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

[Rod]

9 minutes ago, f7ben said:

Nope

Cause you can’t wow!

[Momorider]

2 hours ago, Zambroski said:

Ironic post...again.  Are you trying to piss off the volcano?

 

I kinda like you so far.  Do more here.  

 

Bad idea he is like Taintrider level retarded  oh well you will have another imbecile to pick on 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Momorider

[Rod]

29 minutes ago, Momorider said:

Bad idea he is like Taintrider level retarded  oh well you will have another imbecile to pick on 

 

[Wildboer]

1 hour ago, Rod Johnson said:

Except he always uses facts and evidence to back up his claims  

He considers Prozac Lobsters "facts and evidence" For the most part he wildly misinterprets or  misrepresents other people's work to suit his narrative. You just don't see it because you agree with his interpretations.

[Rod]

17 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

He considers Prozac Lobsters "facts and evidence" For the most part he wildly misinterprets or  misrepresents other people's work to suit his narrative. You just don't see it because you agree with his interpretations.

You keep saying that but can’t refute anything he says so...

[motonoggin]

16 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

You keep saying that but can’t refute anything he says so...

It's a naturalistic fallacy/appeal to nature. That's why it's not good evidence. 

Peterson's arguments, more often than not, use logical fallacy. Appeals to nature, no true Scotsman, appeals to authority, strawman arguments, etc. 

Its bunk fam

[Rod]

26 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

It's a naturalistic fallacy/appeal to nature. That's why it's not good evidence. 

Peterson's arguments, more often than not, use logical fallacy. Appeals to nature, no true Scotsman, appeals to authority, strawman arguments, etc. 

Its bunk fam

Actually he always backs up his arguments with scientific data. 

[Wildboer]

45 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

You keep saying that but can’t refute anything he says so...

You think his opinions are facts, why would I bother explaining anything to you in detail?

[motonoggin]

7 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

Actually he always backs up his arguments with scientific data. 

No he doesn't

[DriftBusta]

7 hours ago, Zambroski said:

“Toxic masculinity.”  That term always makes me laugh.

x2.  Listen to Moto.  Me thinks he thinks awfully high of himself throwing around the  buzzwords that they made up in his marxist chat rooms, as if it gives them some sort of intellectual edge.   Half the words are made up, there are no legitimate descriptions of them, maybe a mention in the urban dictionary.  So get the fuck out of here with your haughty nonsense.   Whats worse is its nothing more than talk on the internet, like an Uber Troll.  Put your ideas into motion.  Lets see it happen.  By all means bring it, take off your ski masks.  See how far you get throwing around terms like non cisheteronormative, or necromonging fascists.  I can only imagine how much pot is ingested to come up with such....um.....word salad.....and worse, think that its logical, relevant or has a chance of happening or being accepted.  I can only imagine floating on the lake in his boat, and him starting in with that nonsense.  Do like my buddies kid.  Go join a commune out in Oregon and build your little utopia.  The rest of us are too busy making bank and loving life just the way it is.  

6 hours ago, motonoggin said:

Oh, it's not the first time, we've got lots of incels and other protofascists skulking around here.

No he doesn't, he sounds just.like you trying to imitate me. Garbled ideas and word salad. He's a dumb asses' idea of a smart guy.

Peterson is the ultimate safe space snowflake. I mean, dude thinks non cisheteronormative people who dare demand respect is infringement upon individual freedom and tantamount to fascim.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, motonoggin said:

I mean the intentional conflation of cultural marxism with postmodernism, nihilism, communism, and stalinism would give anyone who actually knows what those things are a clue as to how of the rails the dude is.

But because he made a principled stand against an imaginary boogeyman he's lionized and worshipped. 

 

3 hours ago, motonoggin said:

He openly subscribes to naturalistic fallacy. 

He also appears to not know what cultural marxism and post modernism are even though either term comes out of his mouth 3-4 times a minute.

 

[Rod]

28 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

No he doesn't

Yes he does 

[motonoggin]

I see woolie is once again feeling threatened by the size of my vocabulary.

[Wildboer]

8 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

I see woolie is once again feeling threatened by the size of my vocabulary.

They get worked up when they realize they're arguing with someone who can read above a middle school level.

[Zambroski]

59 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

You think his opinions are facts, why would I bother explaining anything to you in detail?

I don't think his opinions are facts.  I think they are researched and educated opinions...many of which, I agree.

Now, since I don't think "his opinions are facts", maybe you could be bothered to explain it to me?  In fact, without all the backreading, has anything remotely resembling debate on his theories/opinions/ideas been discussed here?  Or are we still onto the "lobster" thing and other ridiculous ignorantia?

[ArcticCrusher]

2 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

I don't think his opinions are facts.  I think they are researched and educated opinions...many of which, I agree.

Now, since I don't think "his opinions are facts", maybe you could be bothered to explain it to me?  In fact, without all the backreading, has anything remotely resembling debate on his theories/opinions/ideas been discussed here?  Or are we still onto the "lobster" thing and other ridiculous ignorantia?

Doubt it.

