Category Archives: Jordan Peterson

Jordan Peterson, God, and Christianity: The Search for a Meaningful Life

January 14, 2021

Few psychologists have garnered more attention in the past five years than Jordan Peterson, whose YouTube channel has amassed 4.4 million subscribers and social media feeds have attracted millions more. Petersons online personality courses have enrolled more than 40,000 students and his books have sold millions of copies across the globe. Among them is 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos, which became a bestseller after being published in 2018 and has been translated into 45 languages.

In the new bookJordan Peterson, God, and Christianity: The Search for a Meaningful Life,Word on Fire FellowMatthew Petrusek, Ph.D., provides a systematic analysis, from a Christian perspective, of Petersons biblical series on YouTube and12 Rules for Life. The epilogue examens its sequel,Beyond Order.

Prof. Petrusek is an associate professor of theological ethics at Loyola Marymount University and co-authored the book with LMU philosophy professor Christopher Kaczor, Ph.D.

Jordan Peterson, God, and Christianity was recently published by the Word on Fire Institute.

IACS spoke to Prof. Petrusek about the book.

Why did you write this book?

Working with Dr. Chris Kaczor, I wanted to speak to two audiences at the same time. First, to committed Christians, I wanted to highlight how Petersons work has been wildly successful in making the biblical understanding of reality, humanity and morality attractive to a secularized, post-Christian culture. To Petersons many non-Christian followers, I wanted to show how orthodox Catholicism completes and fixes the areas in Petersons thought that, in my view, need more philosophical and theological development and refinement.

How do Jordan Peterson and his work fit into the search for a meaningful life?

Petersons lectures and books address many different topics. However, one unifying theme in all of them is that life is not only meaningful but also that meaning is objective. It is not merely an individual or social construct. It is embedded in reality. That is boilerplate philosophical and theological material for Catholics, but Peterson has made it sound revolutionarily liberating to secular ears.

Peterson is a controversial and divisive figure. How has that controversy shaped the public perception of his works and thought?

I dont think Petersons work is controversial and divisive two terms that have taken on almost entirely subjective meaning in the past few decades. To be sure, an influential cadre of media, business, and academic voices have spoken loudly and very negatively about Peterson. However, in my view, they have not seriously engaged his arguments and, even less, shown evidence why his positions are wrong. Rather, their hostility to Peterson seems to be ideologically driven. As a Catholic, I do not agree with everything Peterson has said or written; that is why, in great part, I co-wrote the book. However, also as a Catholic, I do not find his principal arguments to be controversial or divisive.

Do you think Peterson has been effective at re-introducing the Bible and God into secular culture and, if so, why?

Yes. I think many secularists are drawn to Peterson, first, because he is a man of science and science is one thing, perhaps the only thing, that many secularists take seriously. So if a scientist can find such great meaning in the Bible, maybe they can, too. Second, Peterson, like the podcaster Joe Rogan, is not afraid to follow the truth wherever it leads, or, at least, where he thinks it leads. He is intellectually curious but also profoundly concerned with finding a good answer to his questions (that is, not just curious for the sake of curiosity). That combination of authenticity, intellectual openness, and moral seriousness is a rarity and will draw many peoples attention. Third, although Catholicism has always read the Bible with an ear to all its levels of meaning, Peterson has opened the biblical text to meanings that secular audiences (and poorly catechized Christian audiences) were not previously aware of. In fact, one lesson I think the Peterson phenomenon teaches Catholics is what a poor job we, both laity and clergy, have done in communicating the moral and spiritual richness of scripture. Happily, there has been a Catholic intellectual renaissance blossoming the past several years that has been reintroducing the beauty and brilliance of the Bible to the culture. Bishop Robert Barrons Word on Fire apostolate has been at the forefront of this movement.

From your perspective, how have Petersons thoughts and attitude toward God changed over time?

