Jordan Peterson -♀️Liberalism & Feminism 2018 | Intelligence Squared
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 03. 2023
- Back in 2018, professor Jordan Peterson sat down with Intelligence Squared to discuss the gender debate and liberalism with journalist Anna McElvoy.
See the full session here: • Jordan Peterson on Gen...
Want to see more videos and virtual events?
✅ Subscribe to this channel and turn on notifications: czcams.com/users/iqsquare...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intelligence Squared has established itself as the leading forum for live, agenda-setting debates, talks and discussions around the world. Our aim is to promote a global conversation that enables people to make informed decisions about the issues that matter, in the company of the world's greatest minds and orators.
Follow Intelligence Squared on:
👉 Facebook page: / intelligence2
👉 Twitter page: / intelligence2
📌 Website: www.intelligencesquared.com/
#IntelligenceSquared #IQ2 #IntelligenceSquaredPlus #JordanPeterson #GenderDebate #Liberalism #Feminism #EmotionalIntelligence
I am from India, i really don't find the point of feminism in western society, what do you girls needed extra. You got right to vote, right to education and also right to work in office, joining the workforce. If feminism is really needed then it should be needed in devoleping countries specially in those areas where women are suffering.
I’m not a huge fan of feminism but I think you should know all those things you said women have, they got directly because of feminism, and if they want to reach an equal status to men in society they need it still.
Can someone explain why j.p is getting the negative side of the comments on here. I genuinly have found his messages helpful for myself but my sheer curiosity has put me in a position where i would love to hear the opposing viewpoints
Because people are ideological 😊
The full length video from the Intelligence Squared channel has far more support for Jordan Peterson. And it has 3.5M views, compared to 12K views. And quite frankly, this comment thread seems to have a significant support of Jordan Peterson's argument. But not nearly as much as the main video.
czcams.com/video/7QRQjrsFnR4/video.html
Jordan ruins this woman 😂
Jordan Peterson is the square root of intelligence.
How so?
First would be that JP is a clinical psychologist.
Backs up his statements with peer reviewed research in the field.
He has a best sellers book with five million copies worldwide and his global book tour has reached more than 250,000 people in 100 different cities.
Has 7.58M subs on YT, 7.8M on IG, 4.8M on X
Jordan has answered intelligently to the bombardment of questions from every angle thrown at him. If he made statements that didn't resonate with the audience he'd be named gueduo on YT.
@@gueduo
And you are a 0 on the left of intelligence.
Yes, down to imaginary numbers for sure 😀. Imaginary intelligence. And he needs right wing trolls to improve his public image, so, nope, he' s an average person who got funding from right wing oligarchs who wants your obedience
@@asleepawake3645 To be completely honest, i feel if you base your opinions on people in where there political views are then the word "intelligent" shouldn't even be in your vocabulary.
Late to this video but happy I watched.
Well this ended in a cliffhanger
Drawing a picture while they chat... Legend.
She is coiled, striking out with every word & he just swats her aside,
Love this😂
Is there a longer version of this discussion somewhere?
Ofcourse
If she would had an axe. She would have chopped his head off. Wonderful to see that kind of frustration and not being able to express that anger and yourself 😂
What person in the interview is listening to each other?
We have Jordan drawing on a note pad looking down as Anna asks a question.
Anna is nodding and looking to ask the next question before Jordan is answering the question.
What body language speaks volumes about this interaction?
"We have Jordan drawing on a note pad"
He was doodling because he was bored, and I'm fairly certain he was doing it to piss her off. It can get painful listening to ideologues, they all just sprout the same diatribe. They're really just a mouth piece for ideas they've heard from other people. Nothing original. After a while it can get monotonous. I pity the poor woman actually, she's so inept and out of her depth it's embarrassing.
👉 ... " 2018 " ... 👈
- Why publish this 'here' after 5 years .. ?
His name tends to draw in views although it looks to have failed this time.
😲
Propagandist
Jordan likes the lady, he is calm but very distracted, scribbling here and there on the paper, losing eye contact for most of his time and is not that proking as with other interviews
Wackadoodle.
Make it stop.
Jordans reasoning as to why liberalisms not an ideology is based on the fact that individual sovereignty which underlines liberal political systems, dates back to judeo-christian conceptions of the individual and therefore its 'deeper than politics'. The same can be said for a communally based society, which predates even contemporary religions within which the community is sovereign. Jordan has attempted to disguise liberalisms ideological underpinnings by suggesting a naturalism about liberalisms dogmas. This doesn't take away from the fact that judeo-christian religions operated through ideology which presented the individual as sovereign, once its realised that this to is a construction, then Jordans entire argument falls apart as he's doing what he accuses those who are 'woke' of also doing.
SJW's are NOT classic liberals.
You are still using sjw? Wow. What a throwback!
Intellence Squared is the premier trader of other peoples work, often years old...why. Why isn't there any original thought from the Intelligent Squared People in front of the camera??
I dreamed I saw my maternal grandmother sitting by the bank of a swimming pool, that was also a river. In real life, she had been a victim of Alzheimer’s disease, and had regressed, before her death, to a semi-conscious state. In the dream, as well, she had lost her capacity for self-control. Her genital region was exposed, dimly; it had the appearance of a thick mat of hair. She was stroking herself, absent-mindedly. She walked over to me, with a handful of pubic hair, compacted into something resembling a large artist’s paint-brush. She pushed this at my face. I raised my arm, several times, to deflect her hand; finally, unwilling to hurt her, or interfere with her any farther, I let her have her way. She stroked my face with the brush, gently, and said, like a child, “isn’t it soft?” I looked at her ruined face and said, “yes, Grandma, it’s soft.
🤢
Bye
Peterson just sounded so much different 5 years ago. I know this isn't entirely his fault, but he's lost a lot of his calm, mentor-like charisma.
