Secular psychology professor gets it on the value of Family

[Bonaventure]

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eieVE-xFXuo[/yt]

[Bonaventure]

Extremely informative, and the speaker, Jordan Peterson, became a darling of conservatives for refusing to use gender neutral pronouns.

[Greg]

That was epic.

Thanks for posting.

[Heinrich]

I hope he is wrong re the French election. I did Not watch, Just read backdrop caption.

[Kaesekopf]

Extremely informative, and the speaker, Jordan Peterson, became a darling of conservatives for refusing to use gender neutral pronouns.

He's not even /ourguy/, but he's sick of the leftism.

Odd bedfellows!

[Graham]

Probably more traditionalist than he lets on.

[Gardener]

Wife and I just watched. We both loved it.

[Elizabeth]

Very engaging fellow!

[Archer]

Thanks for posting, that was excellent. Definitely worth a watch.

[Non Nobis]

Extremely informative, and the speaker, Jordan Peterson, became a darling of conservatives for refusing to use gender neutral pronouns.

He's not even /ourguy/, but he's sick of the leftism.

Odd bedfellows!

In case anyone isn't familiar with Jordan Peterson (or is even less familiar than I was a while ago), here is something that shows how he is not /ourguy/:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPIh1xQiuI8[/yt]

He is definitely a conservative thinker and a good speaker, so we can appreciate that (and I will), but on the most important matters of all his thinking leads him far astray.

[Graham]

He's basically a modernist, and even for a modernist that's an embarrassing, wishy-washy answer. He wants to restrict God to ontology, Jesus to a helpful personification, and Scripture to psychology and symbolism, but that would make liars of the apostles. I wonder if anyone has ever put that to him straight-up.

[Sempronius]

 He was being a little mysterious."Did Jesus' body resurrect?" *long pause* "...I dont know"

[Graham]

I've been listening to Dr. Peterson's podcast. Much of it is very interesting. He has trouble seeing God as a person. He has no trouble seeing God as infinity, or reality, or possibility itself, but any part of theology or scripture that seems to him too anthropomorphic or blatantly miraculous he interprets as mythology and therefore converts (often ingeniously) into philosophical or psychological terms. Which can be valid in itself, because scripture is open to multiple levels of meaning and I can't see why that shouldn't include a 'psychological' component, so long as it doesn't contradict or rule out the other levels. Here, if I'm honest, I have the impression that he's making some authentic contributions to scriptural study. But the refusal to 'allow' God personhood, or direct intervention in the world, is a last-ditch attempt to place conceptual limits on what Dr. Peterson himself defines as the unlimited. 

[Elizabeth]

**scared of the warning in red and guilty**

I agree with how Dr. Peterson describes the dynamics of how brutally hard-working and ever-vigilant, the powerful law-oriented professionals must be in order to survive. 
His natural talent for teaching was evident in his remarks about how rich we really are in light of History.

[Gardener]

Not sure if the quote is attributed correctly, but of itself it's correct:



However, whilst appearing as a condemnation of women, I think it's actually a sharper rebuke against men.