It is very hard to say where Petersons explorations will take him. It seems the experience of his wifes sudden healing from cancer and her devotion to the rosary has had a significant effect on him. But, of course, conversion is only a decision between God and the individual. All the same, I think of him, sometimes, as a contemporary St. Augustine of Hippo who is gradually thinking his way into orthodox Catholicism, yet still privately saying for now, to paraphrase St. Augustine in the Confessions, Make me a believer Lordbut just not yet!

Editors Note: Follow Prof. Petrusek on Twitter @MattPetrusek.

Original post:

Institute for Advanced Catholic Studies at USC > USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and...">Scholar Q&A: Matthew Petrusek, Ph.D. > Institute for Advanced Catholic Studies at USC > USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and...

Lightspring / Shutterstock

Besides the Eiffel Tower and foie gras, France is known for having produced an intellectual class that, over the centuries, from Diderots Encylopdie to Derridas critical theory, has successfully exported its products to the rest of the world.

Frances intellectual history demonstrates that alongside traditional social classes, a nation may cultivate something called the intellectual class, a loose network of people who collectively produce ideas about society that are no longer restricted to the traditional categories of philosophy, science and literature. Prominent intellectuals merge all three in their quest to interpret the complexity of the world and human history.

READ MORE

French intellectuals are perceived as floating freely in the media landscape. American intellectuals, in contrast, tend to be tethered to universities or think tanks. They publish and sometimes appear in the media, but with a serious disadvantage, having tocompete in shaping public discourse with far more influential media personalities such as Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson or even Tucker Carlson.

A stale historical clich compares Europe with ancient Greece and the US with the Roman Empire. Rome and the US both produced a vibrant and distinct popular culture, with a taste for gaudy spectacle and superficial entertainment. But in Roman times, plebeian culture co-existed with a patrician culture cultivated by Romes ruling class. Modern democracy roundly rejects the very idea of a ruling class. Commercialism has turned out to be the great equalizer. Everyone in America is expected to share the same culture of movies, TV and popular music. The same applies to popular ideas, whether political, scientific or economic.

Amy Wax is a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania who is not shy about expressing her ideas, notably her updated version of class differences. She is convinced that what she calls bourgeois culture replaced Romes patrician culture in the US but is in danger of extinction. Wax believes everyone in the US, including recent immigrants, should share that culture. Anyone who resists should be excluded. She also thinks that race and ethnicity are reliable indicators of the capacity of immigrants to conform.

As a young woman, Wax paced the halls and absorbed the wisdom spouted in lectures at Yale, Oxford, Harvard and Columbia University. Along the way, she amassed the kind of elite educational experience that identifies her as a distinguished exemplar of the modern intellectual class. With such impeccable credentials, it is fair to assume that she is not only well-informed but has learned the fine art of responsible thinking, a quality the media attributes to such luminaries.

So could it have come about that such a distinguished thinker and ranking member of the intellectual class should now be accused of sharing the kind of white supremacist attitude Hillary Clinton (Wellesley, Yale) famously attributed to the basket of deplorables? The intellectual class in the US uniformly and loudly rejects all forms of racism. If Wax expresses ideas that echo racist theses, it would indicate that she is betraying her own intellectual class. Appropriately, her university acknowledged her betrayal when it condemned her xenophobic and white supremacist discourse.

In a podcast in late December, Wax went beyond her previously expressed belief that the US would be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites. On that earlier occasion, she specifically targeted blacks, whom she categorizes as intellectually inferior. This time, she took aim at Asians, whose reputation for academic excellence and scientific achievement most people admire. She justified her attack in these terms: As long as most Asians support Democrats and help to advance their positions, I think the United States is better off with fewer Asians and less Asian immigration.

When the host of the podcast, Professor Glenn Loury, questioned her logic, she evoked the danger of the dominance of an Asian elite in this country who may change the culture. Waxs fear of domination by a foreign race and her defense of white civilization could hardly convince Loury, who is black. Loury countered that the Asians Wax wants to exclude are creating value and enlivening the society.

How do we lose from that? he asks. In response, Wax offered her own rhetorical question: Does the spirit of liberty beat in their breast?

