I actually listened.

I know the term "straw man" gets thrown around a lot but jesus christ dude.

wait why in the fuck did you just quote my comment from a different subreddit into this one?

In /u/raytendo's defense, you're pretty shit at this drama thing.
I'd suggest you be a good American and start shooting up some schools or some concerts or something. Maybe that'll help.

i guess i've made an effort to avoid it. but anyway, considering I never said anything about banning anything or made any references to ancient greek, what you're doing is the literal definition of a straw man and/or argumentum ad absurdum and/or putting words in my mouth. (those are all three very similar dumb things to do). it's when you make a "hyperbolic" (as you said) cartoon version of what the other person is saying and then dismiss that hyperbolic cartoon version. you've really been on reddit for 5 years and can't identify a straw man?

Wahh fallacy fallacy, that's an argumentum ad absurdium!

Do you have any idea how much of a fag you sound like right now?

I mean. I'm a fag. So I'm fine with it?

You're an insult to normal gay people faggo

.......uh......???

......okay cool. you got me.

shut up bitch.

wall of text about JP

aaaaaand i am out

I'm going to continue to leave this video of Peterson's bizarre ideas on metaphysical shit wherever I see him referred to as an "intellectual".

implying that a pandering bullshit video undermines everything else he's spoken on or his credentials such as possessing a PhD or teaching at Harvard because politics.

You're right, all his previous work stands on its own. Credentials can only get you so far, though, and this man's words in this video are not bullshit, they are his words--and I'll take them to be his honest words, because I have no reason not to.

I guess it depends on how you want to define intellectual. If you define it as "has never said anything stupid or made lame arguments to pander to fanboys" then we're talking about a pretty elite crowd. I don't get the guy's appeal, but I also don't think him making the occasional retarded remark disqualifies him from being an intellectual, he's proven he's pretty fucking smart.

Okay, so when can we trust him to be smart, and when can we trust him to be retarded? When is he pandering--is it anytime you don't like what he says, or is it whenever it's convenient to his credibility? These things he's saying in his videos aren't some one-off thing, either, he talks about this shit more often than I'll charitably assume you know about. I've listened to hours of him speaking; he's eloquent, charming, and average in intellect (for an academic whose focus is psychology.) For some reason people assume charm and eloquence = extremely intelligent and worth listening to. When you get past that charm, there's really nothing left except a guy who has two modes: typical academic who loves his fellow academics of choice, and guy who says obvious things packaged as something new (clean your room, which is cribbed straight from Buddhism's "wash your dishes when you've eaten" tenets.) Oh, and there's a third mode I forgot: revealing that he's fucking insane when you get him talking about metaphysics.

This isn't a hill I'm willing to die on because I hardly care. I will say you're definition of an intellectual is pretty ridiculous. Bill Maher is considered by many on the left to be one, but by your standard if he's ever said something dumb, then he can't be because we don't know when he's being smart, or when he's just saying something to play to his base.

Also, rehashing old ideas in a new way that resonates is pretty standard amongst academics. It's all been said before by somebody somewhere.

But whatever, Jordan Peterson is unintelligent, and you're arbitrator on what qualifies as intellectualism. Got ya.

you're definition of an intellectual is pretty ridiculous.

How would you know? I haven't told you what it is.

Jordan Peterson is unintelligent, and you're arbitrator on what qualifies as intellectualism.

Never said either of those things. If you have to lie about what I said, or make things up, I'm pretty sure you're not very confident in your position.

Bill Maher

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMQs34iH1a4

Omg he does sound like Kermit the frog tho

Nazi frogs

I'm pretty sure that if Carnegie wrote "How to make Friends and influence People" today, he'd probably be called an alt-right nazi as well, just because some frogposting teenagers read his work.

He'd be called a Nazi because making friends and influencing people are white supremacism, shitlord

His book is ableist and trans-exclusionary.

Why don't you actually respond to the author's arguments instead of just appealing to authority?

• What does Stephen Hawking know about multiverse?

• He wrote a paper on it and worked on it for years.

• Why don’t you address my argument instead of appealing to authority?

Autism confirmed.

I guess I misunderstood his point, which doesn't surprise me because most of it is the pseudo-intellectual ramblings of a pedant.

I trust your opinion, /u/preprandial_joint, because you seem to be the expert in the field