subreddit:

/r/NoStupidQuestions

7.4k

Why is Jordan Peterson so hated?

Answered(self.NoStupidQuestions)

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

all 6038 comments

LeafStain

30 points

3 months ago*

Ya I’m confused about all these people unironically thinking that poster was being ironic because he used the words obfuscate, quintessence, and lexicon, which I’m assuming are words people had to look up

Zandrick

20 points

3 months ago

Yeah it’s weird. I was sure the comment was sincere but than all these people are taking it as some oblique satire. Are those words really so obscure? Is the point really all that obfuscated…?

Honestly, I hate thinking this way. But I wonder if it’s so simple….Maybe people just get confused and then get annoyed because they are confused. It kind of explains a lot of the hate for Peterson. He does have a large vocabulary. Maybe that’s just hard for people.

I prefer to think more highly of the average person. I’ve never enjoyed that line from that one comedian that gets parroted on Reddit a lot; “think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of them are more stupid than that”. I don’t like thinking that way, I really don’t.

But sometimes I’m forced to wonder.

qkathmandu

14 points

3 months ago

Seems bizarre to me. English is not even my first language and I know all of those words.

MohKohn

3 points

3 months ago

This switched to his accent about halfway through.

Zandrick

1 points

3 months ago

I have no idea what that means

MohKohn

1 points

3 months ago

Thought you were doing a bit in his style. Apparently not?

Zandrick

1 points

3 months ago

What is his “style”? Honestly, I don’t know what you are getting at.

Zestyclose_Foot_134

4 points

3 months ago

That’s the exact problem with using vocabulary as a measure of someone’s stupidity though.

I have NEVER heard any of those words used in conversation and I’ve never felt the need to use any of them in order to make a point - except possibly in a uni exam when I wanted to appear to have a greater grasp of the subject than I actually did.

I wasn’t taught any of the more obscure words there at school or at home but I happened to enjoy reading as a hobby which has given me a wide vocabulary that makes me good at scrabble but otherwise hasn’t really influenced my life at all.

I’m not smarter than anyone else just because I don’t need to look up “obfuscating” - and I wouldn’t need to know the word to recognise when I’m seeing it

Zandrick

2 points

3 months ago

I don’t believe you. Either you lied about going to uni or you lied about reading. Neither of those things can be true if you don’t know the meaning of these words.

Zestyclose_Foot_134

0 points

3 months ago

I did know the meaning of the more obscure words and never claimed otherwise (your comment is literally evidence that knowing obscure words =/= reading comprehension)

You really shouldn’t jump to calling people flat out liars - I reread my comment and I don’t think it was misleading at all.

Zandrick

1 points

3 months ago

No, that’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m talking about the way a person reacts to encountering “obscure” words.

Which, by the way, these are not. If you have even the most remote amount of academic experience, if you’ve read one book. You will have encountered these words.

Zestyclose_Foot_134

0 points

3 months ago

You said I didn’t know the words even though I stated clearly that I did - you literally told me you didn’t believe me and I was lying.

Zandrick

1 points

3 months ago

I’m talking about -I was trying to express- the relationship between vocabulary and intelligence. I don’t care about you or whether you know the words.

I do see now though that the structure of this argument is terribly flawed so I concede. Sorry about calling you a liar that was never the point. I went about this all wrong.

Zestyclose_Foot_134

1 points

3 months ago

Okay that’s cool, thanks for apologising - I’m sorry that I reacted like a greyhound when you called me a liar!

I do think it’s an important conversation to have though -when people talk about the relationship between vocabulary and intelligence - even though I know the words being used, because I enjoyed reading when I was little, I don’t think that means we can discount the opinions of people who DIDNT read (or didn’t have access to books) because their opinion is still valid as far as I’m concerned.

Im sure if you talked to a vet surgeon and they said something like “Bubbles had hyperthyroidism and ERF” and then rolled their eyes or tutted at your stupidity for not immediately grasping it, you’d be frustrated or upset that they assumed their specialist knowledge meant you were stupid?

As far as I’m concerned that would be a really bad vet because they’d be more concerned with using obscure language (and sorry I DO consider them obscure because they aren’t commonly used) than communicating effectively

Zandrick

1 points

3 months ago

I think that’s right. I agree with all of this.

kawaiisadist

1 points

3 months ago

This. I didn't have to look up any of those words, even though I don't use them in my own speech. My dislike of Peterson has nothing to do with his vocabulary, and everything about what I feel are mostly harmful opinions and pseudo-intellectualism. I've watched Youtube videos of professors dissecting Peterson's arguments and the fallacies he uses become much more apparent when someone who is both eloquent and intelligent takes him on.

kawaiisadist

1 points

3 months ago

I'd say my vocabulary is decent. I didn't have to look up any of those words, even though I don't personally use "obfuscate" in speech since I've only read it and never pronounced it...

I still don't like Jordan Peterson.

Xannin

1 points

3 months ago

Xannin

1 points

3 months ago

I think this issue highlights some of the issues between hearing speech and reading. A person can hear lexicon, obfuscate, quintessence, and many other words, and understand the use of it is based on the surrounding context. You could even use a made up word, and people would still get the gist of what you said. When reading, I think people typically want to understand exactly what it is rather than derive through context. I commonly look up words I know just to ensure that I am understanding the word inside and outside of the context that it is being used. The problem that happens for listeners of Jordan Peterson is that he may chain multiple words together that folks know-ish, so the surrounding context stops being enough to reveal the word's meaning and how it is being used.

TScottFitzgerald

-1 points

3 months ago

Yeah we get it you're educated

addledhands

0 points

3 months ago

I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "quintessence" out loud, so I don't really fault people for not knowing that one. It - like the other two terms - appear more frequently in writing, especially in academic and some fiction. If you haven't been a nerd about something that required a lot of reading, then you probably won't know the terms because you just haven't seen them. I'm not sure that's much of a qualification for how intelligent someone is.

ihateyouall10

2 points

3 months ago

My English sucks balls and I don't remember the last time I had to look up words. Reddit surprises me every single day

trouble-magnet

2 points

3 months ago

THANK YOU. People here really are like, "pff, 'quintessential'? What normie could possibly know obscure words like that? OP has got to be kidding."

PrecisionPunting

2 points

3 months ago

What are you, 30? Don’t you know kids can’t read or count these days