/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11339919]

You better start pretending that God exists.

[Anonymous No.11339927]

>>11339919
>what do you mean by believe
>and what do you mean by God
LMAOOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.11339941]

>>11339927
buddhist answer:
>what do you mean by "you"?

[Anonymous No.11339943]

>>11339927
its a dumb political play. By being ambigious he pleases both the neckbeards and the LARPers

[Anonymous No.11339949]

>>11339927
You're doing it wrong faggot. "define" is the true autist's choice, let me show you:
>define believe
>define God

[Anonymous No.11339951]

>>11339927
>>11339941

[Anonymous No.11339996]

>>11339919
Yes master

[Anonymous No.11340001]

>>11339919
>Do you believe in God?
>*pause*
>That's a question I can't answer, it gets to the root of psychology itself and I can't say something like "God exists" because it's meaningless without referring to all the theory behind it, the question is a trap intended to put you in a box, you need to read Dostoyevsky, and let me tell you, you'll learn more about God from him than from asking anyone if God "exists." Oh yeah we can just put everyone into two categories, sure that'll work, no it's not good enough, my answer won't satisfy you because you're asking the wrong question which stems from a need to categorise fellow humans and put them into boxes, and let me tell you, that's a road you do not want to go down, I've explored that path and I've seen that side, it's no joke. If you read the Gulag Archipelago you see the same thing...
>(continues for 2 hours)

[Anonymous No.11340017]

>>11339919
>He can't genuinely make himself believe a lie
lmfao.

[Anonymous No.11340171]

Peterson posts should be a autoban on lit

[Anonymous No.11340182]

>>11339927
You better start pretending women have equal to men.

[Anonymous No.11340488]

>>11339943
What's even worse is that the neckbeards and LARPers eat it up.

[Anonymous No.11340665]

>>11340001
For all you illiterates, his answer was that he is not exactly a Christian in the most strict sense, but because he lives like one he considers it something he believes. He was concerned by people asking him such important questions as yes/no's, because either way you answer they assume a lot about your beliefs from there. He has said his explaination to the problem is in Maps of Meaning, so if you want to understand his position, just read the book.

Or keep complaining that he is vague on our Australian Unicycling forum.

[Anonymous No.11340672]

>>11340182
> women have equal

[Anonymous No.11340701]

>>11340665
The problem is that he's basically admitting to a vague, post-modern (ironically enough) "deist" but then happily taking on board all the social and religious capital that comes with it. It's a worldview that lacks metaphysical or spiritual integrity, and yet he passes himself as "believer" so that he can continue to con evangelicals out of their money who assume he shares their same worldview.

[Anonymous No.11340707]

>>11340701
that comes with being a Christian*

[Anonymous No.11340710]

>>11340182
What did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.11340804]

>>11339941
what mean word?

[Anonymous No.11340821]

>>11340701
It's not vague is my point, you just haven't read his book. He will quite readily answer questions about his beliefs, but he himself said he had put it in 600 pages prior, and does not believe he could put it any more simply without leaving out important detail.

[Anonymous No.11340871]

>it's another 'nobody itt has read Peterson but critique him so they feel intelligent' thread

[Anonymous No.11340897]

>>11340665
>For all you illiterates, his answer was that he is not exactly a Christian in the most strict sense, but because he lives like one he considers it something he believes
that someone like this is taken seriously is like a sign of the end times.

[Anonymous No.11340936]

>>11340897
Right you definitely should not take someone seriously if they disagree with you.

[Anonymous No.11340971]

>>11339919
DADDY

[Anonymous No.11341038]

>>11340821
If he doesn't say that he believes in God, he does NOT behave like a Christian, whether he likes it or not. Language is a part of behavior just like any other, and every honest Christian would answer the question "Do you believe in God?" with a resounding "Yes". Peterson is the weakest kind of faggot: he doesn't truly believe in God but he has to delude himself that he, in some way, does, in order to not kill himself. Truly a tale of our times.

[Anonymous No.11341059]

WASH

[Anonymous No.11341073]

>>11339941
What do you mean by by?

[Anonymous No.11341188]

>>11341038
He does, he just does not want his view if God to be conflated with the consensus.

[Anonymous No.11341232]

>>11340871
>it's another "he's just being misunderstood, how could you think he'd say/believe that" thread

[Anonymous No.11341245]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6T47opnLyFw

how can the Peterites ever recover

[Anonymous No.11341246]

>>11340936
he has taken god out of religion and christfags don't see how fucked that is and does infact applaude him. it's like something you'd read in an apocalyptic profecy.

