The News Thread

Incels are just another group of people responding to outcome disparities by looking only at systemic factors (imagined or real) rather than looking at changes they could make to account for the reality created by people responding to incentives and maximizing their own preferences and values. To the extent that the incel community is dangerous, Jordan Peterson as well as the "Game" community is probably saving a not-zero amount of innocent lives. And if we think a handful of incels in the west is an issue, imagine the danger with the demographic imbalance in China/India. There are armies worth of frustrated military aged men.
 
Last edited:
there are men who get paid weekly who pay a hooker every paycheck where the hooker is the only sex this guy is getting, where without sex workers, there'd be a whole hell of a lot more of these incell guys killing people
 
Dak said:
Incels are just another group of people responding to outcome disparities by looking only at systemic factors (imagined or real) rather than looking at changes they could make to account for the reality created by people responding to incentives and maximizing their own preferences and values.
Click to expand...

The tone of this response makes it sound like you want to write them off as inconsequential despite the fact that incel affinities may have just cost people their lives. It is just another group, but it's not something anyone should ignore.

If Jordan Peterson's work stops people like Alek Minassian, then fantastic. I'm not sure whether Peterson ameliorates or exacerbates the issue, but in either case I'll respond the same way I do with Marx: he isn't to blame for misinterpretations of his work.
 
incells actually kill people
that's actually how we know that they even exist
so to write them off as "just..." is stupid
most people go without sex for a while and just whine about it on facebook or something
these guys that are fucking killing people are going to incell websites
https://www.reddit.com/r/ForeverAlone/
http://www.love-shy.com/
these guys can't handle celibacy like a normal person, and they're actually killing people from rage that's coming from being celibate
making prostitution both completely legal and super cheap would actually prevent the deaths of a large number of people
 
Einherjar86 said:
The tone of this response makes it sound like you want to write them off as inconsequential despite the fact that incel affinities may have just cost people their lives. It is just another group, but it's not something anyone should ignore.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think them inconsequential, just like I don't find SJW's etc inconsequential for making the same sorts of errors in different domains. They also do real damage.

Edit @Blurry_Dreams : Most people don't never fuck, and there's a much higher barrier for men to acquire non-contractual sex compared to women (ceteris paribus). Sexually starved young men have been used by civilizations for killing purposes for thousands of years, and militant Islam has made explicit use of sex and sexual frustration as a part of recruitment. We're probably somewhat fortunate the incel community is mostly populated by the cowardly. @HamburgerBoy could probably provide some perspective on his claimed community.

Einherjar86 said:
If Jordan Peterson's work stops people like Alek Minassian, then fantastic. I'm not sure whether Peterson ameliorates or exacerbates the issue, but in either case I'll respond the same way I do with Marx: he isn't to blame for misinterpretations of his work.
Click to expand...

Telling Minassian "to straighten up and clean up his room because he isn't being as the best version of himself" is quite different than "All hoes are thot Chad fuckers who deserve a raping". The Game community gets slimed with incels because there's a huge overlap in the community population, but Game replaces "rape thots" to "become a CHAD with this ONE EASY TRICK".
 
Last edited:
Dak said:
No, I don't think them inconsequential, just like I don't find SJW's etc inconsequential for making the same sorts of errors in different domains. They also do real damage.
Click to expand...

I would agree.

Dak said:
Telling Minassian "to straighten up and clean up his room because he isn't being as the best version of himself" is quite different than "All hoes are thot Chad fuckers who deserve a raping".
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. To clarify, I don't think you can reduce the potential problems with Peterson's work to single-sentence maxims, and certainly not when those maxims are informed by a muddled and confusing mythographic view of reality. It takes a lot more work to unpack Peterson's writings than pointing to what has become the most-quoted line from his most recent book.
 
Einherjar86 said:
Yes, it is. To clarify, I don't think you can reduce the potential problems with Peterson's work to single-sentence maxims, and certainly not when those maxims are informed by a muddled and confusing mythographic view of reality. It takes a lot more work to unpack Peterson's writings than pointing to what has become the most-quoted line from his most recent book.
Click to expand...

I don't think Peterson has suggested that myth is reality, but that people have these myths deep in the psyche, which informs thought and behavior. This is somewhat repackaged Jungianism. Peterson isn't offering new things, he's selling synthesized old (by varying age) ideas in 21st century condensed form. Fortunately or unfortunately, most people aren't really going to grok much beyond the maxims.
 
I'm sure we don't have to get into another Peterson debate. ;)

That said, I don't see much difference between myths being "real" (i.e. actual) and myths being lodged "deep in the psyche," and I never meant to imply that Peterson believes myths describe historical events, or some such. Myths don't have to have actually taken place (e.g. Zeus didn't need to have actually existed, actually transform into a swan and actually rape Leda) in order for the Leda and the Swan myth to be "real." In fact, I'd suggest that the reality of myths is a purely psychic reality. That's probably the literary theorist in me talking.

