Speaking for myself, I do not agree with some Peterson’s opinions, but I like him as a person. Probably the best way to explain it is that he is the kind of “politically controversial” person which I wouldn’t be scared to hypothetically find out that he is actually living next door to me.
I find the way he uses the word “truth” really annoying. Yet, if I told him, I don’t expect him to… yell some abuse at me, hit me with a bike lock, or try to get me fired from my job… just to give a few examples of recent instruments of political discourse. He would probably smile in a good mood, and then we could change the topic.
Peterson is definitely not a rationalist, but there is something very… psychologically healthy… about him. It’s like when you are in a room full of farts, already getting more or less used to it, and then suddenly someone opens the window and lets the fresh air in. He can have strong opinions without being nasty as a person. What a welcome change, just when it seemed to me that the political discourse online is dominated by, uhm, a combination of assholes and insane people (and I am not channeling Korzybski now; I am using the word in its old-fashioned sense).
I’d like to somehow combine the rationality of LessWrong with the personality of Peterson. To become a rational lobster, kind of. Smart, strong, and a nice neighbor.
EDIT:
I guess I wanted to say that I am not concerned with Peterson’s lack of x-rationality—but neither I deny it -- because I do not intend to use him as an example of x-rationality. In many aspects he talks nonsense (although probably not more than an average person). But he has other strengths I want to copy.
I see Peterson as a valid and valuable member of the “niceness and civilization” tribe, if there is such a thing. As opposed to e.g. people who happen to share my disrespect of religion and mysticism, but personality-wise are just despicable little Nazis, and I definitely wouldn’t want them as neighbors.
Speaking for myself, I do not agree with some Peterson’s opinions, but I like him as a person. Probably the best way to explain it is that he is the kind of “politically controversial” person which I wouldn’t be scared to hypothetically find out that he is actually living next door to me.
I find the way he uses the word “truth” really annoying. Yet, if I told him, I don’t expect him to… yell some abuse at me, hit me with a bike lock, or try to get me fired from my job… just to give a few examples of recent instruments of political discourse. He would probably smile in a good mood, and then we could change the topic.
Peterson is definitely not a rationalist, but there is something very… psychologically healthy… about him. It’s like when you are in a room full of farts, already getting more or less used to it, and then suddenly someone opens the window and lets the fresh air in. He can have strong opinions without being nasty as a person. What a welcome change, just when it seemed to me that the political discourse online is dominated by, uhm, a combination of assholes and insane people (and I am not channeling Korzybski now; I am using the word in its old-fashioned sense).
I’d like to somehow combine the rationality of LessWrong with the personality of Peterson. To become a rational lobster, kind of. Smart, strong, and a nice neighbor.
EDIT:
I guess I wanted to say that I am not concerned with Peterson’s lack of x-rationality—but neither I deny it -- because I do not intend to use him as an example of x-rationality. In many aspects he talks nonsense (although probably not more than an average person). But he has other strengths I want to copy.
I see Peterson as a valid and valuable member of the “niceness and civilization” tribe, if there is such a thing. As opposed to e.g. people who happen to share my disrespect of religion and mysticism, but personality-wise are just despicable little Nazis, and I definitely wouldn’t want them as neighbors.