12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos - Jordon Peterson

[Ari]

Anyone else reading this?

I came across Jordan Peterson on YouTube with that infamous Cathy Newman train wreck interview. He came across as incredibly adroit, knowledgeable logical and above all interesting in his views. After watching a lot more of him I thought I'd give his book a go.

First chapter interesting, second chapter is hard work. Hoping it'll become easier.

Wondered how anyone else was finding it?

And in case you're the last person on earth not to see THAT interview: https://youtu.be/aMcjxSThD54

Enjoy.

[DeejRC]

Its pretty standard western socio political philosophy based very much in the old school tradition, i.e. dear God its dull. To that he has added observations from his own clinical psych practice and lessons from Jung, i.e. he has made it doubly dull.

[ZedLeg]

It's Eat, Pray, Love for libertarian bros.

[Goaty Bill 2]

DeejRC said:

Its pretty standard western socio political philosophy based very much in the old school tradition, i.e. dear God its dull. To that he has added observations from his own clinical psych practice and lessons from Jung, i.e. he has made it doubly dull.

That's as maybe.
However, as I have pointed out elsewhere, the vast majority of people are unlikely to have studied most of the material he has sourced, nor under the tutelage of a highly experienced and widely read professor.

What resonates with me is the very fact that he is teaching old school tradition. It's hardly all bad, and encompasses ideals that many young people seem never to have been exposed to, or at least never considered seriously.

I have a copy myself. I've not started reading yet, but I fully expect the footnotes and bibliography to be as useful as the text itself.

[DeejRC]

I never said whether it was good or bad - just dull.

And why is it dull? Because old school “classical” teaching of the various layers of western thoughts on society and democratic “freedom” are heavy and complex and very wordy. It isn’t a subject of light study. And like all subjects of that ilk - it is therefore inherently dull ! Anybody who doesn’t find such stuff dull should be shot at birth lest they become a politician and try to fk up all or lives.

[Gargamel]

DeejRC said:

I never said whether it was good or bad - just dull.

And why is it dull? Because old school “classical” teaching of the various layers of western thoughts on society and democratic “freedom” are heavy and complex and very wordy. It isn’t a subject of light study. And like all subjects of that ilk - it is therefore inherently dull ! Anybody who doesn’t find such stuff dull should be shot at birth lest they become a politician and try to fk up all or lives.

Never knowingly under opinionated.

Don't try any classical philosophy or theology then

Good to see people trying more challenging topics, rather than watching Eastenders, crack on !

[liner33]

I have seen this guy on the Joe Rogan podcast a few times (Recently here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6T7pUEZfgdI)

Find him interesting and have also bought the book, his ideas are far more than simply old philosophy imo

[Goaty Bill 2]

DeejRC said:

I never said whether it was good or bad - just dull.

And why is it dull? Because old school “classical” teaching of the various layers of western thoughts on society and democratic “freedom” are heavy and complex and very wordy. It isn’t a subject of light study. And like all subjects of that ilk - it is therefore inherently dull ! Anybody who doesn’t find such stuff dull should be shot at birth lest they become a politician and try to fk up all or lives.

I take your point and thank you for the clarification.

I agree, it can be dull at times.
I have read a selection of books that appear in Peterson's reading list. Some I had read before (Dostoevsky), and some were new to me (Solzhenitsyn, Browning), and others just so far away from the usual stuff (Nietzsche, Jung) that I would probably never have considered them.
All of the above are certainly hard work at times. But the payback is enormous and therein lies the excitement.

I promise never to become a politician.
As for fking up lives, I do my best to avoid it, will be better prepared to avoid it in future, and have almost certainly got it wrong a few times over the years.
All the same - keep the cartridges at hand

[Ari]

Through to chapter 4 now, and 3 and 4 haven't been as heavy going as 2. I can't honestly say that I'm learning a lot but maybe I'm just fairly well adjusted(!?), or maybe I've just not got to a part that is relevant to me. I keep thinking of one or two people that really could benefit from it however!

What's interesting from such a man of science is how much religious imagery he refers to, almost constantly in places.

I can't work out whether he's a religious (God believing/fearing) man, or just likes the structure that religion brought to civilisation (or at least as near as we've got to it).

I've watched videos where (in one) he's asked 'Do you believe in God?' To which he replies that he doesn't like that question and then continues to skirt around the issue as he always does, neither confirming nor denying his belief.

For a man with such clear and forthright views, it seems to be the one subject that he's very reluctant to be drawn on.

[Goaty Bill 2]

Ari said:

Through to chapter 4 now, and 3 and 4 haven't been as heavy going as 2. I can't honestly say that I'm learning a lot but maybe I'm just fairly well adjusted(!?), or maybe I've just not got to a part that is relevant to me. I keep thinking of one or two people that really could benefit from it however!

