Is There a Particular Reason You Don't Like Jordan Peterson?
Pierre Legg, a commentator and analyst, originally authored this essay. The piece delves into the controversial figure of Jordan Peterson and provides an analysis of his unpopular views, particularly on religion. Peterson's responses to questions can often be seen as incoherent and nonsensical, with a notable example being his answer to the question of Jesus' resurrection.
Religious Views and Their Criticism
Jordan Peterson's image as a thinker who delves deeply into profound topics can be misleading. In reality, when it comes to religious matters, his responses are often incoherent and nonsensical. While his stance against totalitarian efforts to enforce gender pronoun usage has been commendable, his religious discourse is severely criticized for its pedantry and lack of clarity. According to Pierre Legg, Peterson's views on religion are blown out of proportion by his supporters. His recent aim to defuse the question of whether he believes in the resurrection of Jesus is prime evidence of his lack of clarity. Legg's analysis suggests that Peterson's responses are not based on firm religious understanding but rather on evasive postmodern tactics.
The Crucial Question and Peterson's Response
When pressed about his belief in the resurrection of Jesus, Peterson’s response lacks clarity and coherence. In Legg's example, when asked a straightforward question about whether he believes that Jesus rose from the dead, Peterson's response is bewildering. Peterson suggests that the question depends on the meaning of "Jesus," and that the people who saw the resurrection also did not fully understand what it meant. This evasive response is criticized as a lack of logical reasoning and the hijacking of a debate into a word game. Legg provides biblical references that clearly support the belief in the resurrection, such as Luke 24:5-6, 1 Thessalonians 4:14, 1 Peter 1:3, and 1 Corinthians 15:12-15.
Postmodern Tactics and Their Impact
By evading the question and resorting to postmodern tactics, Peterson's responses are criticized for intentionally evading the subject at hand. Such tactics involve repeatedly redefining terms to win an argument, which can make substantive debate impossible. This approach is seen as dishonest and counterproductive. This is notable in other debates where Peterson similarly defies the issue and seeks for tenuous analogies from literature or vast theological claims.
Personal and Financial Motivations
Apart from his religious views, Legg points out that Peterson's financial success and influence on religious dogmas are also under scrutiny. Peterson benefits financially from his works, with supporters buying his books and donating to his causes. Legg suggests that his views on Christianity are strategically framed to maintain his financial success. The primary example given is his desperate attempt to clarify his views on the resurrection of Jesus in a way that is incoherent and self-serving.
Conclusion
Jordan Peterson, while a highly influential thinker, appears to be more confused or occasionally dishonest in his religious responses. His evasive tactics and lack of firm religious conviction are criticized by Legg. The primary criticism revolves around Peterson's flimsy religious argumentation and the strategic framing of his views to appeal to a specific audience. This essay delves into these criticisms, providing a clear and reasoned analysis of Peterson's stance on religious questions.