooting that right wing people are anti-science and too stupid to understand evolutionary biology.

The Scopes Monkey trial was sold as left wing pro reason and science people Vs. right wing knuckle dragging religious Christians that wanted to enforce a literalist Biblical view of the origins of humanity.

This was not true then, but even If it was, in the end it is the left that not only insists we abandon Darwin, but just as the left did in the Soviet Union, actually criminalize it. Or at least criminalize any actions or speech that would derive from operating under a scientific view of evolution, biology, and its specifics on sex and sexual reproduction.

As a child, a relative once told me that “stupidity is not the most common substance in the universe. Irony is.” But as ironic as this looks, the left has always been in essence a totalitarian religion. The left teaches that all reason or facts or history that shows leftist/post modern foundations to be unsound are not reasons to abandon that foundation, but in fact reasons to abandon reason and science.

A proof that the mask is coming off the Marxist basis of Canadian government agencies: Jordan Peterson loses grant

Posted on by

Jordan Peterson loses government grant for being politically incorrect on an unrelated issue.

(I cannot think of a better example of how communism works than that)

TORONTO — University of Toronto psychology professor Dr. Jordan Peterson has had a federal research grant application denied for the first time in his long and distinguished academic career.

And he’s certain that the rejection from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the government agency that supports post-secondary research, is linked to the controversy surrounding his stand on gender-neutral pronouns such as “zie” and “zher,” and the modern notion of gender as being fluid.

That his application was also rated so poorly is telling, he said, meaning that if the proposal had just missed the mark, it might have been a credible critique, but the proposal failed abysmally.

Julia Gualtieri, spokeswoman for the council, said in an email Monday that grants are awarded through a merit review process, and that “past funding is not a guarantee of further funding.” Names of the peer review committee members will be publicly posted once all applicants have been fully notified, she said. […]

Well before Peterson erupted on to the public consciousness last fall with his YouTube videos questioning the current push for genderless pronouns and gender equity, he was recognized as a respected scientist.

He taught at Harvard University for six years.

His so-called “h-index,” for instance, is considered exceptional.

The h-index is the result of physicist Jorge Hirsch’s attempt to measure the quality of scientists, not just the number of times he or she was published.

In other words, both productivity and impact are measured.

According to Hirsch, after 20 years of research, an h-index of 20 is good, 40 outstanding; Peterson’s score is 49. His total citation count is almost 8,000.

For those not familiar with the brilliant Dr. Peterson, here is a video of a lecture he gave recently in Ottawa, which in today’s climate, thanks to the resurgent totalitarian left, is a brave position to have, but really really should’t be.

Can any reader of this site, find an example of leftist and even openly Marxist profs with 1/4 of the credentials but no problems getting grants?

H/T M.

Jordan Peterson Q&A part I from the Ottawa lecture March 11 2017

Posted on by

For those that have not seen it, the actual lecture, to which the above video is the first part of the Q&A, is below:

This should be a link to a really important comment under these videos at Dr. Peterson’s own mirror of these videos by a grad student shocked at how deep the subversion of education is by Marxists.

In case the link doesn’t work, and it doesn’t seem to all the time, here it is below:

Rob Parker10 hours ago (edited)
It is heartening to see a university professor opposing post-modernism. I am a post-grad student studying International Relations, and we are having post-modernism, Derrida, Foucault, Saussure, Lacan and others of that ilk forced down our throats, in mandatory classes. I am currently procrastinating from writing an essay on how post-structuralism is useful and positive (rather than useless, vapid, empty parasitic nonsense).
This is after my morning lecture on how Lacan is useful when looking at international politics. I am damn angry at this attempted indoctrination. An International Relations degree should teach us about International Relations, yet I’m reading Lacan discuss Oedipal urges and sexual fetishism, and Foucault on… I don’t know! (I’ve been reading Foucault for 6 months now and I still don’t know what he’s talking about). The post-modernists, I feel Lacan in particular, write obscurely to hide the emptiness of their work, and nobody understands it truly but pretends they do to seem intelligent!
I am also incensed in how post-modernists attempt to take their non-theory status and inability to prescribe anything and pretend this weakness is a strength.  In my own time, outside of university work, I am forced to read up on issues such as the South China sea, Chinese economic slowdown, military-industrial complexes and US foreign Policy, etc- such things that were advertised as core to the course! My dissertation will be on power balance and the US-China, yet I am forced to read nonsense nonsense nonsense. I used to think that accusations of marxism in academia were a little extreme, but now I know that it is spot on.
Post-modernism, post-structuralism, critical theory. BLEH! I agree with Prof. Peterson, post-modernism comes out of Marxism and is dangerous to the West. It is parasitic and only seeks to break down, to reduce things. It is intellectual entropy.
In the book ‘A road less traveled’, Peck portrays God as an ideal for man to approach, and man must live life constantly seeking to improve, seeking to approach the perfection that is God. Conversely, the Devil is entropy, the leeching of energy from the universe and constant destruction, breaking down, deconstruction. I am coming to see post-modernism as an embodiment of this entropic devil, it does not seek to produce, to improve, to reach perfection,
it only seeks to destroy. If Adam or Eve was a post-modernist, we wouldn’t have reached cavemen level technology! Sorry to write such a long rant, apologies for the difficult to read sentences, I have been reading Foucault all day and my standards for readability have dropped correspondingly. Professor Peterson, from a student who does not want to be indoctrinated, thank you for helping me to find a way to express my revulsion with post-modernism. Your work provides a welcome counterweight to that of establishment academics. I didn’t want to be pulled into this academic struggle, I wanted to learn about Chinese economic slowdown and US military preponderance and so on, but they have wormed their way into all of social sciences. Therefore, I’m grateful for your talks, to arm myself and insulate myself against their ideology!