You mean when he sold his soul for far right culture war extremists and the oil mafia lobby
"Isn't entirely his fault". Having a mental breakdown due to being prescribed benzodiazepines isn't his fault at all. Once you have that breakdown your mind alters. You aren't ever the person you were after that.
@@DancinJim Yup. A major before and after. Plus, the world is getting absolutely wild at the same time.
Discussing generalization is a waste of time. Not watching.
What has Jordan Peterson to do with intelligence?
He’s a good counterexample. If you’re ever feeling dumb, listen to him during his “debate” with Sam Harris, trying to define what he believes a god is.
Only 1/3 of adult Americans have more than a high school diploma. That's his targeted audience. Young incels who lack critical thinking skills think he's smart because they don't know any better, & sometimes he uses intellectual expressions.
Propaganda from the same dark money that paid alex jones
@Christaps the 3rd no but he had some dumb beliefs
@@asleepawake3645 This is silly.
The debate over feminism is not an ideological one; rather, it is the product of women seeking equality within the confines of patriarchal oppression. It is regrettable that a self-proclaimed intellectual is granted a platform to delegitimize feminism as a mere trivial attempt to create division. What this individual fails to acknowledge is that the division arises from the struggle for progress versus the retention of traditional power structures. Progress requires relinquishing some of the power and privilege that come with tradition, and Jordan Peterson cannot seem to reconcile this fundamental truth. Instead, he attempts to straddle both sides of the debate while sowing seeds of doubt and suspicion about the very notion of progress.
Self help gurus of self marketing are not intellectuals. This guy sold his soul to market forces, just like Kiyosaki peddles his old old expired books.
@@asleepawake3645 I stand corrected.
Very well articulated.
Every term you have used is open to debate and interpretation. Feminist Patriarchy Theory is just that- a theory. Many tenets of it are self evidently wrong and being proven so by things like the Scandinavian gender paradox. The fact that you don't want someone to have a platform to challenge your narrow ideological certainties is telling. If you want an example of the real dangerous authoritarianism in our midst, take a look in the mirror.
@@fiveleavesleft6521 Thank you for the opportunity to engage in this discussion. However, I must point out that your response is riddled with logical fallacies and lacks substance. Allow me to dissect and refute your statement.
Firstly, the fact that a theory is open to debate and interpretation does not render it invalid. The very nature of scientific inquiry involves the testing and refinement of theories through debate and interpretation. Patriarchy theory is no exception to this process.
Secondly, the so-called "Scandinavian gender paradox" does not disprove patriarchy theory. Rather, it highlights the complexity of gender inequality and the need for nuanced analysis. In fact, the gender paradox is often misinterpreted and oversimplified to fit a particular narrative, such as the notion that gender equality has been achieved in Scandinavian countries. This is simply not the case.
Thirdly, the claim that my view is narrow-minded and authoritarian for opposing Jordan Peterson's views is a classic example of ad hominem. It attempts to discredit the argument by attacking one’s character, rather than engaging with the substance of their argument.
In conclusion, your response fails to address the fundamental issues raised. Jordan Peterson's views on feminism and gender are deeply flawed and promote regressive ideas that reinforce traditional power structures. Patriarchy theory provides a framework for understanding and addressing these power structures, and it is not invalidated by debate and interpretation. Perhaps focus on the substance of the argument rather than resorting to fallacious reasoning and personal attacks.
What? I'm sorry but is this serious? Jordan Peterson on Intelligence Squared? This is unsubscribe for me. I'll find actual intelligent people elsewhere thank you very much
calm down.
i am the furthest thing from a fan of jordan peterson but before he went of the rails he was accomplished in his field. mind you even back then i agreed with very little of his opinions. but this doesnt mean its the same as them having him on now
@@EZ-ff2bx Then why are you being a patronising whatever and telling me to calm down? The man has never been an intellectual. Imo. I can have that opinion without some person coming along and being patronising in that 'just so' misogynistic way. Thanks
@@tosca... wow first of all my intention was never to be patronizing and if it came across that way you have my apologies. however in a shorter way i am only suggesting that you were having an overreaction to someone you dislike. back in 2018 he had transformed from an academic to a self help joke but he was not that malicious is all i am saying. and this channel is great and this is no reason unsubscribe.
that being said you do what you want, i assume you are an adult and fully capable of making your own decisions, what i said was not meant as an insult only as tiny bit of advice.
@E Z96 Thanks, that was kind of you to clarify. Sorry about delay in replying.
So, I do think a website such as this, which has established a certain reputation as a space for intellectual ideas and debates also carries a responsibility to feature guests with reputations which match. That means guests who have good reputations and histories with significant rigour. It's my opinion Peterson has never had such rigour in any of his career iterations. At this time he is nothing but a very negative voice among many negative voices which deliberately set out to malign women on the one hand, and to encourage men to engage in deliberate misogynistic behaviours on the other. Unfortunately Peterson cannot be taken seriously as any kind of intellectual and has a degree of social toxicity attached to him now which is very far from anything intellectual. Jmo of course. And, I should make it clear I'm not intending to be intellectually snobby or anything of similar kind. I'm not such a stuffed shirt I hope. But giving young men and boys the idea there is a social space for male toxic behaviour is a problem. We don't want a world full of boys and young men incapable of being fair, decent and able to see the social consequences of their own beviours. Neither do we want boys to follow the example of men like Joe Rogan, or worse, Andrew Tate. That's the circle Peterson is in now, so no, it's not acceptable that Intelligence Squared has given him succour by featuring him. On the contrary, it has bolstered his self importance and the sense he has of himself as an intellectual. This is not a good outcome obviously.
Feel free to jog on. He is very much welcome to share his expertise.