This weeks Devils Dictionary definition:

Spirit of liberty:

Americas supreme civic virtue that consists of pursuing self-interested goals and conducting aggressive assaults against whatever one finds annoying

Wax offered her own definition of the spirit of liberty, which she identified as the virtue associated with people who are mistrustful of centralized concentrations of authority who have a kind of dont tread on me attitude, who are focused on our freedoms, on our liberties, on sort of small- scale personal responsibility who are non-conformist in good ways.

Apart from the fact that Wax is attributing a cultural attitude to Asians (more than half of humanity), her idea of liberty reflects feelings associated with aggressive, nationalistic historical memes(for example, dont tread on me) rather than the kind of political concept we might expect from a serious intellectual. In his 1859 essay On Liberty, John Stuart Mill defined it as the protection against the tyranny of political rulers, analyzing it in terms of the individuals relationship with authority, not as a spirit or attitude. But Mill was English and, unlike Americans, the English are disinclined to celebrate attitude.

Wax, who is Jewish, paradoxically complained that Jews have a lot to answer for numerically through their predominance. She derides their susceptibility to the idealistic, pie-in-the-sky socialist ideas. When Loury accuses her of appealing to a stereotype, she objects that theres nothing wrong with stereotyping when it is used correctly. Just as Wax approves of non-conformity in good ways she condones correct stereotyping. She believes herself to be the arbiter of whats good and correct.

Wax shares with Fox News host Tucker Carlson a sense of legitimate domination of what she calls the tradition of the legacy population, identified as the traditional white Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) majority. Wax aligns with cultural nationalists like Samuel Huntington, whose book Who Are We: Americas Great Debate? following his famous The Clash of Civilizations: And the Remaking of the World Order preached for the reaffirmation of the political and moral values transmitted by the WASP founders of American culture 400 years ago.

The Weatherhead Center for International Affairs of Harvard University sums up the components of the Puritans culture: the English language, Protestant values, individualism, religious commitment, and respect for law. The cultures admirers routinely forget that their respect for law might mean disrespecting the law of the indigenous populations of the land they chose to occupy. Enforcing that respect sometimes translated as genocidal campaigns conducted in the name of that law. It also embraced slavery based on racial criteria.

Waxs up-to-date WASP culture, which she prefers to call bourgeois culture, no longer requires genocide or slavery to prevail. Her defense of a largely imaginary legacy culture has nevertheless led her to embrace a racist view of humanity. While decrying the multicultural wokism that she believes now dominates academic culture, she appears to believe 19th-century France rather than the Yankee Revolution sets the standard to live up to.

Wax is right to lament the very real breakdown in Americas intellectual culture. The trendy woke moralizing so prevalent in American academia deserves the criticism she levels at it. Both her attitude and that of woke scholars derive from the same puritanical tradition that insists on imposing its understanding of morality on everyone else.

Waxs choice of bourgeois culture as the desirable alternative to wokism seems curious. Bourgeois culture is identified with the mores of a dominating urban upper-middle class that emerged in 19th century France that projected the image of a vulgar version of the aristocracy. It produced a culture specific to France, very different from the democratic culture of the United States at the time.

This highlights another difference. Whereas the French intellectual class, even when indulging in its traditional disputes, tends to agree on the meaning of the terms it fabricates, American intellectuals routinely bandy about terms they never seek to define or understand and use them to punish their enemies. That is what Wax has done with bourgeois culture and, in so doing, she has declared multiple races and ethnicities her enemies.

*[In the age of Oscar Wilde and Mark Twain, another American wit, the journalist Ambrose Bierce, produced a series of satirical definitions of commonly used terms, throwing light on their hidden meanings in real discourse. Bierce eventually collected and published them as a book, The Devils Dictionary, in 1911. We have shamelessly appropriated his title in the interest of continuing his wholesome pedagogical effort to enlighten generations of readers of the news. Read more of The Fair Observer Devils Dictionary. After four years of daily appearances, Fair Observers Daily Devils Dictionary moves to a weekly format.]

