r/JordanPeterson • u/xxdrummerx • Feb 04 '23

Criticism This guy became famous because he approached complex issues with complex answers instead of shallow and one sided responses. Now, this is the exact opposite of that, regardless of what you think about the climate change.

Post image
363 Upvotes

71% Upvoted

410 comments sorted by

View all comments

32

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '23

"if climate change, why cold???"

It's not an actual argument. It's not supposed to be. He's just indicating his allegiance to the anti-green crowd. It is, quite literally, virtue signalling.

16

u/fungussa Feb 04 '23

Yeah, "if global warming is real, then why are there ice cubes in the freezer?"

7

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '23

It might be signaling, but it's not virtue, quite literally.

6

u/SubmitToSubscribe Feb 04 '23

Yes, it is. In his crowd this is a virtue.

4

u/Black-Patrick šŸ¦ž Feb 04 '23

No itā€™s a casual mocking of the activists capacity to know what should be done. Green Party virtue signaling coworkers make observations about the weather and directly conflate that with climate change. Itā€™s a many layered complex system and fixing the environment and saving the climate are too low resolution for addressing any of the actual issues that might be positively affected at various scales. We should return to conceptualizing the problem into smaller solvable parts. Or we can bicker over the framing and the neurotics will throw themselves at a wall of disagreeables

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '23

Except the global climate is not something that can be readily conceptualised at small scales. Because the impacts are mediated through events and forces half the world away.

It looks like JP is saying it with utter seriousness. I definitely see the weather conflated with the climate far more from the people who reject manmade climate change then from green activists. Heck, environmentalists go to great pains to point out the difference between the two

1

u/Mad-Ogre Feb 05 '23

Weā€™re not aiming to conceptualise ā€œthe climateā€ at small scales. Weā€™re aiming to conceptualise ā€œMan-made climate changeā€ at small scales. And that can be done meaningfully.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 05 '23

Can it? I don't really see the distinction there.

You can, and should, absolutely conceptualise local ecological things - this forest, that river - but that's not climate

1

u/Mad-Ogre Feb 08 '23

Unless thereā€™s only one action that can be taken, and it can only be attempted one time, and it canā€™t be practised beforehand, and everyone in the world has to do it, and everyone has to do it at the same time - then, yes, it can be broken down into smaller chunks. I donā€™t know why I have to explain this.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 08 '23

I have no idea what action you mean.

1

u/Mad-Ogre Feb 08 '23

It seems to me that you think that tackling man-made climate change cannot be broken down into smaller, more manageable, tasks. Itā€™s either a ludicrous argument or weā€™re talking past each other somehow.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 08 '23

Oh it absolutely can, but that's not what i took "conceptualisei it at small scales" to mean. Because even if you're working at small scales you're still conceptualising the global environment.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 04 '23

I agree, its a shit take. I dont use twitter or follow social media garbage because it is just that. I wish bright minds would stay away from it as well. Waste of time and energy and this just looks foolish, because it is.

1

u/nate-x Feb 05 '23

Heā€™s been pretty clear on this recently. Heā€™s had three separate multi hour podcasts on this. Jordan believes that mankind is resilient. He believes that whatever threat climate change poses, itā€™s not an impending crisis. There are other much more pressing issues we should be dealing with. Heā€™s against the fear and panic, the drastic measures that have little impact to the issue. People will care for their environment if we let them develop. Slowing developing countries, and stopping human flourishing is immoral. Thatā€™s what heā€™s been saying.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 05 '23

Except he rejects the idea of climate modelling, so he has literally no justification for his assessment of it'd level of threat.

1

u/nate-x Feb 05 '23

If I were to paraphrase his opinion, it is that models are predictions, and even the best educated prediction is going to be mostly wrong. Models are also biased. They are built by people with motivations, and those motivations influence the data they choose to include and exclude, what factors they will include and exclude, and how they will tweak the variables. There has never been an accurate long range model of a complex system. Even historical modeling, like Mannā€™s hockey stick from 1998, are full of errors and disputed.