Globalist piece of shit Sam Harris has deleted his twitter account.
(mobile.twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (81)
sorted by:
Peterson was still mostly Blue Pilled back then. He could see some problems emerging but he still had faith in the systems and people running them, generally speaking.
Now, he's completely Red Pilled. He's apologised for some of his previous statements and I don't think it's a bad thing for someone to admit their failings.
He's also an extremely good clinical psychologist and his lectures on psychology are absolutely fantastic and incredibly insightful. Most of his lectures are available on youtube and other such places. I strongly recommend watching them. He is truly brilliant.
His takes on not allowing anonymous accounts and calling them narcissistic psychopathic Machievillians (two buzzword non-psychology terms) is like a week old. You are gonna have to wait until he goes a bit without a fuckup to try and sell this lie.
Also as someone else trained in clinical psychology, his lectures are pretty standard and only standout because people literally know nothing about psychology beyond what they let the Left feed them for decades. That's how you'd describe most of his fans even, "I'm so ignorant I've never heard obvious things said out loud so to me this is mindblowing."
Got any good recommendations of basic and more advance psychology books?
I'm personally a big fan of reading Philosophical works and applying them more than Psych books. Psych books are constantly constrained by either being paid shills, or having to pre-empt damage control to avoid getting cancelled. And if you don't have enough knowledge to catch those things when you see them, you'll get misled easily. One specific one that I credit with radically changing how I thought of human social relations was Nietzche's Genealogy of Morals, specifically the piece on how the sick are the greatest danger to the healthy. I know Nietzche is a meme, but most people don't read beyond the bite sized memeable bits to find the much better stuff.
But in terms of them, generally anything in the Bio Psyche category will be clean enough though its far more dry. I gleaned a lot from reading the DSM 1-5 and the discussions had between versions about changes and why they needed to happen, which then lead to good jumping off points on things that catch your interest. The discussions regarding removing the Autism Spectrum from DSM5 will probably appeal to a lot of people here.
Similarly, reading up famous "studies" and then trying to poke holes in it will give you a lot of practical knowledge to see marketing and misinformation as it happens, because the media uses "studies" to launch their talking points. The Black Doll and Stanford experiments are landmark, but so full of holes its hilarious and that's a great place to start doing such. Once you get good at it, you can start getting actual useful data even from complete shams and lies of a work because they usually aren't smart enough to see what parts they failed to scrub.
I know that's all kinda boring and vague, but I got my education through near a decade in schooling so it was gleaned through such channels instead of easily digestible books.
Well, most knowledge is not given/acquired easily, at the very least you help by pointing in the right direction.
I have seen a few of his lectures on psychology.
He is able to communicate certain concepts well but nothing worthy to the level of being called brilliant.
I think there is such a thing as being blackpilled, but still wanting to be a player in the game - or having professional boundaries that make it to where your thoughts rarely drift to the real discomforts. The knowing that all of your peers, even your family, the woman you love, your family, your friends, they would all drop you in a heartbeat if they heard the real truth of what you really think.
Your life would be destroyed so what you really think hardly ever makes it past the cognitive barriers of what allows you to justify staying afloat in this veritable hellscape relatively unmolested and employable, but again these pervasive thoughts are still there chewing at your psyche, so you settle for the next best thing wherein you hope that by fixing young men they might come to their own conclusions; all the better they hate you in the end because you hate yourself for being so weak. You get addicted to benzos and shut off until the narrative moves forward, and you let a little more slip. Hoping, dreaming of the day that you can finally be free of being utterly tongue-tied and hopelessly cuck-caged. I think there are a lot of people exactly like this.
I think people should pay attention to him with maybe a bit of a queer eye, but we often try to make heroes of people who even so much as wink at the "alt-right". As a result you have people who are very disappointed in any attempt at self-preservation or having pieces on the board. You'd think by now hero worship would be dead, but for some reason that optimism still exists. I think the pessimism is equally unwarranted.
There are no more heroes, simply, players in the game.
He's only a hero because so many young men are utterly lost in our feminized culture.
His advice used to be common-sense. Now it's taken as some sort of Revelation.
Taking what he says as some kind of revelation is a sad, sad symptom of the context we live in. Common sense is now faux pas.
Call me when he names the Jew.
That's his best trait: he actually thinks on his feet in public and is willing to admit when he's wrong (a giant asset for a public intellectual, something Harris ought to have tried to mimic). He's also very careful about qualifying his generalities.
However, politically he's a run-of-the-mill conservative, which is no surprise given his ethical system.