/lit/ - Literature

>>9616814
You're welcome to elaborate anon. If it's going to contribute to the conversation then bring that shit out and talk about it.

Yours truly is feeling righteously and wickedly Klossowskified today, which means boilerplate Marxist theories of aesthetics are going to have a serious uphill battle against Joyous Difference unless they are really fucking interesting. So go on and interest us then you sexy mother.

I mean, the one thing I will give Peterson respect for is he has a coherent philosophical position out there that dips heavily into mythology and psychology he's willing to defend against attack. It's just wholly unoriginal.

I have a hard time taking him as seriously as a philosopher as the people he cites. He seems more like a philosophy 101 teacher than a philosopher. He's like the Bill Nye of philosophy and when people act like "lol as if you know as much as Bill Nye about science" it's like "Yeah that's really not nearly as impossible as a thought as you think". Even though I would say Bill Nye is reasonably well informed about science relative to the average person, just like I would say Peterson is unusually well informed about philosophy.

It also smacks me as fairly absurd how he advises people to read Beyond Good and Evil but not the philosophers cited in Beyond Good and Evil.

>>9602006
Nietzsche is where he stole much of his thinking on that point from and tackles the problem better.