Musk to Rescue Astronauts

[Sherlock Holmes]

Who wouldn't be? Peterson, unlike DEI proponents, is a very deep thinker.

Nah, it just looks that way to those who are shallow.

 

[westwall]

Nah, it just looks that way to those who are shallow.

Most people ARE shallow. They don't have time to do any deep thinking. They are too busy trying to make ends meet.

But that doesn't negate the fact that Peterson is an extremely smart guy, and he is very adept at destroying the claims made by DEI proponents.

I can see why you don't like him. He hurts your gravy train.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Most people ARE shallow. They don't have time to do any deep thinking. They are too busy trying to make ends meet.

But that doesn't negate the fact that Peterson is an extremely smart guy, and he is very adept at destroying the claims made by DEI proponents.

I can see why you don't like him. He hurts your gravy train.

I did lots of deep thinking when I was a child and teenager growing up very poor in Liverpool in the 60s.

Peterson is vacuous, he doesn't actually say anything, doesn't commit to a position, just makes vacuous assertions and tries to sound erudite, some (like you perhaps) even interpret that as intellectual depth.

Here's an analysis of the man, worth a read: The Intellectual We Deserve

Excerpt:

Jordan Peterson appears very profound and has convinced many people to take him seriously. Yet he has almost nothing of value to say. This should be obvious to anyone who has spent even a few moments critically examining his writings and speeches, which are comically befuddled, pompous, and ignorant. They are half nonsense, half banality. In a reasonable world, Peterson would be seen as the kind of tedious crackpot that one hopes not to get seated next to on a train.

I've never heard him say anything politically interesting, no gravy train here, I just don't take the man seriously, he just makes noises.

 

[westwall]

I did lots of deep thinking when I was a child and teenager growing up very poor in Liverpool in the 60s.

Peterson is vacuous, he doesn't actually say anything, doesn't commit to a position, just makes vacuous assertions and tries to sound erudite, some (like you perhaps) even interpret that as intellectual depth.

Here's an analysis of the man, worth a read: The Intellectual We Deserve

Excerpt:


I've never heard him say anything politically interesting, no gravy train here, I just don't take the man seriously, he just makes noises.

Wow, you post an OPINION of what a biased reviewer says he said.

You are dismissed.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Wow, you post an OPINION of what a biased reviewer says he said.

Yes, of course it's someone's opinion, people have opinions, Peterson has opinions.

I never knew anything about Peterson until earlier this year, sure I'd seen his name and got the idea he was quite forthright but as for politics, I didn't approach him from that standpoint but from his views on IQ and philosophy.

Once I spent some time listening to him and reading some of the stuff he's written it started to become clear he was actually uninteresting, except perhaps to people that share some of his political views, as if he somehow brings intellectual weight to some fringe ideas and fringe people are drawn to that, they need spokesmen.

The article I found was discovered months after me looking into Peterson and it's a good article, it examines the bizarre things he says and scrutinizes them. This is one of the things discussed in the article, I too picked up this from what I'd learned of Peterson:

Here's an excerpt from Peterson's book:

Procedural knowledge, generated in the course of heroic behavior, is not organized and integrated within the group and the individual as a consequence of simple accumulation. Procedure “a,” appropriate in situation one, and procedure “b,” appropriate in situation two, may clash in mutual violent opposition in situation three. Under such circumstances intrapsychic or interpersonal conflict necessarily emerges. When such antagonism arises, moral revaluation becomes necessary. As a consequence of such revaluation, behavioral options are brutally rank-ordered, or, less frequently, entire moral systems are devastated, reorganized and replaced. This organization and reorganization occurs as a consequence of “war,” in its concrete, abstract, intrapsychic, and interpersonal variants. In the most basic case, an individual is rendered subject to an intolerable conflict, as a consequence of the perceived (affective) incompatibility of two or more apprehended outcomes of a given behavioral procedure. In the purely intrapsychic sphere, such conflict often emerges when attainment of what is desired presently necessarily interferes with attainment of what is desired (or avoidance of what is feared) in the future. Permanent satisfactory resolution of such conflict (between temptation and “moral purity,” for example) requires the construction of an abstract moral system, powerful enough to allow what an occurrence signifies for the future to govern reaction to what it signifies now. Even that construction, however, is necessarily incomplete when considered only as an “intrapsychic” phenomena. The individual, once capable of coherently integrating competing motivational demands in the private sphere, nonetheless remains destined for conflict with the other, in the course of the inevitable transformations of personal experience. This means that the person who has come to terms with him- or herself—at least in principle—is still subject to the affective dysregulation inevitably produced by interpersonal interaction. It is also the case that such subjugation is actually indicative of insufficient “intrapsychic” organization, as many basic “needs” can only be satisfied through the cooperation of others.

