Yea the scorn should be reserved for the pop psychologist using his celebrity offering fake counseling sessions to siphon money from people who could probably use real help.

I couldn't find a 1-on-1 option on his patreon but for $50-$500/mo you can get some sweet monthly youtube Q&A. Like group therapy I'm sure.

But nobody is saying his actual research sucks, which is how you determine whether he can be called an expert. I certainly don’t believe fly, of all people, is capable of making that determination. Do you? Does anybody?

The thing is his actual research has very little to do with why he's well known, so it's not surprising that his critics don't focus on it.

You're on a poker forum and you are worried about money being siphoned from people that need it? What makes you think Jordan Peterson isn't really helping people.

The point being debated (by me) is whether he can be considered an expert in anything. So his popular level work is irrelevant.

When someone is an expert in something and suffers from the obvious heuristic that it makes them an expert in all things it indicts their conclusions in their field of expertise, to a degree at least. Their ability to overweigh and depend on their own thinking in other subjects surely exists in their own field and likely indicates a bias problem that is potentially problematic.g

It doesn’t mean they are wrong about everything, it means they should be trusted less.

Fair enough. I would have been willing to consider him an expert in personality testing in psychology (even if not necessarily more so than other psychologists who work in that area).

But, when I see something like that court case where he was apparently trying to offer expert testimony based on his research in a way that I think is clearly and obviously ridiculous, it does make me far more reticent to call him an expert even in that limited field. I've seen some bits and pieces of lectures from him that would make me hesitant to refer to him as an expert in other areas too.

I think Wookie's point is good. Yes, prima facie we should be more likely to consider someone an expert if they have relevant credentials and background, but at the same time those fields usually have something like a rough consensus on basic points. Someone who tries to brandish the credentials while having way out-of-consensus views -- especially if those views seem trivially silly -- probably doesn't deserve to be treated as a credible expert just because of his credentials.

Peterson used to be an excellent scholar, but I don't feel his work has been the same since he had that glass of apple cider.

Who is saying otherwise?

Fly the trumpkin is the only one arguing your absurd straw man. He is the one saying because Peterson is clearly a moron when it come to sexism and racism that de facto means he can’t possibly know who Freud was or what the amygdala is for even though he is a full professor at U of T.

Straw man you say...

I agree with Johnny Truant wrt experts badly slipping in other areas probably indicates that they aren't the sharpest even in their own area of expertise. It may not hold water with all experts who happen to be quacks regarding other topics, but it's an argument that makes sense.

I think you’re conflating 2 separate things, whether or not someone is an expert and whether or not we should take them seriously. People like Roger Penrose or Lenoid Levin should absolutely not be taken seriously when they talk about Godels theorem or quantum computing, respectively. But to turn around and say they aren’t experts in math or computer science is just insane.

When you were a child did your parents have to let you win when they played games with you just to shut you up?

I think it's more that I was implicitly talking about whether or not we should consider someone an expert in some particular field. That's why I talked about the court case, because it involved Peterson's supposed field of expertise.

Anyway, I agree with your example. I feel like there's a good chance a bunch of people in this conversation are talking past each other but I wasn't paying enough attention to be sure, so I dunno :P If fly is claiming what you are suggesting he is claiming (in the analogy) then I didn't notice.

Yup. Id be shocked if he hadn't been a card carrying member of the Ron Paul fan club. He's a libertarian, obviously.

I just realized that I was confusing apple cider for Diet Dr. Pepper. Mods please delete tia.

Right. And I picked Penrose and Levin because their crazy views come in the fields that they are experts in (you can nitpick on Penrose and say philosophy of math<> math, but I thought it was ok for the sake of analogy.

His quote was “Jordan Peterson isn't a ****ing expert in anything...” I think straight CV checking is enough to show that that’s false and hardly qualifies as White knighting.

What you are saying is very true in almost all cases. That is why I am skeptical of very religious people even when they are talking about their own field of expertise.

But it is not as true if the field of expertise is generalized creative thinking or logical arguing. And it is especially less true if that person (not so much me but people like my father and others of his ilk such as Tversky) restricts his outside opinions to those subjects where his own field of expertise could apply (eg whether to go for two points plus many other more important things.)

And again, look how ****ing PROUD these guys are to furiously defend the insanely stupid reactionary who has become the mentor to the worst people in the ****ing world because I may have not been sufficiently nuanced when I called Peterson "not an expert".

****ing so eager to score a point on a side subject because they can literally never engage on substance and are completely helpless against left wing critiques of their ****ty politics and ****tier heroes.

And oh yeah, Max, I hope you realize that the cost of this point you've scored against me is that you're the ****ing President of the Jordan Peterson fanclub, forever. And it's only going to get worse from here, Peterson is a total ****ing crank who has fallen in with these alt-right grifters and is absolutely going to get redpilled about the JQ in the next year or so. And every time, there'll be you, reminding everyone that he's a ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR at HARVARD and you ****ing peons need to put some respect on his name. (It goes without saying, of course, that Peterson's parents were wealthy)



Like, just to once again clown on these guys, Max, that quote about "not a ****ing expert..." that you're so happy to have caught me saying, was it about clinical psychology? Or was it absolute ****ing gibberish about JP's just making **** up about the relationship between socioeconomic conditions and IQ?

Cite or ban plz.

When you say somebody isn’t an expert in anything, you are necessarily talking about all subjects. Do we need to bust out some high school set theory notes to teach you that?

I'm just asking is this conversation you addressing the substance of the issue that people were talking about, or are you pointlessly tangenting this off into being the Language Precision Police for the very very specific point of finally finding a point you can score against me to avenge a grudge you developed when I hurt your feelings by wanting poor people to have healthcare?*


*You will not end up scoring any points, and I will eventually provoke you into melting down about how people with GEDs should be turned into Soylent Green or something.

Elegant surrender, but I would have pointed out the incorrectness of the claim (if I understood it to be false) regardless of who posted it. I imagine normal people would have just said “yeah that was hyperbole but ...” For you it’s obviously a huge affront that somehow led to a paranoia fueled meltdown.

I think he doesn't offer it anymore because it was too popular and eating up his time. Not sure. But when I spoke to this guy hed been on the phone to Peterson like half an hour before.

Mother****er if your Daddy had taught you to read maybe you wouldn't need a ****ing Canadian crank to be a father figure in your life. These were both among the first handful of posts I made after l'affair expert. (also, Jesus Christ you people are awful ****ing liars, Max, you're saying that any time anyone in this forum posts something dismissive about the resume of someone you are UNFAMILIAR WITH you fact check their credentials, lest an expert go unrecognized under the One True Definition of Expert? Man you were too ****ing eager to score one for your team you didn't even bother to check to see if you were signing up for Team Won't Use Trans Pronouns)