And possibly about the increasing observation by Gad Saad, Steven Pinker, Bret Weinstein,.... That the groups of peers are already biased in the same way your statement suggests.

He is a scientist like the others cited, and because their findings are not politically correct they are labeled alt-right.

This label has also been attached to Sam Harris, one of the most balanced liberals.

@OwlInASack Any links or evidence your statement isn't just opinion? He might be wrong, and I would like to hear the arguments against from properly qualified academics if you have them. In the talks I have seen, Dr. Peterson actually uses accredited, peer-reviewed research. The only link I could find that backed up your statement was comments from Ira Wells (see below link). BTW...Dr. Wells is a professor in English, who's Research and Teaching Interests from his bio page (second link) include: Nineteenth and twentieth-century American literature and culture; narrative; aspects of theory. You might not agree with Dr. Peterson, but whom should we give more credence to about human nature and psychology, a clinical psychologist, or an English professor? To me it presently appears you don't like him, so you spout derogatory comments without any proof.

[theguardian.com]

[english.utoronto.ca]

@icolan @OwlInASack I'll check out the links...TY. And yes, I agree, he buttresses his Christian beliefs with logical arguments that sound reasonable, but no scientific proof of the initial premise. I initially said I find him to be a human (fallible) and disagree with some things he presents - so I don't worship everything out of his mouth as the word of god. As far as a personal attack, I assume you refer to "...derogatory comments..." part? FYI, that isn't a personal attack. At no time did I call you any names or attack you're character. I just asked for some clarification on your position, the fact at that point none had been given, and how your stance APPEARED to be more emotional or opinionated than factual. You're little emotional tirade and YOUR personal attacks against me when someone doesn't initially agree with your POV you speaks volumes. How do you expect to engage with others if you can't have a reasonable dialogue back and forth without immediately pulling that kind of B/S @OwlInASack. That is intellectual honesty asking for proof and clarification on a point, not swallowing anything anyone says, be it J. Peterson, you, or Jesus Christ.

@OwlInASack Obviously you have not listened to him with an intent to form an understanding of his work.

@Jacar I have seen 5-10 videos of him, the ones dealing with the law that you have to call transgender people by their preferred pronouns, and then some of his videos on his classroom presentation - which as you stated are probably focused on his field of study. So no, I'm not a big follower nor a member of his fan club, so I will admit there may be a lot more stuff out there that I am ignorant about. I did see one interview where he was talking about his spiritual beliefs, and turned it off like a min or two into the thing b/c while I respected his POV on the other things mentioned, god was a loosing argument and not worth wasting my time watching. I respect people who are logical and literate, but I try to remind myself they are people and not get wrapped up in the cult of personality syndrome.

@OwlInASack "To me it presently appears you don't like him, so you spout derogatory comments without any proof" may be personal, but it is not a personal attack. If I called you a hateful mindless thin skinned bitch who just attacks people you don't agree with without any proof or logical reasoning - yes, that would be a personal attack. There is a huge difference, but I doubt you will concede that point.

@OwlInASack Then report me to @Admin for making a personal attack

That may be true, but I think of the saying, "just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me". From what I have seen, his right wing stance is typically more respectful and allows dialogue from the left than what you get from the other side. Right or wrong...that garners the most respect from me.

He is not right wing. He is science based, in just the same way, as Harris, Saad, Pinker,.... That is findings do not conform with the regressive left's corrrectness has gotten him labeled. That is bad for all of us.

@Jacar
I agree with you mostly. He is fair-minded and science-oriented. As a young man he was a Socialist. But nobody is perfect. He has his “demons” and they appear to me to be of a rightwing paranoid type, but it seems to intrude into his rationality only about 5% of the time. I’m taking this from my own observations, not from what his detractors are saying. For the most part, they don’t really see where he’s coming from because he’s six steps ahead of them in complexity. I’m a great admirer of JBP; I think he’s sincere, and brilliant, and flawed... like all humans.

@OwlInASack since I watched Peterson from his early lectures in the classroom, I noticed that he has an engaging personality, coupled with lots of ‘learning!’ He is captivating, especially to us who love learning! But, as I kept listening to Peterson, I realized he was expressing a lot of his personal truth and I could take it or leave it! He has found some ‘truth,’ but he has not found ‘the truth!’ That is where a person can be ‘sucked in,’ Because, he is so engaging and captivating, and his ideas may work for him, but that doesn’t mean that they are universal or that I can ‘buy everything that he is selling!’

@OwlInASack I think he is an example of a certain personality (like trump), that ‘hooks’ people...their admiration ceases to be objective, and they ‘fall in love,’ and take on a cult like admiration! That is the danger! Peterson can ‘get sucked,’ into this and loose himself also! I have noted changes in his personality (from his classroom lecture), since he ‘really broke out! He can incorporate his psychology, into what he is lecturing on now, because it is an inexact Science! In my opinion it is tricky! I have seen this happen...when people loose themselves to the ‘teacher’ person...he has made his message easily digestible with just exotic enough to be captivating!

@OwlInASack I found that transgender issue, baffling on his part! He can’t possibly live in the psyche of another person, so how can he state unequivocally that he knows how life is played out for those people? And why did this get his dander up, in the first place? And, again, he has not bothered to quote Science (if so, I missed it) on this issue! In this last interview, he started out, relaxed and forthright, but toward the end, he became more agitated and clearly political! I find that is where I break from what is useful and what is his personal opinion, presented as ‘gospel’ It has the ear marks, of ‘snake oil’...at least to me! At this point, I feel there is something out of sync, with Peterson and I want to see how it plays out! It looks like he is getting ‘blow back,’ so maybe people will stop and think, and make sure his ideas support ‘real life!’