Is this actually worth reading or is it a meme?

[Anonymous No.18177993]

I don'tr eally know much about Peterson aside from a couple youtube videos. I'm looking for a non fiction read and am wondering if this is worth picking up.

[Anonymous No.18178015]

Peterson's a faggot and a retard.

[Anonymous No.18178018]

>>18178015
I know what you are but what is he?

[Anonymous No.18178023]

/lit/ isn't gonna be anything but fagtard sneething over him, because he's not serious literature, but he does serve a purpose (lots of books serve a purpose other than being serious literature)

[Anonymous No.18178027]

Just pick up some summary of Plato or whatever.

[Anonymous No.18178045]

>>18178027
>>18178023
what's a good introductory read for philosophy / literature then? I would like to get into it but am unsure where to start

[Anonymous No.18178049]

>>18177993
if you have seen a few peterson lectures then you have already heard everything he has to say

[Anonymous No.18178060]

>>18177993
It's a lot of repeated material from his longhorn lectures on YouTube. Good material still, but night just be better off listening to his Personality Lecture series.

[Anonymous No.18178061]

>>18178045
Anthony Kenny's History of Western Phil is the best one. Copleston is more traditional, but much longer (abt 5x as long) and has lots of untranslated latin and greek, which will clog you up if you don't speak those. also, it's much slower, and for a narrower audience than Kenny.
don't read bertrand russell's.
>>18178049
true, peterson is a gateway out of peterson. but that doesn't mean he's bad (u could say the same about Karl Jaspers, really).

[Anonymous No.18178063]

>>18177993
The latter.

[Anonymous No.18178088]

>>18177993
It’s just a meme. Koch Industries product shoved down everyone’s throat till it finds its gullible audience.

I used duck duck go to look for “zizek meme where are the Marxist?” And now YouTube is sure I want to see all of Petersons vids

[Anonymous No.18178482]

>>18177993
Watch his Maps of Meaning college lectures and his biblical series auditorium lectures. That’s Peak Peterson.

[Anonymous No.18178492]

>>18177993
12 Rules is a self-help book and Peterson's culture war crusade is boring. Just watch his old Maps of Meaning lecture series, he's made an important contribution to comparative mythology.

[Anonymous No.18178494]

>>18178088
At least you get peterson videos. All my recommendations are fucking tedtalks.

[Anonymous No.18178520]

>>18178494
Pat yourself on the back right now, for saving the world. I'm looking at a young mind right now, I know you're intelligent. Look at us, we're the machine that keeps the world going.

[Anonymous No.18179000]

>>18177993
People can hate on him all they want. I never read this book but I used to be way into his lectures. Not so much anymore, but he was certainly one of my gateways into actual literature and philosophy. Looking back I don't agree with much of the things he says anymore, but I'm still thankful for his lectures as without those I'd probably still be spending all my free time on games and anime instead of reading.

[Anonymous No.18179017]

This is the textbook we used in PSY230. It was really good. (It's been out of print for like 40 years, but you can snag used copies on Amazon...I paid $8 instead of buying the $200 licensed course reader). Read that instead of his book.

[Anonymous No.18179031]

I listened to the audio book
no it isn't >>18178049
having time to think and really see he's kinda retarded and word salad of nothing most of the time
he is a gateway which can be useful though

[Anonymous No.18179066]

>>18178061
what's up with Russell?

[Anonymous No.18179116]

>>18177993
He's entry-level. He'll have important things to tell you if you're demoralized and lost. This fact alone make his fanbase very vulnerable to become a cult of personality. I'm not that experienced to tell you what you should be reading, though.

[Anonymous No.18179551]

>>18179066
I'm guessing that he means it's too advanced, i tried reading it when i was entry-level (i still am) and he goes into things (institutions, schools of thought, people etc...) without any introduction and you're supposed to have prior knowledge of these things. To me it seemed like a history of western philosophy for those who already know most of it and want to delve that bit further.

