 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| In which I tear apart Jordan Peterson for intruding on my domain. by Mischief Maker 05/30/2018, 6:49pm PDT | ||||
 |
 |
|||
| I was recently shown a clip of Peterson's lectures that triggered me. I've talked about Peterson's grift with owning the liberal media. (quick review):
1. Say a boring uncontroversial fact. (women wear makeup to look nice). 2. Pair that with a statement that implies a crazy reactionary policy shift. (can men and women work together?) 2a. The reactionary statement MUST be noncommittal enough for you to wriggle free. If the statement doesn't end with a question mark or ellipses, you're doing it wrong. 3. The interviewer attempts to paraphrase by connecting the dots (are you saying men and women can't work together because women wear makeup?) 4. Act shocked and appauled that the interviewer took your two statements to their logical conclusion (I didn't say that I'm just asking questions) 5. Collect that sweet incel cash. But now I'm going to respond to one of those goddamn 2 and a half hour long videos I'm supposed to waste my life watching in order to have earned the right to criticize his horseshit. Not the whole video, (dear god, part 8?!) just the bit he says at 1:45:10: So he believes the entwined snake motif in mythology is a representation of DNA although "it's really complicated to say why." WOAH! Check out the brain on Jordan! He "really does believe" Ancient cultures all around the world understood that DNA is in the shape of a double helix and put it in their art. But his reasons are too smart to explain and leave open for criticism and/or counterargument. Okay, first of all, if there was some lost Atlantean civilization that understood molecular biology enough to know the chemical structure of DNA and wanted to transmit the knowledge to future generations in the form of symbolic art, they wouldn't focus on the double helix. That's not the important part of DNA, it's just the scaffolding. It's the nucleotide pair bonds inside the double helix that's the action part of DNA, and when they're being used, the helix is unwound. If he had a painting of gods unfurling a scroll with just four characters on the scroll in two specific pairs, then another god was making a copy of the inverse of the characters on the original scroll, then I'd sit up and take notice. It's not like the double helix is that special a shape anyway. Take two strings, wrap them around each other. Little kids playing with blades of grass wrap them up into double helixes. Australian Aborigines also did a lot of swirl patterns, does that mean they understood black holes? "But wait, Mischief!" you reply, "what about this motif of two snakes coiled together in a double helix found all over the world from imperial China to ancient Egypt?" Well here I'll meet Jordan Peterson halfway. There IS an universal truth that gives rise to this motif all over the world. You ever see what it looks like when snakes fuck? Well whaddya know? Their tails wrap around each other in a double helix, just like all those motifs found in ancient cultures all over the world. Why are the primordial mother and father's bodies replaced by snakes from the groin down? Because THEY'RE FUCKING! But by making it symbolic, it doesn't offend conservative sensibilities. Just like Adam and Eve's fig leaves. Two snakes wrapped around each other are a representation of the molecular structure of DNA. Jesus Christ. This is just like Deepak Chopra's abuse of quantum physics to back up his own brand of woo. On a related note, I picked up the game "Tesla vs Lovecraft" last week. It's definitely a better sequel to Crimsonlands than Neon Chrome, but it does have its own problems. However, thanks to that game I've been exposed to a quote from Nikola Tesla that perfectly encapsulates Peterson's bullshit: 
And holy shit, Peterson fans! If you're interested in actual psychology and have hours and hours of free time on your hands, Dr. Robert Sapolsky put his entire Human Behavioral Biology class lectures from 2010 on youtube that you can audit for free! Although you may be disappointed that he spends more time talking about neurotransmitters, gene expression, and his own field research taking blood samples from Baboons in Africa, and less talking about the dragon of chaos, how the witch symbolizes feminists, or the time Peterson was attacked by a songbird. But you may learn some actual science and come away with insights more profound than "you shouldn't talk with your mouth full." |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
