Comments on: Turning psychosocial discourse back toward the syncretistic, multicultural Jung

By: Graham

Graham — Mon, 24 Dec 2018 16:49:00 +0000

Back in November “Nature” editorialized against HHS for proposing a standard of “assigned sex” for babies based on physical observation.

Not “gender”, mind you. “Sex”. So even the “biological sex” category is being ruled out of discourse.

By: Sam J.

Sam J. — Sun, 23 Dec 2018 14:14:29 +0000

“…Peterson’s immense international popularity demonstrates the hunger for meaning among young people today…”

As I said in another comment this is just who they are pushing now. That he doesn’t call for immediate anal sex workshops for prepubescent boys and girls is refreshing but really only shows how far we have fallen. Things are so bad we’ll listen to anyone not stark raving mad. (I read they were having some sort of workshop or whatever now saying Men have menstrual periods. Oh my aching head).

By: Albion

Albion — Sun, 16 Dec 2018 20:19:56 +0000

I tried to read one of Peterson’s books. I couldn’t get past the lobster first chapter.

Sorry Mr Peterson, but at least I paid full price for your book, so there’s that.

By: Kirk

Kirk — Sun, 16 Dec 2018 19:29:56 +0000

Having discarded the distilled wisdom of thousands of years of traditional morality, is it a surprise that we have to re-invent the whole edifice, and that what men like Peterson come up with in their short lifetimes does not match what the mass of previous philosophers and scholars developed over multiple lifetimes…?

By: Bob Sykes

Bob Sykes — Sun, 16 Dec 2018 13:17:46 +0000

Vox Day and Adam Piggott beg to differ. Being a lapsed Catholic, and remembering smatterings of Aquinas and Augustine, I find both Peterson and Paglia to be inadequate.