[Anonymous No.18180286]

>>18179017
mfer I find it difficult to get myself to read a textbook. I think that is a sure fire way to make me struggle with reading it all the way through

[Anonymous No.18180607]

>>18177993
This book is a blatant money grab and Peterstein is a fucking fraud. The most egregious fraud of his is the $20 personality test. Utterly shocking that he was getting away with that. If I ever see this degenerate drug addicted derelict, I’ll wring his pathetic pencil neck until he squeals like the pathetic Canadian he is.

[Anonymous No.18180620]

>>18178023
Shitting also serves a purpose, you fucking retard. That doesn't mean you should eat shit.

[Anonymous No.18180624]

It's extremely good if you grew up as an orphan or a latchkey and missed out on important lessons from your parents growing up. A lot of people give the guy shit for stating the obvious, but the secret to his genius is he is able to articulate complex topics in such a simple way that you feel like you've known it all along. He makes Marxists seethe because they haven't gotten their shit together and the things Peterson says hits something visceral.
His biblical series is pretty fantastic, as he's able to tell Christianity's story while filtering out the dogma.
>>18178088
>where are the Marxists
Peterson fucked that up pretty bad, especially since he knows plenty of Marxists entrenched in academia. Richard Wolff would have been an easy example of one of these sophists that talk around in circles without saying anything of value.

[Anonymous No.18180663]

In all honesty it's a good read but probably not something that you should consider "serious" literature. He makes the occasional good point and his writing is quite good but you aren't going to learn anything lol.

[Anonymous No.18180722]

For most of the population its probably worth it but if you've been reading from a young age consistently and went thru a self-help phase then toss it.

[Anonymous No.18180734]

>>18178015
fpbp

[Anonymous No.18180772]

>>18178061
>Anthony Kenny's History of Western Phil is the best one
It really isn't. The way he makes fun of Russell for criticizing Aquinas is really sophomoric. Russell is right in criticizing Aquinas because Aquinas already believes in God and so his "proofs" of God's existence are underhanded and try to prove a foregone conclusion. Kenny makes the false analogy that Russell was also trying to prove a foregone conclusion when he tried to prove "2 + 2 = 4" in Principia Mathematica, but in truth Russell had no dogmatic commitment to arithmetic and he would have been satisfied (albeit surprised) if it turned out that "2 + 2 = 5". Russell (like Socrates would put it) was willing to go "wherever the argument led him", while Aquinas would have been deeply troubled by the non-existence of God since he had built his own religious career on the premise that there is a God, and he was committed to that belief.

The way in which Kenny makes fun of Hume (one of the greatest philosophers who ever walked this Earth) is also pathetic.
>>18179066
>>18179551
He doesn't mean that Russell is too advanced. Since he likes Kenny, he probably holds Russell in contempt. Russell's History of Western Philosophy is often criticized (in part with good reason, in part just because some people hate Russell on a personal level) for being biased and for giving too much importance to ancient philosophy (and this in my opinion is a good thing rather than a bad one).

[Anonymous No.18180877]

>>18177993
Yes, this is worth the read. It’s easy to get through and interesting enough.

[Anonymous No.18180989]

>>18180877
This. It's a fairly quick read, but it contains a lot of conventional wisdom put in an articulate way that the common man can grasp.

[Anonymous No.18181033]

>>18177993
Read or listen, take onboard what you think will improve your life and then move on. Don't become obsessed.

[Anonymous No.18181058]

>>18177993
Faps of Memeing is his only noteworthy work and its almost unreadable because of its shitty formatting and godawful visual AIDS

[Anonymous No.18181085]

>>18178088
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIQp4KMwqwk

[Anonymous No.18181124]

>>18181058
>Faps of Memeing
>visual AIDS

[Anonymous No.18181651]

>>18178015
/thread

[Anonymous No.18182098]

washed my penis
cleaned my room
chest out, heads up

fuck what are others, I forgot??

[Anonymous No.18182947]

>>18180772
Thats a reason why people dislike Russell, but the more important reason is that he intentionally misinterprets philosophers he doesn't like, such as Hegel and Kant

[Anonymous No.18184466]

>>18182098
I found the best piece of wisdom out of the 2nd in this series, Beyond Order, was: "Opportunity lurks where responsibility has been abdicated."