What's interesting from such a man of science is how much religious imagery he refers to, almost constantly in places.

I can't work out whether he's a religious (God believing/fearing) man, or just likes the structure that religion brought to civilisation (or at least as near as we've got to it).

I've watched videos where (in one) he's asked 'Do you believe in God?' To which he replies that he doesn't like that question and then continues to skirt around the issue as he always does, neither confirming nor denying his belief.

For a man with such clear and forthright views, it seems to be the one subject that he's very reluctant to be drawn on.

I think I can answer that with some degree of accuracy.
Peterson has in the past described himself as 'Christian'.
He has also clarified that he does not accept the entirety of the Bible as being the literal word of God. i.e. Genesis is a story, not history, the resurrection may have taken place somewhat as stated, but he is not dogmatic about it.

But let's avoid turning this into a debate about religion.

So to the question 'God fearing' or 'liking the structure', it appears to be a combination of the two.
Peterson has been at great pains to be clear that it is the lessons of the stories that is of interest, not the question of are they literal true events. That can be seen in that he doesn't insist only on the Bible as a source, but also on other religious belief systems and their mythology.
Generally, this is to bolster the argument that these archetypical stories are sort of 'built in' to us as a species. That's the Jungian bit.

This video gets pretty close I think Jordan Peterson: Do You Believe That God Exists?

[Ari]

That's the video I was referring to and I don't think it's as hard a question as he makes out.

Yes 'God' and religion can take many forms for many people, but the question is basically, does he believe that the earth and all that's on it was built by a deity and does he believe that he will live on after death as a sentient being (ie not in other people's memories or on youtube - will HE continue to exist in some form whereby life goes on for him?)

I'd be very interested to know what he really thinks. My impression is that he believes that religion is a good framework for civilisation (hence his comment 'I live as though God exists'). But it's interesting that he can't or won't say that.

[Goaty Bill 2]

It's a tough one.

I feel that I understand his position, but lack the words to articulate my interpretation clearly and succinctly. It would require writing a long essay that no one would read
And in the end, it would only be another person's interpretation.

And so, I took my copy of this off the shelf yesterday, and have begun...

[FredClogs]

I've heard him on Rogan several times, he was on last week plugging this book, i should read it but I'm pretty sure I'd regret it at soon as I started. Is one of the rules "Don't get into arguments with idiots?" Because he really should take that leaf and have a quiet sit down.

Also the irony of someone who's whole stichk is ranting on the evils of authoritarian intellectualism writing a book with 12 intellectual rules you should live by is not lost on me.

[liner33]

The book was condensed from a Quora post he made https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-valuable-t...

There were 40 rules originally , so to save some from reading the book here they are

Tell the truth.
Do not do things that you hate.
Act so that you can tell the truth about how you act.
Pursue what is meaningful, not what is expedient.
If you have to choose, be the one who does things, instead of the one who is seen to do things.
Pay attention.
Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you need to know. Listen to them hard enough so that they will share it with you.
Plan and work diligently to maintain the romance in your relationships.
Be careful who you share good news with.
Be careful who you share bad news with.
Make at least one thing better every single place you go.
Imagine who you could be, and then aim single-mindedly at that.
Do not allow yourself to become arrogant or resentful.
Try to make one room in your house as beautiful as possible.
Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today.
Work as hard as you possibly can on at least one thing and see what happens.
If old memories still make you cry, write them down carefully and completely.
Maintain your connections with people.
Do not carelessly denigrate social institutions or artistic achievement.
Treat yourself as if you were someone that you are responsible for helping.
Ask someone to do you a small favour, so that he or she can ask you to do one in the future.
Make friends with people who want the best for you.
Do not try to rescue someone who does not want to be rescued, and be very careful about rescuing someone who does.
Nothing well done is insignificant.
Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world.
Dress like the person you want to be.
Be precise in your speech.
Stand up straight with your shoulders back.
Don't avoid something frightening if it stands in your way -- and don't do unnecessarily dangerous things.
Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them.
Do not transform your wife into a maid.
Do not hide unwanted things in the fog.
Notice that opportunity lurks where responsibility has been abdicated.
Read something written by someone great.
Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street.
Do not bother children when they are skateboarding.
Don't let bullies get away with it.
Write a letter to the government if you see something that needs fixing -- and propose a solution.
Remember that what you do not yet know is more important than what you already know.
Be grateful in spite of your suffering.

[hairyben]

Looking forward to reading this but have several books in line already. I don't get enough reading time. I've found his interviews in various podcasts fascinating.

I kind of think his religious ideas are that separation of moral authority and politics is an ideal that the human race should embrace. The "lefts" widespread rejection of religion and subsequent loading of all moral/political guidance into one place is a regression that is ultimately no better, in terms of how open it is to abuse, as the all powerful supreme religious leader.

[Pothole]

Gargamel said:

DeejRC said:

I never said whether it was good or bad - just dull.

