Jordan Peterson et la la nouvelle trahison des clercs

screen-shot-2016-12-08-at-5-46-57-pmRight now there are only two Canadian academics with the requisite scientific, philosophical, literary and historical literacy that have stepped up to the plate publicly for TEAM TRUTH (there are others but understandably they are less reticent). One leading light is Gad Saad whose praises I’ve sung in previous posts; the second is Jordan Peterson who has recently been forced into the limelight. Peterson is well on the way to becoming the sort of public intellectual that Jonathan Haidt has occupied for several years — i.e. a paragon of humility, modesty, fairness, integrity, wisdom, intellectual honesty, guts, and fortitude. There are good interviews with Peterson but the one with Joe Rogan is best since both participants are on top form and the discussion is expansive and nuanced — religion, meaning, ethics, ideology, politics, genocide, science, consciousness, literature, and opening with a swipe at ((the cipher [0] or the biggest “cuck” @ 9:16)) — Trudeau. As a true conversationalist and by bringing much to bear on any topic, Peterson is always eminently quotable. Given that Joe and Jordan chat for almost three hours it means the intellectually lazy (you know the profile . . . activism posing as inquiry types . . . increasingly anti-science, invoking the usual analytically bereft buzzwords such as “identity”, “power structure”, “gender”), reheated “Reader’s Digest” Marxism for people who have never even read the more accessible “The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Napoleon” or “On the Jewish Question”, recent Marxist toughies such as Jerry Cohen or “Croicks” and certainly not trenchant critics such as Raymond Aron or Arthur Koestler. As Peter Boghossian writes:


Does anyone remember the wonderfully delicious Sokal Hoax? Each one of these genuine intellectually inbred abstracts listed here seem to squarely fall under the Sokal piss-take. The virtue-signaling swarms of self-righteous faux indignation (“intellectual”=mercantilists/hucksters/clerisy/ersatz intellectuals) will not give the aforementioned thinkers a fair hearing and will typically double down as rattled clerisies are wont to do. They should cogitate on Peterson’s Solzhenitsyn-inspired (skin-in-the game) message — the best place to affect meaningful and lasting change in the world resides with ones self:

I don’t think that you have any insight whatsoever into your capacity for good until you have some well-developed insight into your capacity for evil.

. . . but it is also the hardest of processes — hence what Oakeshott called a “crib” (an ideology, a gospel) — fulfills the need for easy and superficial salvation (i.e. “identity” politics). With a job and associated social status entitlement (i.e. as “professional thinker”) to vociferously protect, why should intellectual honesty and integrity intervene upon their quickly corroding good thing? Not to worry, since they have perversely written off pretty much most of the population in their “oppression Olympics” hierarchy, the anti-liberal regressive left is eating itself via social media (a digital analog reminiscent of the Great Purge), because as the most vulgar of rationalists in denial about social or scientific reality (complexity), there is no other place for them to exercise their ever-shrinking (and consequently now heightened bullying) power. They have been well and truly “tango’d” (by you know who); hoisted by their own petards with narcissistic and disreputable navel-gazing.