[Anonymous No.18184474]

>>18177993
Read Maps of Meaning instead, unironically. It's a genuinely fascinating academic work.

[Anonymous No.18185719]

>>18178482
>>18178492
>>18184474
i've read maps of meaning, but none of peterson's other stuff. it's pretty mid-low tier stuff wrt this sort of psychoanalysis/cbt/self-help lit. not bad though. i liked robert kegan better.
if you want to read Maps for the serious phil, maybe that's good. i come from a background already in those spheres, so it hit a little less hard than i think it would for others. be cautious with his conclusions i'd say, but he's good for spurring the imagination.

>>18179000
agree here

>>18179066
russell is the midwit's patron philosopher.

>>18179551
>he means it's too advanced
no, it's just more blatant demagoguery than any of the others. the one i'd critique for being too advanced is Copleston. he basically assumes fluency in Latin and Greek, as well as knowledge of basically every figure he covers. i'd say your anticipatory critiques of Russell work better for Copleston. Russell is just a retarded nigger, it'd be like reading an history of philosophy written by Žižek or Peterson.

>>18180620
i'm not recommending people eat 12 Rules for Life

>>18180772
>Russell is right in criticizing Aquinas because Aquinas already believes in God and so his "proofs" of God's existence are underhanded and try to prove a foregone conclusion
this is fine rhetorically, but doesn't prove anything. i can say the same about his philosophy. all rational impulse starts with preter- or sub-rational roots.

>Kenny makes the false analogy that Russell was also trying to prove a foregone conclusion when he tried to prove "2 + 2 = 4" in Principia Mathematica
fine critique, if you're going for a worldview-level criticism. Russell DOES assume the existence of brute, universally-accepted, dialogue-necessary basic facts. but he has a worldview just like aquinas does.
>The way in which Kenny makes fun of Hume (one of the greatest philosophers who ever walked this Earth) is also pathetic.
this is schizophrenic, he doesn't make fun of Hume anywhere in his history of phil.
>being biased and for giving too much importance to ancient philosophy
this is the one issue i have with it, but it's not something i harp on because almost every other history of phil has this issue. the only respite is Copleston's contemporary volumes, but that's a set of addenda that most people don't read.

>>18182947
no, i legitimately think Russell didn't UNDERSTAND Kant or Hegel. if he'd ever tried to do a treatise on serious philosophy, Schelling's esthetics or something, i can't imagine how callow it'd be, knowing how little he understood Kant.

[Anonymous No.18185742]

>>18177993
it's good. im in the middle of the second one (the black one) and it is less profound but still decent. maybe because we live in a postpeterson world

its a very light 400 pages, very easy to read quickly and digest.

if you have to ask yourself if you should read it, i say yes simply because it will put to rest the fatigue of wondering what is inside.

[Anonymous No.18185760]

>>18177993
Has some interesting stuff, this one is leagues better than the second. Ultimately, though, it's a self help book and really only worth reading if you feel you need self help. A lot of the stuff in it is pretty self-evident.

[Anonymous No.18185773]

>>18178088

Yeah I saw 2 videos of Petersons, decided he reminded me of a cult figure and didn't want anything more. Youtube bombarded me with his shit until I spent 3 minutes going and saying "Do not show me this video again" of his stuff. Some of his messages are very apt and accurate, but you can boil them down to just their basic form and have no need of him.

[Anonymous No.18185796]

>>18185742
he uses really abstract flowery praise to describe things that are really mundane and bleak, but this is certainly intentional. he clearly has great respect for biblical narratives, but he stays really detached from their direct interpretation and instead abstracts them into some really abstract formal mythology type thing. in the same breath he elevates disney movies and harry potter books to the same level. his communication style becomes really grating really quickly.

[Anonymous No.18185817]

I dislike his circumlocutions. He's never straight talking. Can't trust a man who comes at everything sideways.