And why is it dull? Because old school “classical” teaching of the various layers of western thoughts on society and democratic “freedom” are heavy and complex and very wordy. It isn’t a subject of light study. And like all subjects of that ilk - it is therefore inherently dull ! Anybody who doesn’t find such stuff dull should be shot at birth lest they become a politician and try to fk up all or lives.

Never knowingly under opinionated.

Don't try any classical philosophy or theology then

Good to see people trying more challenging topics, rather than watching Eastenders, crack on !

Not good to see such binary assumptions, you snob!

[Ari]

Chapter 7: Pursue what is meaningful, not what is expedient

Oh my god. The world is terrible, life is suffering, everyone is evil, you must give up on pleasures, defer gratification and dedicate your life to The Good Cause. Mix in a million biblical references and stir. After reading what appeared to be the same thing over and over and over I ended up skipping about 2,000 pages, stopping occasionally just to check whether the narrative had changed. Otherwise I'd have had to write off the rest of this decade and most of the next in pursuit of the end of the chapter.

He might be very very clever, but he's not very very concise.

Bits of the book seem excellent (if a little obvious - discipline your child, parent it instead of befriending it and you'll have a nicer better adjusted child. No st Sherlock! Yes, clearly some people really would benefit from this advice, but none that will actually read this book). But a lot of it is really hard going.

So far I'd hesitate to recommend it. Still, only half way through, maybe it'll get better.

Shame because in front of the camera or the class he comes across so well. It's almost like he had too much time and over-wrote it.

[Goaty Bill 2]

Well, I can roundly agree that chapters 1 & 2 were something of an effort.

Chapter 3 on the other hand was (with changes of location) like reading a biography of my own youth!
The places may have been different, but the times, people and their ways were very familiar. An enjoyable read that one.

Ari, if you haven't seen this it may better answer you on Peterson's position on his beliefs. (but not too much better )
61: Jordan B. Peterson finally asked about the Catholic Faith - YouTube

[DeejRC]

Ari - welcome to my degree.

NOW, can folks understand my point when I said that this stuff was mind numbing god awfully horrendously sodding deathly dull at Uni and that he is offering nothing new?!

I simply do not understand how or why any of you can find this stuff interesting?!

To further illustrate my point: I used to walk out of my lectures, A) to watch neighbours in the 1.30pm slot, B) to watch Mac v Borg at the Albert Hall, C) to go swimming simply because it was too nice a day to remain inside. ALL of which was a better use of my time than remaining in said lecture.

• Thats* how much importance you can place on this stuff.

And now you wish to encourage someone to watch someone else talk about Catholicism???? And you expect them to be interested???

[Goaty Bill 2]

DeejRC said:

Ari - welcome to my degree.

NOW, can folks understand my point when I said that this stuff was mind numbing god awfully horrendously sodding deathly dull at Uni and that he is offering nothing new?!

I simply do not understand how or why any of you can find this stuff interesting?!

To further illustrate my point: I used to walk out of my lectures, A) to watch neighbours in the 1.30pm slot, B) to watch Mac v Borg at the Albert Hall, C) to go swimming simply because it was too nice a day to remain inside. ALL of which was a better use of my time than remaining in said lecture.

• Thats* how much importance you can place on this stuff.

And now you wish to encourage someone to watch someone else talk about Catholicism???? And you expect them to be interested???

Last first;
Ari has asked the question a couple of times. The interview isn't about Catholicism, it is a poor short description of one question. + The youtube video title etc.

It was useful for me (not the Catholicism bit), because I discovered there was a glaring gap in my Dostoevsky collection!
('Notes from Underground' to be delivered shortly)

From my perspective, having been born two years before Peterson and raised in a very similar environment, much of what he says and writes as ideas or principles is already 'known' to me.
However, at the age when he was attending university, I was deeply involved in alternately defoliating forests, planting trees, and fighting forest fires (between b33rs, drag racing and waterskiing or snow skiing).
Not a wasted youth, but one that was less than intellectual.

So what does he offer to someone like myself (not necessarily via this book)?
- a confirmation that there is still some sense in good ol' western philosophical values
- lessons in articulating those ideas and values more clearly (to myself and others)
- master classes in debating technique
- ideas/recommendations for additions to my library of some very important literature
- it has lead me to some very interesting people; Jonathan Haidt, Stephen Hicks, Camille Paglia...

Additionally, I have acquired a vastly improved knowledge of Marxism and understanding post-modernism through his lectures, and more so through the my own research that watching his lectures has led me to do; Books, literature, other speakers/lecturers etc.

I can only suppose that what he offers to a younger generation, is to hear many of these things for the first time, in a format that is fairly easy to digest.
He may not always be 'original', but sometimes the teacher's job is simply to teach, or point the way to the possibilities of learning.