Here's what the reviewer has to say and I agreed with this, it was the view I'd already formed before reading the article:

What’s important about this kind of writing is that it can easily appear to contain useful insight, because it says many things that either are true or “feel kind of true,” and does so in a way that makes the reader feel stupid for not really understanding. (Many of the book’s reviews on Amazon contain sentiments like: I am not sure I understood it, but it’s absolutely brilliant.) It’s not that it’s empty of content; in fact, it’s precisely because some of it does ring true that it is able to convince readers of its importance. It’s certainly right that some procedures work in one situation but not another. It’s right that good moral systems have to be able to think about the future in figuring out what to do in the present. But much of the rest is language so abstract that it cannot be proved or disproved. (The old expression “what’s new in it isn’t true, and what’s true isn’t new” applies here.)

It also looks at the diagrams from Peterson's book, and they are frankly ridiculous, for example:

The article has this to say about the bizarre diagrams:

How does one even address material like this? It can’t be “refuted.” Are we ruled by a dragon of chaos? Is the dragon feminine? Does “the ‘state’ of preconscious paradise” have a “voluntary encounter with the unknown”? Is the episodic really more explicit than the procedural? These are not questions with answers, because they are not questions with meanings.

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.

It's complete mumbo jumbo, he's a nothing, really, if you find him relevant then good for you, but it's sad that you've fallen under the spell and now hero worship a dingabt just because he might share some weird political idea with you.

Why not explain that diagram to me, what does it mean? what do the terms mean? is it testable?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

I find Peterson to be inherently in a state of constant confusion, the things he says are his attempts to make sense of the world as he sees it. He has created bizarre models of the world that somehow make him feel less confused but everything he says and writes suggests to me he is struggling all the time, on the edge of sanity, perhaps even suicidal.

He reminds me of the weed smoking hippies I'd encounter in Liverpool during the 1970s, stoned yet appearing erudite and enlightened but really just very confused people deep down. These guys would sit in late parties with small audiences of needy people listening to their wisdom, Peterson is very much like that.

 

[westwall]

Yes, of course it's someone's opinion, people have opinions, Peterson has opinions.

I never knew anything about Peterson until earlier this year, sure I'd seen his name and got the idea he was quite forthright but as for politics, I didn't approach him from that standpoint but from his views on IQ and philosophy.

Once I spent some time listening to him and reading some of the stuff he's written it started to become clear he was actually uninteresting, except perhaps to people that share some of his political views, as if he somehow brings intellectual weight to some fringe ideas and fringe people are drawn to that, they need spokesmen.

The article I found was discovered months after me looking into Peterson and it's a good article, it examines the bizarre things he says and scrutinizes them. This is one of the things discussed in the article, I too picked up this from what I'd learned of Peterson:

Here's an excerpt from Peterson's book:


Here's what the reviewer has to say and I agreed with this, it was the view I'd already formed before reading the article:



It also looks at the diagrams from Peterson's book, and they are frankly ridiculous, for example:

View attachment 1002805

The article has this to say about the bizarre diagrams:


It's complete mumbo jumbo, he's a nothing, really, if you find him relevant then good for you, but it's sad that you've fallen under the spell and now hero worship a dingabt just because he might share some weird political idea with you.

Why not explain that diagram to me, what does it mean? what do the terms mean? is it testable?

For a person who claims to have thought your deep thoughts as a child, lacking life experiences, education, and simple control of your body, relegates your opinion to one of a source of light humor, but little else.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

For a person who claims to have thought your deep thoughts as a child, lacking life experiences, education, and simple control of your body, relegates your opinion to one of a source of light humor, but little else.

I suspect you're not real, just a buggy AI experiment sputtering random sentences devoid of meaning.

 

[westwall]

I suspect you're not real, just a buggy AI experiment sputtering random sentences devoid of meaning.

Thou doth project too much, rumphole!

 

[Concerned American]

Thou doth project too much, rumphole!

Is this Rumphole reincarnated? Figures -- he spouts the same stupid garbage.

 

[westwall]

Is this Rumphole reincarnated? Figures -- he spouts the same stupid garbage.

Yeah, it took me a minute, but I am pretty convinced it's that retard.

 

[daveman]

Where is trumps "Space Force" ?

Here's a list.

Buckley Space Force Base, Colorado; Los Angeles Air Force Base, California; Space Launch Delta 45, Patrick Air Force Base, Florida; Peterson and Schriever Space Force Base, Colorado; and Vandenberg Space Force Base, California.