[Anonymous No.11341255]

>>11340804
what?

[Anonymous No.11341282]

>>11341246
>he's taken God out of religion
He's bridged the divide caused by inherent incredulity in religion (which accounts for a growing wave of atheism for the past several years) by illustrating the social cohesion and utilitarian benefit afforded by religious behavior.
None of his positions are theological; if Peterson alters your theological position its because you lacked conviction in the first place.

[Anonymous No.11341290]

>>11340665
How post modern of him

[Anonymous No.11341291]

>>11341232
>it's another 'someone with a narrative demonstrably warps Peterson's message but I choose willful ignorance of that fact in order to remain comfortably within my agenda' thread

[Anonymous No.11341295]

>>11341291
Peterson doesn't have a message

[Anonymous No.11341300]

>>11341290
Anchoring your behavior to a traditional moral authority isn't exactly post-modern.

[Anonymous No.11341301]

>>11341282
call it what it is. lip service. there's a special place in hell for people like that. not that peterson believes in hell. or an afterlife.

[Anonymous No.11341303]

>>11341295
He's written an entire book on his message. Two, in fact, though one is admittedly more suitable for mass comprehension.
Its okay to admit you haven't read either of them.

[Anonymous No.11341304]

>>11341300
it is if you're doing it to the concept of one though

[Anonymous No.11341309]

>>11341303
doesn't mean he has one

and I have actually, thanks to libgen

[Anonymous No.11341314]

>>11341301
But do you argue that Peterson's "lip service" isn't effecting positive social change, if only in secular terms?
What you're judging Peterson for is entirely tangential to Peterson's actual goal. It's not like it's entirely new to see authorities use religious dogma to bring about purely secular reactions, either - on the 90% chance you're Catholic, given this is /lit/, you're surely familiar with the practice.

[Anonymous No.11341315]

>>11339919
Its amusing because multiple erudite high iq cath posters on this board have openly admitted what Peterson will admit with a .44 to his temple: god doesn’t real, he appeared to be useful, Nd he makes us feel so we sud encourage religion

and this is good, we’ve revealed the christfaggotry for the nihilism it really is

[Anonymous No.11341319]

>>11341314
it isn't, if anything it's doing more harm than good

[Anonymous No.11341325]

>>11341304
Not particularly. His ideals are staked entirely to demonstrable physical consequences of traditionally religious secular behavior, which are practical and not relative. Jordan IS closer to a deconstructionalist mindset than he'd probably like to admit, though.

[Anonymous No.11341326]

>>11341315
Can someone decipher this for me?

[Anonymous No.11341332]

How is JP any different than people like Joseph Cambell?

[Anonymous No.11341333]

>>11341319
How so?

>>11341309
On the off-chance you're not shitposting, you may want to read his other book if you've tackled one and still don't see what he's getting at. Plenty of other people itt have done it and most of them assuredly haven't read either of his works. Comprehension is a key to criticism, you're not going to change anyone's mind when your argument boils down to "waah Peterson's a stupid-head"

[Anonymous No.11341335]

>>11341325
again, just the concept of a diety

[Anonymous No.11341342]

>>11341333
It's dishonest and encourages idiots to do stupid things. And yes I have re

[Anonymous No.11341343]

>>11341332
Peterson at the very least does his scholarly work correctly and doesn't pretend to the universalism of archetypal theory. He's admitted when pressed that he doesn't quite know how, for example, Islamic cultural mythology slots into the archetypal theory or if it does at all and wants to work towards bridging that gap.

Peterson's Jungian assertions are utilitarian in nature, Campbell's verged on the ideological.

[Anonymous No.11341346]

>>11341335
the deity is just a necessary by-product of a self-maintaining social function

>>11341342
>It's dishonest and encourages idiots to do stupid things
You'll have to be more specific than that

[Anonymous No.11341349]

So belief in god just means pretending now or is that just in relation to peterson?

[Anonymous No.11341395]

>>11341349
peterson and gavin mcinnes pretend to be christians

[Anonymous No.11341410]

>>11341315
sounds like a post-modern poem

[Anonymous No.11341411]

>>11339919
Why not try pretending you're more powerful than God?

[Anonymous No.11341416]

>>11339919
Is Peterson a Calvinist?

[Anonymous No.11341428]

>>11340665
Yes I got that

He is basically a post modern atheist presenting an atheistic theology of Christianity, but still calling himself a Christian

Guy is such a fucking cuck sometimes. He has something really interesting to say like 15% of the time and then just this weird pretentious vague boomer-signaling the other 85% of the time.