[motonoggin]

4 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

I don't think his opinions are facts.  I think they are researched and educated opinions...many of which, I agree.

Now, since I don't think "his opinions are facts", maybe you could be bothered to explain it to me?  In fact, without all the backreading, has anything remotely resembling debate on his theories/opinions/ideas been discussed here?  Or are we still onto the "lobster" thing and other ridiculous ignorantia?

Dude, the lobster thing disqualifies everything else he has to say as a supposed intellectual. 

No one really needs to go further than that. 

It's like  listening to a physics lecture from a dude who tells you that the earth is flat 

[Zambroski]

Just now, motonoggin said:

Dude, the lobster thing disqualifies everything else he has to say as a supposed intellectual. 

No one really needs to go further than that. 

It's like  listening to a physics lecture from a dude who tells you that the earth is flat 

Mhm.  

[Wildboer]

8 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

I don't think his opinions are facts.  I think they are researched and educated opinions...many of which, I agree.

Now, since I don't think "his opinions are facts", maybe you could be bothered to explain it to me?  In fact, without all the backreading, has anything remotely resembling debate on his theories/opinions/ideas been discussed here?  Or are we still onto the "lobster" thing and other ridiculous ignorantia?

I mean, not a whole lot, we're not going to bother with Rod and Momo  

He starts off the video talking about "Utopians" whose goal is a perfect society. This is bullshit, the goal is a better society than the current one, not perfection.

He also mentions how 85-90% of the world is worse off than "us" I'm not sure who "us" is here, but I'm assuming he means the capitalist west. This is a wildly qualitative and useless statement.

Then he says communism in Russia and China were real because both of them failed. He harps over and over on the dictatorship thing... socialism does not necessitate a dictator. So it's just irrelevant bullshit.

I'm not watching the last minute of the video, it's already completely worthless drivel. He's arguing against a false narrative he's invented. It's not socialism, it's his opinion of socialism and his opinion of it is conveniently hinged on utopia and dictatorship.

[Rod]

28 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

Dude, the lobster thing disqualifies everything else he has to say as a supposed intellectual. 

No one really needs to go further than that. 

It's like  listening to a physics lecture from a dude who tells you that the earth is flat 

No it doesn’t. This post you made indicates that he has you intellectually frustrated 

[Rod]

13 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

I mean, not a whole lot, we're not going to bother with Rod and Momo  

He starts off the video talking about "Utopians" whose goal is a perfect society. This is bullshit, the goal is a better society than the current one, not perfection.

He also mentions how 85-90% of the world is worse off than "us" I'm not sure who "us" is here, but I'm assuming he means the capitalist west. This is a wildly qualitative and useless statement.

Then he says communism in Russia and China were real because both of them failed. He harps over and over on the dictatorship thing... socialism does not necessitate a dictator. So it's just irrelevant bullshit.

I'm not watching the last minute of the video, it's already completely worthless drivel. He's arguing against a false narrative he's invented. It's not socialism, it's his opinion of socialism and his opinion of it is conveniently hinged on utopia and dictatorship.

 

[Wildboer]

2 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

 

Rodney doesn't understand, how surprising.

[Rod]

1 minute ago, Wildboer said:

Rodney doesn't understand, how surprising.

You’re the one who doesn’t understand  

[Zambroski]

16 minutes ago, Wildboer said:

I mean, not a whole lot, we're not going to bother with Rod and Momo  

He starts off the video talking about "Utopians" whose goal is a perfect society. This is bullshit, the goal is a better society than the current one, not perfection.  Hyperbole.  Pretty sure you (and everyone else) knows what he means.  A "utopian" is an idealist..hence, the "perfect society" comment.

He also mentions how 85-90% of the world is worse off than "us" I'm not sure who "us" is here, but I'm assuming he means the capitalist west. This is a wildly qualitative and useless statement.  "Wildly quantitative and useless"?  Hmmmmm.  It's a point that is pretty well accepted.  Can't verify the percentages though.  I'd bet he is close.  

Then he says communism in Russia and China were real because both of them failed. He harps over and over on the dictatorship thing... socialism does not necessitate a dictator. So it's just irrelevant bullshit.  You boys cannot keep re-defining definitions of socialism and communism to make it look like what you are trying to sell works vs. what has clearly failed in the past.  Saying it works but has never been tried because of a lack of universal acceptance and enlightenment is....well, SMH cuz...HUMANS.

I'm not watching the last minute of the video, it's already completely worthless drivel. He's arguing against a false narrative he's invented. It's not socialism, it's his opinion of socialism and his opinion of it is conveniently hinged on utopia and dictatorship.  We all get our opinions.  If enough people agree with them....you get to have videos perused on sled forums for comment.  

 

My responses in Red.  

[motonoggin]

1 minute ago, Zambroski said:

My responses in Red.  

All shit

[Zambroski]

4 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

All shit

You silly, kooky radicals!   Course....I knew this getting into it.  Keep on keeping on Moto...maybe one day.......REVOLUTION!  I'll join in....but we ain't taking no fucking Beta-cucking librulz in the truck!