/lit/ - Literature

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju4G3cmXwY4

Shifty bait
People ITT: dismiss Peterson because he's trendy/because theyre tankies
Watch his material before you formulate these half assed critiques. People like you just add fuel to his fire (as seen in his Twitter content).

I've only seen a few /lit/ posters who have actually raised valid well-purposed criticisms; criticisms that I'd like to see JP respond to even

Name ONE person with more influence than distinguished psychologist Dr Jordan B Peterson.

How about killing yourself and banning sci fi and pleb threads. Peterson threads are based.

"stop worrying about how other people are fucking with you and put yourself together" is literally the best message of any of the popsci stuff around

too bad none of his detractors will understand or act that out

>hurr he's never read engles or derrida

don't need to put a piece of shit from a mountain of shit into your mouth to know it's a piece of shit from a mountain of shit

>>10163365

peterson

viktor frankl and nietzsche were correct in their assumptions. frankl mentions that there has to be a sort of tension between what is and what could be in a person's life, manageable but enough to keep things improvable, as a trajectory up is better than a high plateau, so to speak. value structures can be collapsed and there are fundamental flaws in our metanarratives but the cool thing is that they can be corrected and regenerated. if you take the relativist approach you dispense with the idea of the ideal? congratulations you get an overindulgent, arrogant culture in decline potentially followed by a collapsed society or your money back.

>>10058187

partially due to Joseph Campbell. but since he's in the public eye and more current a lot of it is due to Peterson. he does a good job of mapping out (no pun intended) his ideas in applicable ways -- mainly archetypes and the shadow complex. Jung's not an obscure writer but he is abstract and his work is not easily digestible for someone who is new to the sphere of psychology

Freud's ideas and concepts have been so tread out that the "incorrect-ness" of them have been forgotten and the applicable/useful ones have been straight up taken for granted, so it's nice to see a balance of the depth psychologists since they can be used to reflect one another in some ways

he's got a lot of existential vibes to him and it's a credible path forward for putting yourself together. is the life-long process of individuation THE way? no. is it a flawless and infalliable way? no. but people yearn for one, and it has enough metaphysics to keep people in wondrous awe and enough meat & potatoes for joe q. public to use to fix their own personality deficiencies

>>9954118

>green-pill

ok

he's deep into the works of Jung, Campbell, Huxley, et. al. in terms of archetypal theme/motifs in narrratives and psychology. he loves his phenomenological bois as well, which is ironic as heck since they kickstarted the post-structuralist school he bleats on about. academically this puts him in a very adversarial position

at face value he's been called a "cultural Christian" but I am not entirely unconvinced that he isn't a crypto-Gnostic (re: how he discusses the concept of the divinity of the individual, about the Logos, >>9954163 and other little scraps here and there) but that's unsurprising considering how deep into Jung he is

if you're a turbo-NEET with anime and masturbation addictions (or just lost in the ennui of depression and meaninglessness), the best thing that you can do is go watch his maps of memeing lecture and take the good parts to heart and you might make something of yourself

if you're already sorted well, then you don't need good ol JP outside of the phil/psych/lit names he drops. yeah, they are entry-tier, but man must start somewhere in order to go somewhere else

tl;dr what >>9954159 said

>The “natural,” pre-experimental, or mythical mind is in fact primarily concerned with meaning – which is essentially implication for action – and not with “objective” nature. The formal object, as conceptualized by modern scientifically-oriented consciousness, might appear to those still possessed by the mythic imagination – if they could “see” it at all – as an irrelevant shell: as all that was left after everything intrinsically intriguing had been stripped away.

>>9601197
>>9601199
>>9601201
>haven't cleaned their rooms

>>9500303
Have fun staying with metaphysics in the oblivion of being

>>20757

SORT