I still kind of like him, sort of

[Anonymous No.11341434]

>>11341395
Yeah but McInnes pretends to be christian because DUDE I SSSSSMMMONK WEED XDDDD

[Anonymous No.11341435]

If you don't believe in Christ enough to die for it, you have no business calling yourself a Christian.

[Anonymous No.11341441]

>>11341326
Christians, especially high iq chrisians, are perfectly aware there is no God and there is no afterlife, however evo-bio has shown us that it is useful for enforcing productive moral norms like monogamy and punishing violent crime. Therefore, people like Peterson and the Caths on this board promote Catholicism and Christfaggotry because they believe it has strong utilitarian benefits that outweigh the burden of an ontology and cosmology and epistemology which are false and irredeemable. Its nihilism because: that moral norm creted the conditions for its own dissolution; that moral norm is repugnant to all that is ascendant and sovereign; that moral norm is uglifying and itself was a kind of deformity in the physiognomy of The West; that moral norm is a LOWER RANK of values than the race to influence and overpower nature. So, its amusing, even affirming to me that the Christfags who are honest admit on this anonymous image board that they don’t believe god is real because its just too absurd a notion, Peterson refuses to affirm God because he is a de facto atheist (and almost all Christians only reflect on god a few times a day if that and when they’re feeling strong affections they attribute to unseen forces). All of this is good, and i hope more Christians admit their utilitarian nihilism sooner so we can sort them into the same camp as the Civcucks and Prog lib humanitarian parasites

[Anonymous No.11341453]

>>11341435
Damn you're right, we'd better start training tigers to maul apostles like the good old days.

[Anonymous No.11341463]

>>11341441
>Christians, especially high iq chrisians, are perfectly aware there is no God and there is no afterlife,
>brainlet.jpg

[Anonymous No.11341465]

>>11341291
>it's another "gots ta defend muh pleb tier intellectual" thread

[Anonymous No.11341472]

>>11341465
>it's another "I have no argument" thread

[Anonymous No.11341473]

>>11341441
Being an atheist is unironically middlebrow. Both the dumbest and the smartest people alive believe in God, it's just the people who fall between those poles that tend to wear fedoras.

[Anonymous No.11341479]

>>11341473
>Both the dumbest and the smartest people alive believe in God
So we're just going to ignore huge swathes of the scientists and philosophers throughout history, huh.
Or, wait, you probably expand your definition of "middlebrow" to just include everyone who disagrees with you regardless of their objective intelligence.

[Anonymous No.11341482]

>>11341333
Different anon then >>11341319, but I'd argue that supporting Christianity on account of its seeming social utility will bring us back around to this very problem with letting go of it all over again. Christianity's moral, ethical, and social doctrines are grounded in Christ being the Truth, and in being the One Truth. Without that, the values themselves won't have any teeth, and you end up with a repetition of the movement from sharp 18th century enlightenment skepticism that considered it maybe socially advantageous to modern skepticism and over rejection that sees it as an arbitrary set of restrictions on one's personal liberties. Peterson doesn't get this, which is surprising for a psych guy like him. He forgets how some kids after discovering Santa isn't real hulk out in their feeling of betrayal.

[Anonymous No.11341494]

>>11341472
>it's another "why should i have to read real philosophy when i have this guy who interprets it all for a brainlet such as myself" thread

[Anonymous No.11341504]

>>11341482
>Peterson doesn't get this, which is surprising for a psych guy like him. He forgets how some kids after discovering Santa isn't real hulk out in their feeling of betrayal.
But Peterson's pretty upfront about utilizing belief systems practically to affect secular social change. I get what you're saying in the context of making Christianity into an Enlightenment-era Noble Lie, but I don't see how that's in line with Peterson's thinking.
Peterson seems to want to educate people well after their environmental years into accepting utilitarian religious belief as a function of logic, not condition them into belief at a young age against the risk they'll respond negatively when they see the cracks in the dogma.

