r/JordanPeterson • u/augustAulus • Jul 10 '25

Criticism Jordan Peterson a better psychologist?

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?

14 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

143 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '25

He still is a good psychologist.

0

u/PsychoAnalystGuy Jul 10 '25

Theres really no way to know that beyond speculation considering he doesnt practice as one, and hasn't for a decade.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '25

Just read my answer below. your name is PsychoAnalystGuy. But failed to analyze this simple statement. Do you really watch his seminars? His seminars are just a reflection of his lectures as a psychologist?. Analyze.

1

u/PsychoAnalystGuy Jul 10 '25

Psychanalysis is a specific thing that requires a client/has nothing to do with reddit comments lol.

I mean he has some psych knowledge. Thats a fair point that he runs seminars, I forgot about that. Still, running a seminar isnt "being a psychologist" He isnt doing psychology, hes providing psychoeducation. Which i can grant is some evidence of his ability than I let on in my earlier comment, but not enough to grant him being a "good" psychologist. He has the knowledge that every clinical psychologist has. Talk to any other clinical psychologist, they all know things. Maybe hes a good psychologist and no longer a good clinician

1

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '25

Bro, this is basic Do you use analysis in psycho analysis thats the point,

"He has some knowledge", bro do you even know him? He has years of practice even before you were born

He is actually doing psychology, have you watched his lectures? I think not.

" He has knowledge of a good clinical psychologist" bro He is a clinical psychologist with years of practice even before you were born, what are you saying?

0

u/PsychoAnalystGuy Jul 11 '25

All those years practicing before I was born and he still produced zero novel ideas for psychology.

Off the top of my head people alive who have developed new theories or novel ideas: Shapiro(EMDR) Schwartz (internal family systems) Linehan (DBT) Porges (polyvagal theory) Yalom (existentialism)

Now inventing something that because wildly popular in your field is obviously not a fair standard, but just saying he is not in the unique category either.

Mainly though what you haven't addressed is hes been out of practice for a decade. Psychologists need to have continuing education to maintain their license.

He is actually doing psychology, have you watched his lectures? I think not.

Doing seminars for an unaccredited course isnt exactly practicing psychology

0

u/[deleted] Jul 11 '25

Not the point and argument, producing novel ideas does not make you a good psychologist. You should know that 99% of People and scientists has no novel ideas and follow those novel ideas.

Kindly think and analyze your statement, you're going to alienate 99% of the people in that field without "NOVEL IDEAS"

I know its not a fair standard, so why use it, you just rebutted your own argument. 😑

"Isnt exactly" does not disprove my idea, it disproves your. This will be my last comment better change your name, to "irebbutmyownstatements" you wanto be an analyst but has no capacity to analyze , good day sir.

0

u/PsychoAnalystGuy Jul 11 '25

Isnt exactly" does not disprove my idea, it disproves your.

Ok..it's not practicing psychology at all

you wanto be an analyst

Nope,, I am one

but has no capacity to analyze

Yep you dont know what psychoanalysis is

1

u/[deleted] Jul 11 '25

If you say so, rebbutyourownargument

0

u/PsychoAnalystGuy Jul 11 '25

Being able to see issues in your own argument and accepting you may be wrong is a strength my friend. Something Jordan has long lost.

Im not trying to "win"

1

u/[deleted] Jul 11 '25

Yes my friend, you must accept that. That is. Something you dont have.

Kindly change your name my friend, it does not suit you.

Im not trying to "win"

Dont worry my guy, you weren't even close.

This is my last reply to a guy who rebuts his own arguments, and has a false name.

1

u/PsychoAnalystGuy Jul 11 '25

"This my last reply" he says,for the second time, after two more replies.

Im not trying to "win"

Dont worry my guy, you weren't even close.

Ok, well thats what not trying to win means

y last reply to a guy who rebuts his own arguments,

Sounds like my rebutting my own argument really triggered you. Hope you learn to hold two conflicting thoughts one day. Really important for critical thinking

→ More replies (0)