Dr. Jordan B. Peterson, world-renowned clinical psychologist and professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Toronto, was asked about the University of Chicago’s new Department of Race, Diaspora, and Indigeneity (RDI) during the Chicago stop of his Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life tour, which the Chicago Thinker attended. The questioner, a PhD student at UChicago, expressed concern over the department’s creation, suggesting that “it’ll make it difficult to conduct science.” Peterson interjected, “No, it’ll make it impossible.”
Peterson continued, “You’re a PhD student, you’re supposed to be learning how to pursue the truth. That’s the goal, right? You’re developing expertise in the pursuit of truth… if you’re a scientist and you don’t believe [the truth will set us free], you’re not a scientist.”
He also noted that with regards to intellectual freedom, “The University of Chicago is one of the least corrupted… higher educational institutions, which is not saying much, by the way.”
The establishment of the RDI department came after several UChicago faculty members raised concerns over its potential violation of the Kalven Report, which requires UChicago’s administration to be socially and politically neutral to allow the fullest degree of academic freedom. Dorian Abbot, associate professor of geophysical sciences, has argued that the RDI department “is predicated on a CRT perspective and would not allow full inquiry into the subject from other perspectives,” with economics professor Harald Uhlig voicing similar concerns.
Dr. Peterson ascended into notoriety in 2016 after releasing a series of YouTube videos criticizing mandated gender pronouns in Canada. He recently resigned from his position as a fully tenured professor at the University of Toronto, citing “Diversity, Inclusivity and Equity mandates (DIE) imposed universally in academia.”
“I see my colleagues at the universities, the scientists, the STEM types… they have to write a DIE statement and if they don’t get it right… their research isn’t considered for funding. That’s not a problem, that’s a catastrophe, if you think that there’s any utility to the scientific pursuit,” Peterson remarked.
Peterson also emphasized how he has “colleagues, clinical psychologists, [and] professors who have subjected themselves to lectures about implicit racism from halfwit, barely educated ideologues with one percent of their clinical experience and intelligence telling them how to conduct themselves psychologically and they’ll submit themselves to it. You submit to what you submit to. So, be careful what you submit to.”
He similarly underscored the danger of disingenuously complying with DIE mandates: “My colleagues tell me, ‘We have to write these diversity statements, but we sort of… beat around the bush, and we tell them what they want to hear.’ You think you can do that without convincing yourself? You think your words have more impact on other people than they have on you? Who do you think you are? You think you can lie and stop yourself from believing your own lies? God, that’s like arrogance squared.”
Peterson concluded, “Courage is willingness to stand up for the truth when you’re not secure. PhD students, don’t practice what you don’t want to become.”
During his debate with Slavoj Zizek, it came to light that Jordan Peterson *had never actually read Marx*. His debate prep consisted of skimming the Communist Manifesto – a piece which any UChicago SOSC student is relieved to be assigned, as it is one of the shortest and least dense readings in whichever class it’s read. His approach to this topic is the same; he objects to the study of race, diaspora, and indigeneity despite not actually having done any of it. If you’re confident that your views on the subject are correct, then why not take a class in this new department and defend your arguments? It seems kind of silly to take up the censorship mantle on this issue, especially when a) you haven’t even said anything that’s been censored, and b) you’re the ones who are saying that students shouldn’t be allowed to study something.
You clearly have a bone against Peterson. Favorite author is Dostoievsky, he owns some arts from Russia and even gave his daughter a russian first name.
You stipulate he has not read Marx based on an answer he gave. Even if you read it, do you remember every detail of the book? You say it’s simple study. It’s not the only writings of Marx and maybe he does not agree with the position of that philosopher.
So that makes you angry… and then write things like “he doesn’t seem to know what He’s talking about”.
You just showed, finally, that you are here to counter-act; with some more or less subtle woke-communist agenda.
And know nothing of what Peterson has been through during the last decade, facing censorship and attacks from… the mob.
If you don’t like Jordan’s understanding of Marx’s ideology, then read Thomas Sowell’s understanding of Marx’s work – he is a well known graduate of your University and he certainly did read Das Kapital in depth.
Jordan is right….
Woke imbeciles are within the gates of the University.
They need to be excised.
Hі, I do believe this is a great website.
I stumbledupοn it 😉 I will come back yｅt again since
i have saved as a favorite it. Money and freedom is the greatеst way to change, may you be rich and continue to guide others.
What¦s Going down i’m new to this, I stumbled upon this I have found It absolutely helpful and it has aided me out loads. I am hoping to give a contribution & help different customers like its aided me. Great job.
Dr Peterson can surely be forgiven for not bothering to attempt to even skim-read Das Kapital, but one book he has read thoroughly is Stephen Hicks’s ‘Explaining Postmodernism’. (So that’s two things I have in common with him.) Whatever his book’s other merits, Hicks’s take on Kant, inherited from Rand, is seriously and deeply flawed and, as a result, his book’s influence on Peterson has been quite baleful in this respect. Happily, the remedy for this has been bequeathed to us by the late Sir Roger Scruton’s short book on Kant; I share Scruton’s view that Kant is the greatest philosopher since Aristotle, and I would sleep much better knowing either that Peterson had read Scruton on Kant or that at least he had been very strongly advised to do so, advice he might be expected to take because the two men spoke at some length some years before Scruton’s death (see ). Might Mr Christopher Phillips be able to help? Best wishes, -Mark
The YouTube link I tried to post above got redacted by the website rather than by the moderator (I think). Anyway, it’s easy to verify that “https COLON SLASH SLASH www DOT youtube DOT com SLASH embed SLASH kne-YULXUzU” is legitimate. Best wishes again, -Mark Drayton
—
Mr E M (‘Mark’) Drayton
Community Councillor (Fort William, Inverlochy & Torlundy).
6 Morven Pl. PH33 6HY, UK “EddieMDrayton AT gmail DOT com”.
Or (quicker) text me on +44 (0)7933 760031 (SMS only).
See also “https COLON SLASH SLASH DraytonMark DOT SubStack DOT com SLASH p SLASH latest-news”.
If you don’t like Jordan’s understanding of Marx’s ideology, then read Thomas Sowell’s understanding of Marx’s work – he is a well known graduate of your University and he certainly did read Das Kapital in depth.
I loved as much as you will receive carried out right here. The sketch is tasteful, your authored material stylish. nonetheless, you command get got an nervousness over that you wish be delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come more formerly again since exactly the same nearly very often inside case you shield this increase.