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observers editorial policy.

For more than 10 years, Fair Observer has been free, fair and independent. No billionaire owns us, no advertisers control us. We are a reader-supported nonprofit. Unlike many other publications, we keep our content free for readers regardless of where they live or whether they can afford to pay. We have no paywalls and no ads.

In the post-truth era of fake news, echo chambers and filter bubbles, we publish a plurality of perspectives from around the world. Anyone can publish with us, but everyone goes through a rigorous editorial process. So, you get fact-checked, well-reasoned content instead of noise.

We publish 2,500+ voices from 90+ countries. We also conduct education and training programs on subjects ranging from digital media and journalism to writing and critical thinking. This doesnt come cheap. Servers, editors, trainers and web developers cost money. Please consider supporting us on a regular basis as a recurring donor or a sustaining member.

{{policy}}

{{dismiss}}

{{deny}}{{allow}}

{{deny}}{{allow}}

' + o + "

Fair Observer All rights reserved

Original post:

Amy Wax and the Breakdown of Americas Intellectual Culture - Fair Observer

Joe Rogan is starting his year with steak. Lots and lots of steak. The podcaster and MMA commentator announced on Instagram that he will be adhering to the carnivore diet for the entire month of January, a challenge that he has previously participated in which involves eating nothing but meat. This time, however, he is making one minor adjustment.

"January is world carnivore month," he wrote in the caption. "This time Im adding fruit to this diet. Just meat and fruit for the whole month."

The meat-only meal plan generated a lot of buzz in 2018, when Jordan Peterson revealed that he and his daughter Mikhaila live on only steak, water, and the occasional glass of bourbon, and that they have both seen positive health results as an outcome.

Writer Jack Crosbie tried the carnivore diet back in 2018 when it was blowing up as a phenomenon, and documented his experiences. He lost 10 pounds, but also felt so weak and nauseated during a boxing workout that he nearly threw up. "I have zero energy and it feels, literally, like Im punching under water," he said. "Every time I get hit with a body shot, it feels like Im going to vomit out the entire bag of cement (three days of steak) in my stomach."

While nobody is arguing that protein isn't important when it comes to building strength and muscle, eliminating vegetables from your diet as a source of nutrition is a lot harder to justify. "The removal of all vegetables is not something I would personally recommend, said clinical dietitian Scott Hemingway. "Theres very little science if any science to support any negative effects of consuming vegetables on our overall diet... If people find things that make them feel better or that works for them, Im all for supporting that. However, there really is no science to back these claims currently, and theres definitely no research to determine the potential long-term effects, whether beneficial or harmful, on a fad diet like this."

This content is imported from Instagram. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Dietitian Abby Langer, R.D. agreed, telling Men's Health: "Even keto or Atkinsas limited as they arestill include vegetables, and you can still have some low-sugar fruits. But the philosophy of carnivore is that carbs, fruits, and vegetables arent healthy. Yes, youll lose a lot of weight... But thats because youre cutting out every other food except for protein."

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

Here is the original post:

Joe Rogan Says He's Back on the Carnivore Diet - menshealth.com

With the Cardinals playoff game Monday night against the Rams, the practice schedule was pushed ahead so the team will be on the field beginning Thursday and through Saturday for the normal three days of work before a game.

That will be the first indication of where injured players are as the team hopes to have as many of the walking wounded as possible to be available.

For Sundays game against Seattle, five of the seven inactive players were injured: running back Chase Edmonds, wide receiver/kick returner Rondale Moore, cornerback Marco Wilson, defensive tackle Jordan Phillips and tight end Demetrius Harris.

Then, during the game, running backs James Conner (ribs) and Jonathan Ward (knee), and cornerback Kevin Peterson (concussion) exited with injuries.

Head coach Kliff Kingsbury said, We should know more on KP today, which sounded somewhat like hope that Peterson might clear the concussion protocol.

