The key to Peterson’s appeal is also his greatest weakness. He wants to be the man who knows everything and can explain everything, without qualification or error. On Channel 4 News, he posed as an impregnable rock of hard evidence and common sense. But his arguments are riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of subjects, including postmodernism, gender identity and Canadian law, that lie outside his field of expertise. Therefore, there is no need to caricature his ideas in order to challenge them.
So Dorian Lynskey, the author of the opinion piece, calls out Jordan Peterson's arguments for being "riddled with conspiracy theories and crude distortions of subjects", but can't provide a single piece of evidence in the entire article outlining which arguments are wrong or distorted. This is what bothers me so much about a lot of the debates that goes on in the various forums. People want to say that someone doesn't know the facts, but can't state the facts themselves. more than this, when people try to provide information to counter a point, they cannot provide sources to back up their claims.
Dr. Peterson is just like every other person on the planet, in that he can make mistakes and have an incomplete understanding of a subject. The best way to correct those mistakes isn't to just write them off and say "these are wrong", but to clearly state what is wrong, provide references for follow-up investigation and study, then encourage a response after a sufficient passage of time.
The art of debate and reason is clearly lost … if we ever truly had it to begin with.How dangerous is Jordan B Peterson, the rightwing professor who 'hit a hornets' nest'?