In short, suggesting that myths have a psychic reality is the same as suggesting that myths are "real"--i.e. they represent some kind of deep-seated, atavistic tendency in human evolution. I see privileging and universalizing such tendencies as problematic and dangerous.
 
Einherjar86 said:
In short, suggesting that myths have a psychic reality is the same as suggesting that myths are "real"--i.e. they represent some kind of deep-seated, atavistic tendency in human evolution. I see privileging and universalizing such tendencies as problematic and dangerous.
Click to expand...

I suppose you find Disney movies incredibly dangerous. They've built an empire based on essentially assuming Jung was basically right.
 
Disney movies are fiction. Peterson doesn't write fiction.

But yes, I do find Disney movies dangerous. Please bear in mind that I'm using "dangerous" somewhat figuratively.
 
Einherjar86 said:
Disney movies are fiction. Peterson doesn't write fiction.

But yes, I do find Disney movies dangerous. Please bear in mind that I'm using "dangerous" somewhat figuratively.
Click to expand...

Fair enough re: dangerous. Disney movies profit on, arguably, those archetypes that Jung, now via Peterson, argued are a thing. I dislike Disney for slightly different reasons but I recognize the power of the imagery and allegories. If anything Peterson is demystifying these subconscious processes which are otherwise driving people. Part of psychotherapy is demystifying thought processes and thought-behavior connections (eg, schemas, Emotion-Driven-Behaviors, etc). Concepts, insofar as you better understand them, are typically a bit less compelling.
 
Dak said:
If anything Peterson is demystifying these subconscious processes which are otherwise driving people. Part of psychotherapy is demystifying thought processes and thought-behavior connections (eg, schemas, Emotion-Driven-Behaviors, etc). Concepts, insofar as you better understand them, are typically a bit less compelling.
Click to expand...

I'm unconvinced that Peterson is demystifying unconscious processes as much as he is reinforcing the mythic iconography that sanctions unconscious processes. I don't have enough firsthand knowledge to say, but based on excerpts of Maps of Meaning the latter seems to be the case.

If some readers find his work demystifying, then that's great.
 
Einherjar86 said:
I'm unconvinced that Peterson is demystifying unconscious processes as much as he is reinforcing the mythic iconography that sanctions unconscious processes. I don't have enough firsthand knowledge to say, but based on excerpts of Maps of Meaning the latter seems to be the case.

If some readers find his work demystifying, then that's great.
Click to expand...

Well I haven't read it or really even excerpts other than to skim and figure it probably wasn't very enlightening, or at least not worth the time tradeoff for minimal enlightenment. He does argue we have to work with it rather than "fight it", which I could understand being seen as "reinforcing". Unfortunately, we don't have productive examples or theories for fighting it. We see examples of trying to ignore it, and those examples have high body counts. Recent examples in US politics seem to provide at least a form of support: Obama was elected by dent of his Messianic figure; Trump was elected by dent of his Strongman figure (these are gross approximations of course). McCain, Hillary, and Romney were all much more qualified for the jobs on paper, and all three could be best understood by very unflattering sorts of archetypes. It's not a flattering perspective on the human psyche but it doesn't seem all that inaccurate.
 
Nice article but a couple glaring things. Without going into the paper itself (too tired right now), I don't really understand the point made regarding automation being more commonplace outside of the USA. Whether it's Korean robots or American robots undercutting Americans, that's still automation doing work cheaper than American workers can do it, even if it's globalist automation. The article doesn't mention how manufacturing employment in Korea has been holding up as a result of being apparent leaders in automation. A quick Wiki search says they're at 23%, which is closer to America's 20% than industrialized Central Europe's ~30%.

Also, calling manufacturing employment "stable" between 1960 and 2000 is absurd and an elementary error. Number of employees were stable but our population grew by almost 60% over that same time period. Manufacturing began a steady and significant decline in the 1960s, even if 9/11 and the recession helped to accelerate things. I imagine that was a simplification to make a point by the MSN guys and not the authors of the paper though.

EDIT: Reading the report anyways, it's definitely better than the article, answering my criticism of the second point at least and providing some other interesting info (like a breakdown of various manufacturing fields and how there was a pretty clear cause-and-effect between how skilled it was and how long it was able to resist China's competition).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dak
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MetalAges
Fellas - about the T&A thread......
Replies
54
Views
3K
Bloodbath
DarkGift
D
N
Independent Artists Can Now Distribute Worldwide
Replies
0
Views
190
Self-Promotion
nicholasg980
N
Z
Check out my idea that could revolutionize the music industry
Replies
2
Views
469
General Metal Discussion
Carpe Mortem
C
Symphony
More album distribution news
Replies
8
Views
777
Power Quest
WeekendWarrior
W
Chris_P_Critter
Behind the Suit
Replies
0
Views
596
Bar
Chris_P_Critter
C
Top Bottom