[Anonymous No.11341512]

>>11341494
>it's another "invent a strawman in response to being called out for having no argument" thread

>>11341504
>environmental
DEVELOPMENTAL years, what in fuck was I typing there

[Anonymous No.11341515]

>>11341473
im not an atheist, i don’t have an opinion other than christianity is fake and a lie concocted by pedophiles and power hungry autarchs
>>11341463
(you)

[Anonymous No.11341520]

>>11340665
his words were that he's an agnostic Christian

[Anonymous No.11341524]

>>11341453
People die for Christ all around the world to this day. Their faith is superior to Peterson's. Fuck, Peterson is unironically who Jesus is talking about in Matthew 7:

>"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

>"Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in Heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’"

[Anonymous No.11341528]

>>11341520
And now we wait for the retards who don't know the actual meaning of Gnostic/Agnostic

[Anonymous No.11341535]

>>11341524
>Their faith is superior to Peterson's
and?
Peterson's not going around trying to increase peoples' faith. You've fundamentally misunderstood his intention. He's trying to increase peoples' social cohesion.

The Romans lied and made up a whole bunch of dumb shit post ex facto about how they totally all believed in Christ lol and theirs became one of if not the greatest societies of history.

[Anonymous No.11341541]

>>11341535
Rome was on its way down by the time they all became christlarpers

[Anonymous No.11341559]

>>11341541
The Christlarping still contributed greatly to Rome's functioning, though. As the template for an effectively multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society that was on the brink of tearing itself apart, Rome turned to Christlarping to invoke stronger social cohesion and as a band-aid solution it works.

Our society is already built upon Christian doctrine and we have thousands of years of doctrinal development to draw from, Christlarping today is an exponentially stronger bandaid even if you accept it as just a bandaid.

[Anonymous No.11341610]

>>11341473
wew and you call others fedoras?

[Anonymous No.11341625]

>>11341559
it did not Rome was collapsing and the collapse accelerated as Roman racialism was suppessed by Christian universalism, as the old temples were closed, the priests dispossessed and as Christfags began to war with patricians and pagans. It caused conflict and broke up rhe rhythm of syncretic pagan culture. Christfaggotry sets people apart until its conquered a culture. Rome died because of Constantine

[Anonymous No.11341628]

A lot of replies calling him post-modern for the sake of getting a buzz it seems. If you are after a decent discussion you are going to have to define your terms and stop tossing them around just because the other side does not like them.

[Anonymous No.11341633]

>>11340672
Lie not found. Women not have equal to men

[Anonymous No.11341648]

>>11341625
>Christfaggotry sets people apart until its conquered a culture
>Rome died because of Constantine
Are you serious?

[Anonymous No.11341652]

>>11341648
He's a contrarian anti-Byzaboo

[Anonymous No.11341663]

>>11341512
>it's another "waaa waaa waaa why won't anyone talk about muh pleb intellectual with me" thread

[Anonymous No.11341664]

>not being a pantheist
I wonder what it's like to be fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.11341676]

>>11341664
You should wonder what you're going to do with life after you hit 18.

[Anonymous No.11341681]

>>11341663
>it's another "pretend like other people aren't legitimately conversing so I can keep believing my shitposting dominates the conversation, allowing me to feel self-worth" thread

[Anonymous No.11341728]

>>11339919

He does. Not pretendeing.

Next.

[Anonymous No.11341730]

>>11341676
I am 18 and I know what I'm going to do with my life. Wat nou?

[Anonymous No.11341737]

>>11341535
I'm saying that if Peterson is turning to Christianity for "social cohesion" he's badly missed the point of the religion. A peaceful society in this life is not what Christianity promises.

>Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn

>‘A man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.'

>Anyone who loves his father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me; and anyone who does not take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.

[Anonymous No.11341741]

>>11341441
You don't make a case why you want to sort intelligent god denying Christian moralists away.
Is it because you reject Christians via a Nietzschean kind of argument?
Also, are you sure that utilitarianism is really the word you want to use for this scheme?

[Anonymous No.11341768]

>>11341073
Cya

[Anonymous No.11341774]

>>11341628
Everybody except for Randian redpillers and Harris sociopaths are 50% post-modernist today. Because the were right. Nothing really can be held and properly defended.

[Anonymous No.11341784]

>>11340182
MOMMY

[Anonymous No.11341797]

>>11341774
>Nothing really can be held and properly defended.
>except for people who have real convictions haha they're objectively wrong because I'm le smart

[Anonymous No.11341807]

>>11341737
>I'm saying that if Peterson is turning to Christianity for "social cohesion" he's badly missed the point of the religion
And I'm saying you're missing the point of Peterson. Social cohesion isn't the stated end goal of Christianity, maybe (that's contentious, there's certainly scripture supporting the ideal) but it is a practical end result and one that can be pursued.

[Anonymous No.11341820]

>>11340182
Those are about equal to one cantaloupe a piece