The honourable Jordan Peterson addresses the “not real communism” fallacy

[Momorider]

1 minute ago, Wildboer said:

He's a psuedo-intellectual shyster with a big vocabulary. The dude can comprehend abstract concepts about as well as a lobster on Prozac.

He has about 5x your IQ poop dink   

[Wildboer]

5 minutes ago, Momorider said:

He has about 5x your IQ poop dink   

Nothing proves someone is an idiot more than you calling them smart.

[motonoggin]

5 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Nothing proves someone is an idiot more than you calling them smart.

[NaturallyAspirated]

13 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Nothing proves someone is an idiot more than you calling them smart.

:lol: 

Neal

[racinfarmer]

I'd love to have the chance to sit in one a lecture or whatnot by Jordan.  Great guy.  

[motonoggin]

 This is what a court had to say about Zoidberg B. Peterson:

The situation here is even more remote.  It is difficult to see how Dr. Peterson’s technique of assessing the personality of a person for his private consulting business satisfies the Daubertfactors to make it admissible for a forensic purpose.  Dr. Peterson provided no evidence that his technique of personality assessment has been properly tested for the purpose it is being used for here, detecting when an agreeable person may falsely confess to the police.  All Dr. Peterson could say is he hired university students to try and fake the personality assessment and they couldn’t do it.  That is not scientific validation.  There has been no peer review of the technique of the Unfakeable Big Five.  Dr. Peterson provided no rate of error or accepted deviations.  In fact, he claimed, without any proof, that his assessment tool cannot be deceived while other personality assessment techniques can be.  Finally, there is no evidence that the Unfakeable Big Five is generally accepted as a forensic tool.  It was designed and is used for Dr. Peterson’s private consulting clients to hire employees.

[89]                    I would also add that Dr. Peterson’s evidence on the appellant’s personality does not meet the Mohancriterion of necessity.  A properly instructed jury is quite able to assess the credibility of ordinary individuals in stressful situations (R. v. Turner (1974), 60 Cr.App.R. 80 at 83 (C.A); R. v. Dubois (1976), 30 C.C.C. (2d) 412 at 414 (Ont. C.A.); R. v. Weightman(1991), 92 Cr.App.R. 291 at 297 (C.A.)).  The fact that the appellant was emotionally distraught when he confessed was not human behaviour likely to be outside the experience and knowledge of the jury (R. v. Burns, 1994 CanLII 127 (SCC), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 656 at 666).  I fail to see why a jury cannot assess credibility during a police interrogation in such circumstances, given they have the assistance of a video recording of it, the testimony of the witnesses to the interrogation, the submissions of counsel and instructions from the trial judge.

[90]                    While not necessary to decide this appeal, I would close discussion of the judge’s ruling on Dr. Peterson’s proposed expert evidence by expressing concern about the decision to attempt to proffer Dr. Peterson as an expert witness on areas that he was clearly not qualified as he had no background whatsoever regarding police interrogations. This decision unnecessarily complicated and delayed this trial and is proof positive of the concern expressed in D.D. (at para. 56) of the detrimental impact on the justice system of attempting to use dubious expert opinion. 

https://www.canlii.org/en/mb/mbca/doc/2014/2014mbca70/2014mbca70.html?autocompleteStr=2014+MBCA+70&autocompletePos=1&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAIUGV0ZXJzb24AAAAAAQ&offset=2087

[Momorider]

19 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

Nothing proves someone is an idiot more than you calling them smart.

 

13 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

More  

[Momorider]

3 minutes ago, racinfarmer said:

I'd love to have the chance to sit in one a lecture or whatnot by Jordan.  Great guy.  

He has a speeking tour, look it up, his stuff does sell out fast

[NaturallyAspirated]

10 minutes ago, racinfarmer said:

I'd love to have the chance to sit in one a lecture or whatnot by Jordan.  Great guy.  

Watch the Pangburn video with he and Matt Dillahunty. 

Neal

[racinfarmer]

6 minutes ago, Momorider said:

He has a speeking tour, look it up, his stuff does sell out fast

June 17th, from the looks of it.  

 

Just now, NaturallyAspirated said:

Watch the Pangburn video with he and Matt Dillahunty. 

Neal

I'll check it out.  

[motonoggin]

On the proposed area of how personality traits can make a person more prone to suggestion, Dr. Peterson’s opinion was based on an online personality assessment that the appellant had completed called “the Unfakeable Big Five.”  The Unfakeable Big Five purports to scientifically measure the five recognized areas of a person’s personality (agreeableness, stress tolerance, conscientiousness, openness and extraversion).  The Unfakeable Big Five was devised by Dr. Peterson for his private consulting business and is used as a tool for hiring employees. 

 

[DriftBusta]

Oh ffs.  Motos back on his rants on two forums and 9 threads.

[Rod]

1 hour ago, Wildboer said:

Everything you've ever called socialism has not been socialism. They're literally all authoritarian dictatorships. End of story. 

Socialism and communism ARE authoritarian dictatorships  you can’t have one without the other 

[Rod]

50 minutes ago, Momorider said:

He has about 5x your IQ poop dink   

I think it’s more 

[motonoggin]

6 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

Socialism and communism ARE authoritarian dictatorships  you can’t have one without the other 

Wrong. Sort yourself out bucko

Edited May 8, 2018 by motonoggin

[Rod]

1 minute ago, motonoggin said:

Wrong. Sort yourself out bucko

 

no it’s not wrong. That’s why it’s always been enforced through authoritarianism. 

[motonoggin]

2 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

 

no it’s not wrong. That’s why it’s always been enforced through authoritarianism. 

Communism, by definition, is stateless.

An authoritarian state is therefore, by definition, disqualified from being communist, no matter what they call themselves.

[Rod]

4 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

Communism, by definition, is stateless.

An authoritarian state is therefore, by definition, disqualified from being communist, no matter what they call themselves.

Then it’s time to update your dictionary. Because you’ll never force people into poverty and to give up their property without authoritarian force. Your fantasy society will never exist. 

[motonoggin]

North Korea is a democratic republic because it says so in their name.

 

[Rod]

1 minute ago, motonoggin said:

North Korea is a democratic republic because it says so in their name.

 

And communism cannot exist without authoritarianism 

[motonoggin]

Just now, Rod Johnson said:

Then it’s time to update your dictionary. Because you’ll never force people into poverty and to give up their property without authoritarian force. Your fantasy society will never exist. 

I mean, capitalism does that now. It seems like you're just upset when people who call themselves communist do it.

[motonoggin]

Just now, Rod Johnson said:

And communism cannot exist without authoritarianism 

False.

[Rod]

3 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

I mean, capitalism does that now. It seems like you're just upset when people who call themselves communist do it.

It’s significantly less than communism though. That’s why most people tend to migrate to western society. Communism led to the death of millions and millions of people 

[Rod]

4 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

False.

Show me the thriving stateless communist country then 

[motonoggin]

1 minute ago, Rod Johnson said:

It’s significantly less than communism though. That’s why most people tend to migrate to western society. Communism led to the death of millions and millions of people 

Lmao. Communism didn't do that, an authoritarian state did that.