• yata@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 year ago

    You haven’t read the linked article, because the author does adress this. They point out that Peterson specifically does hide obvious and banal ideas in his sentences, so that when people finally find some blatant truths in his word salad, it makes it seem like the ideas are much more profound than the platitudes they actually are.

    Here is a quote from the article:

    The inflating of the obvious into the awe-inspiring is part of why Peterson can operate so successfully in the “self-help” genre. He can give people the most elementary fatherly life-advice (clean your room, stand up straight) while making it sound like Wisdom.

    And remember the author actually shows this with numerous in-depth examples from Peterson’s writings. A better editor would do nothing, because Peterson writes like that with intent, the intent being to disguise what a cultish hack he is.

    • lowleveldata@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I read the article and I agreed that Jordan Peterson used too much words as I said. I just don’t agree that “he has almost nothing of value to say” as I said.

      • JTode@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The point that is being made, though, is that those things that do have value that exist in his writing, did not originate from him and are available elsewhere to the point of ubiquity. If you only heard about them from him, you should read more.

        • lowleveldata@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Why does it matter if it’s “available” elsewhere? Do you complain when a restaurant provides food that is available elsewhere?