Dr. Jordan Peterson has risen to fame over the past two years or so and his ideas are quite interesting to dig into and there is a lot he's saying and doing that I quite like, such as his fight against the radical left and those who don't believe in freedom of speech. However, I’m not here to talk about his views on free speech or gender identity. I am however here to criticize the beliefs on religion (specifically Christianity.)
Dr. Peterson is clearly an intelligent guy, his work in psychology points to nothing other than that, but him being a smart guy and proposing some good ideas does not make him the saint like figure people have painted him as. He talks a lot about what the postmodernists got right which is that theres an almost infinite amount of ways to interpret the world. He also criticizes them for not realizing that every interpretation isn’t equal. Yet the fine Doctor seems to forget this notion when talking about his own subjective interpretation of the Bible. If you listen to his lecture you’ll hear him say “what I think they meant by this is..” A lot. I never have heard him say, “my interpretation of this is.” Listen Dr. You may be a great psychologist and professor, however that absolutely does not mean that you get to insert your own subjective interpretation that’s filled with bias as a fact. All this does is make people not want to accept your ideas because it's an almost sneaky way of teaching your opinion as a fact. Which seems to be in character seeing as your next tactic is just as sneaky to those who can't think.
Every time you “answer” the question of whether or not you believe in god, you always do a red herring and avoid the actual question. You’ll respond with questions like “well what do you mean by god?” Or “I don’t like that question its an attempt to box me in, I don’t like being boxed in.” Well my friend, I think you are smart enough to know that when someone asks that question, they generally mean a creator that has all power, or at least enough power to intervene in our lives and that cares about us. You don’t need to pretend to be profound by taking a question further than it needs to in that context. You should answer the damn question, don't tap dance around it. You're direct with almost everything you talk about other than this subject, why?
I’ve also heard you say that by default people like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins subscribe to Christian values because they aren’t murdering, stealing, etc. This premise is absolutely ridiculous, if not murdering someone is a christian value, than that claim is going to require evidence, Peterson. From my perspective, it wasn’t until we had secular societies that we started advancing scientifically and evolving our governments to be more centered around equality. I mean for Christ’s sakes, secular societies gave women the chance to vote, black people were freed from slavery, end of segregation, etc. Now I know you argue that a lack of religion in a society leads to an extreme increase of nihilism and totalitarianism, however my argument would be that people are smart enough to create a moral code without a book that says theres a boogeyman in the sky that watches everything we do, knows everything we think and say, and punishes us for eternity for not following his book of arbitrary rules. You may also argue that we don't necessarily know if the advancements were making everywhere are good or not. Or rather if they will be good for us in the long term. You're right, we don't know but to assume negativity or positivity in something we don't know about seems to be nothing more than an opinion.
Overall, I enjoy Peterson's work. although his book is overrated in my opinion and his views get a little cooky when talking about religion and sexual conduct but when he talks about the importance of free speech, the call to open dialogue, and not sacrificing facts for feelings I think he's spot on. His growing cult of sycophants hold him in the highest of regards, acting as if he's a saint that's never wrong, well he isn't a saint and he is sometimes wrong.