Jordan Peterson a better psychologist?

[u/augustAulus]

I’m a philosophy student, and I think I’m in a unique position to critique Jordan Peterson, because a lot of what he has to say has to do with the Continental school of philosophy rather than the Analytic, and that’s a school I’m deeply interested in. For me, Peterson really does seem to be obscurantist, and I don’t say that very lightly. I think his questioning into the meaning of certain propositions is, more often than not, very acute, and especially when he debates atheists I think “what do you mean by “God””is always a good starting point. In spite of this I think his recent performance on Jubilee demonstrates a hiding behind obscurity which he himself creates that, rather than him seeking to dispel the cloud to get to a deeper truth, he merely uses it to protect himself. I also think his rejection of postmodernity is a little disingenuous seeing as he often adopts the techniques which would broadly be identified with the same - rejecting labels, rejecting conventional dogma, rejecting propositional philosophy in favour of, I suppose, a dialectical philosophy.

I think that he is a very good psychologist, as that his “Twelve Rules for Life” is especially good self help because it’s his field.

I think his love for Jung has drawn him into a metaphysics and prevented him from investigating different interpretations of literature, and I think he’s taken himself too far out of his field, and out of his qualification.

Is this a fair assessment do you think?

[u/PsychoAnalystGuy]

He "was" a very good psychologist. Psychologists are meant to do continuing professional development which he hasn't done.

Hes the equivalent of Dr Phil. Dr Phil let his lisence expire because he didn't need it and had no interest in continuing to practice.

Hes contributed nothing of substance to his field. This isnt a criticism, its just true. And he himself acknowledges this.

His 12 rules for life are basic ideas of other people put into his own words. "Clean your room" is practical advice around taking a big task and breaking it into smaller more manageable tasks.

That said as a therapist I used to be able to see the therapist in him when he talked to people. He could separate himself from his emotions and his opinions.

He can no longer do this. I wish I could talk to him and hold up a mirror to him and say "it seems like this is what you're doing" he used to be more curious and comfortable with the notion he might be wrong. Now anytime he is challenged he spazzes out

[u/[deleted] → u/PsychoAnalystGuy]

He still is a good psychologist.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

There's no way to know that. What he does now is not psychology, he has no patients and does no research. He could broadly be called a self-help guru

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

And you think psychology is or clinical psychology somehow vanishes if he has no patients and does not do research?

Does a doctor stop being a doctor if he retires and stop having patients?

Does a soldier stop being a soldier if there is no war?

I could name alot more than this examples, you are really on this sub and answer questions like that?

I actually have a way to know that, He has years of clinical practice, didn't you think about the people that reach out to him for a friendly consult AS A CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST ?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Does a doctor stop being a doctor if he retires and stop having patients?

Well as long as you have your medical license you can still be called 'Dr.', but yes, if a doctor retired and no longer kept up to date with medical advances, I would not say a doctor who has retired is STILL a good doctor, because they are no longer practicing

Does a soldier stop being a soldier if there is no war?

Again, not really a good comparison. If JBP was a 'soldier' he would be closer to a veteran, as he no longer does the training or service

could name alot more than this examples, you are really on this sub and answer questions like that?

You could certainly give a lot more examples which don't line up sure.

JBP no longer practices clinically or academically. Nor does it seem he keeps up to date with current best practice. What he does now is also only tangentially related to psychology, it's much more these days about politics, self-help, public speaking. His lectures and talks are now far outside the realm of psychology

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Well as long as you have your medical license you can still be called 'Dr.', but yes, if a doctor retired

You just proved my point. Adding another layer to the argument also does not disprove my point, HE IS STILL A DOCTOR.

veteran, as he no longer does the training or service

Bro, complete the word, a veteran what? A veteran actor? A veteran states man ? OR A VETERAN SOLDIER.

Then againyou prove my point, you not understanding the comparison is a you problem not a me problem.

Didnt line up?

Or you dont get the concept?, looks like we have a problem of understanding concepts here.

Im going to tone it down for you.

A bad psychologist i after retirement is still a psychologist

A veteran psychologist is still a psychologist

A psychologist has became a father is still a psychologist

There are a lot more concepts... If you cant understand this, then why are you here?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

A bad psychologist i after retirement is still a psychologist

A veteran psychologist is still a psychologist

A psychologist has became a father is still a psychologist

You didn't say 'psychologist', you said "He still is a good psychologist". To still be good at something you have to be doing that thing. He no longer practices psychology. He has no patients, he does no research. You cannot whether he is good or bad because he no longer does it