Lex Fridman Podcast #313 Jordan Peterson

 I didn’t really get much from Jordan Peterson’s conversation with Lex Fridman. I listened because of JP’s significant reputation. I used to think his unpopularity and controversial public persona weren’t justified since his psychological and therapeutic works and advice always seemed reasonable and helpful - I think he’s helped a lot of people deal with their inner demons. 


His political positions have always been more on the conservative side and I’ve never really agreed with them, but over time they’ve become more conservative. I think this is mostly due to societal pressures that come from being a famous ideological/political figure. His views are unsurprisingly aligned with those of his audience, but what’s interesting is how his audience has shifted over time and is now apparently almost wholly conservative. He became famous for refusing to comply with a Canadian law requiring the use of preferred pronouns, a position that threw him into the center of the transgender issue and alienated much of the left/progressive side and won him acclaim on the right/conservative side. Thereafter, those on the left have always attacked him and tried to cancel him and those on the right have supported him and welcomed him into their community. Therefore, his status as a political meme has clearly pushed him towards the conservative side since the other side attacks him ferociously, pushing him to align with the people that try to defend or support him. He addressed this dynamic and agrees that it is happening to him, giving the example that he feels he must defend the academy from the progressives.


JP has also always been interested in Christianity, originally I believe as an example of a Jungian meta-myth, but more and more as a religious affiliation. It’s clear by his religious inclination that JP tends towards conservative even without external pressures. To sum it all up, JP has progressed further away from me ideologically and politically, taking up positions like climate skepticism, due (I think) to a predisposition he has plus the societal pressure in that direction.


I think JP didn’t provide any clear or concrete thoughts but his focus on the ‘accursed questions’ lends everything he says a certain gravitas, and the unanswerable and unapproachable nature of the questions gives him cover for his lack of answers and lack of progress towards answers. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Red and the Black, Stendhal, 1830

Flexible Resume Using Markdown

The Years of Lyndon Johnson: Means of Ascent, Robert Caro, 1990