 

[daveman]

Dear Lord, it's frustrating to work with you when you KNOW I'm correct, but you are trying to PROVE some idiotic point to save face.
I have dominated you in EVERY aspect, yet somehow you believe you are winning.
It is a stage, like what Dotard Donald is going through right now.

Did I need to provide more context for you to comprehend?

Where is trumps Space Force.....in helping to rescue these Astronauts?
Did I really need to say......"In helping to rescue these Astronauts."

First you confused "Where is trumps Space Force" with "What is trumps Space Force"
Second, you confused "Where is trumps Space Force" with "Where is the Physical Location of the Space Force."

I know your game, and it is LAME.
You are fun to humiliate though.

Oh, so you worded your question badly, now you're mad at other people.

 

[daveman]

Admitting that trumps LAME Space Force can't help........ Got it.

United States Space Force Mission

Secure our Nation’s Interests In, From, And To Space.

Lines of Effort

LOE 1 - Fielding Combat-Ready Forces
LOE 2 - Amplifying the Guardian Spirit
LOE 3 - Partnering to Win

Nothing in any of those mission parameters about manned space flight.

You may as well be angry that the Navy can't sail a ship to orbit.

How is it you consider yourself smart?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Yeah.

Cuz everyone knows fetchin some folks and bringin 'em home from outer fuckin space ain't no thang.

Heck no!

Hell, ida done it mahself over the long weekend if ida knowed they needed it.

Borrowed me some pilfered jet fuel from my cousin whose a baggage handler at the air port, fired up my Ford Ranger, and hauled 'em back.

 

[daveman]

Nope.

I realize that trumps "Space Force" is a complete Farce.....Movie Like.
Dear Lord.......Explain why trump felt the need to create a "Space Force"

Sounds like it's you who expected an organization with the word "space" in it to be able to launch a manned vehicle to orbit.

I gave you the USSF's mission. You refused to read it because you thought you knew what it about. No amount of of petulant foot-stamping will change the fact that you're wrong.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Dear Lord, it's frustrating to work with you when you KNOW I'm correct, but you are trying to PROVE some idiotic point to save face.
I have dominated you in EVERY aspect, yet somehow you believe you are winning.
It is a stage, like what Dotard Donald is going through right now.

Did I need to provide more context for you to comprehend?

Where is trumps Space Force.....in helping to rescue these Astronauts?
Did I really need to say......"In helping to rescue these Astronauts."

First you confused "Where is trumps Space Force" with "What is trumps Space Force"
Second, you confused "Where is trumps Space Force" with "Where is the Physical Location of the Space Force."

I know your game, and it is LAME.
You are fun to humiliate though.

I started to sympathize, because that kind of thing happens to me all the time, dealing with the Democrat Cult members here. It can be frustrating, just as you say.

But then I remembered the uncalled for remark you made about me as a teacher.

Public School Enrollment is Declining. How in the . . .

. . . fuck? How do you lose your customer base, when you provide a service that is: a) "Free." (no cost to the consumers and their family) b) Mandatory, and c) Serves a demographic that is growing rapidly due to the influx of legalized illegal aliens, and the growth of welfare families, and...

www.usmessageboard.com

Then I laughed and laughed.

Concerned American, good on you for getting Winco's goat!

 

[daveman]

Here's what dei gets ya

This isn’t your grandfather’s NASA anymore.

Meritocracy is about hard work and demonstrated abilities. It is not a DEI sin but a virtue that creates a more dynamic and affluent society.

sonar21.com

She needs to go to
Only the best ,brightest and motivated should be considered regardless of skin color or if you have a vagina or not.
Ya can't say that cause that just makes to much fucking sense ...Jesus Christ

And it's waycisss....cause reasons ,and credentialed xspurts on tv said so ......bigots !
View attachment 1002642
But she gotta go ...she's a problem

Boeing subcontractor you get fat ugly women dancing to frigging Shania Twain...doors blow off tires fall off ..or the latest just yesterday one exploded tire in a shop killing what were probably two dei hires


No need to wonder why they're stuck in orbit

Leftists oppose meritocracy because they'd starve to death.

 

[daveman]

Of Course there is room for Improvement.
Funding is Important, but looking at Seattle schools or Tacoma schools, of course they have problems, and extra funding may not have the affect that extra funding has in smaller, rural communities, which I'm from and I teach in.

To have a POS poster like Concerned American constantly tell me how pathetic and harmful I am to students FALLS ON DEAF EARS, but I can't believe this Old POS loser continues to attack Public Education.

He will say my response is proof that he is correct.
Wrong.

How many errors per SQ capita has he made?

 

[deannalw]

How many errors per SQ capita has he made?

You noticed that too, eh? LOL!