RE: Peterson's 12 Rules for Life v2.0-- actual book discussion
September 25, 2018 at 2:00 am
(This post was last modified: September 25, 2018 at 2:03 am by bennyboy.)
(September 24, 2018 at 11:15 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Clinical psychologists worth their salt know this, but Peterson stopped being one of those and became a political provocateur long ago. Triggering is the goal, not a side effect - took him very nearly 30 years to perfect his routine. It's how he turns coin.
Hmmm. . . what part of the book are you commenting on right now? Cuz if you haven't read the book. . . I'd ask you to refrain from discussing the book-- we already reading have one shit-slinging thread, and I think that should be used as a kind of peanut gallery for this thread.
I'm not even saying (right now) that you're wrong. . . but that's not what we're doing right now.
(September 25, 2018 at 1:58 am)robvalue Wrote: He's literally saying women are chaos and men are order, though. He takes it further than some vague symbolism, to some inherent property of actual people. He doesn't say it right away, of course. He sets it up as harmless abstract, and then slinks into the literal as the chapter progresses.
Yeah I've already said that-- he conflates the symbolic Dionysian feminine with males' actual experience of females. In my opinion, it's probably wrong to do this, but I haven't read that part of the book yet.
So. . . any comment on lobsters? Cuz I thought it was a funny and quite brilliant analogy-- dominant lobsters going around bullying each other "Who's your daddy?" is a pretty funny anthropomorphism IMO.