As for Edmonds, Conner and Ward, Kingsbury said, Once we get out there Thursday, we'll have a better idea. But as of now, I would just say day-to-day. I don't know how they're gonna progress as the week goes on.

In addition to the loss of wide receiver DeAndre Hopkins from the offense, Moores absence has also affected what the offense can do.

Rondale's a special talent, Kingsbury said. I think we've all seen that. He's dynamic, unique in space, all those things. Really gives us a spark, so it would be great to have him back if we can get him.

The Cardinals made two roster moves Wednesday, re-signing defensive tackle Zach Kerr to the practice squad and activating tight end Maxx Williams from reserve/COVID-19.

Kerr was waived Monday after departing the COVID list and was added after clearing waivers Tuesday.

Williams remains on reserve/injured, so his activation is immaterial to Mondays game. However, the Cardinals now have no players on reserve/COVID-19.

Visit link:

Walking Wounded Hope to Practice and Play This Week - Sports Illustrated

Breadcrumb Trail Links

National Post readers speak out on the issues of the day

Publishing date:

Re: Trudeau and other partisans should rein in the rage, John Ivison, Jan. 4

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

While reading John Ivisons column, the concept of the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few bounced around in my mind. Whether Dickens or Spock, the idea has clearly been lost on both the populist and progressive sides in modern (and dysfunctional) politics. In the past, politicians developed and implemented policies aimed at the needs of the many. Red Tories and Blue Liberals ensured their parties stayed focused on the centre that captured the vast majority of people also known as voters. Compromise was a critical capability of any successful government in developing, modifying and deploying policy changes that would benefit the greatest number of Canadians and maintain both a stable economy and a stable rich Canadian culture.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

How times change. The fallout from the Trump years continues to be felt everyday as a very vocal minority drives rage from the right, destroying any chance of a reasoned political discourse, replaced instead by an attitude that if you are not with us, you are against us. We Canadians and our system are clearly much better. But one doesnt have to dig very far to see we are in the same boat as America. It is simply leaning hard left instead of hard right, well off the centre that has traditionally been Canadas advantage. Justin Trudeau and his band of progressives clearly have the attitude that if you are not with us, you are against us. Instead of building a better, stronger, and more prosperous society for all, it seems they focus more and more on policies that benefit a very vocal minority at the expense of the majority of Canadians and seem hell bent on destroying what has made Canada great economically, socially and culturally. Whether the ship capsizes to the right or the left is somewhat academic. The rage builds up to a breaking point and the ship still capsizes.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

I, too, have great hopes for 2022 and pray the illiberal left reins in its rage. After all, the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the few if Canada is to avoid the precipice the U.S. is heading towards at flank speed.

Stephen Gesner, Oakville, Ont.

Truer words were never spoken and I hope that the spreading of fear by the prime minister and others will end before this pandemic does. COVID has provided the perfect cover for Justin Trudeau to distract from rising inflation, his irresponsible spending, his war on fossil fuels and pushing woke ideologically driven policies. Using fear, now against the unvaccinated, continues to keep Trudeau in control of his radical agenda. COVID has in fact given the political class something they could only dream about having absolute power.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Larry Comeau, Ottawa

Re: Schools open for Omicron except here in Canada, Chris Selley, Jan. 5

It is an axiom that you cannot manage what you do not or cannot measure. OMICRON has overwhelmed our ability to test, contact trace and measure its spread in the broader population. There is no way to know when to unlock the lockdown when the data we have used to date to manage lockdowns is no longer reliable, if at all available. OMICRON is now managing us, rather than the other way around, and business people and school-aged children and young adults are suffering inordinately as a result.

It is too easy to blame Ontario Premier Doug Ford for all of this, but it should be noted that neither Steven Del Duca, the Ontario Liberal leader, nor Andrea Horwath, the provincial NDP leader, have offered a different way forward. Both of these leaders have shown they are capable only of frothing at the mouth over the obvious failures of the current government. It would appear that the only winners in the Lockdown Games are the politicians who claim to be following the science and the public health officials who abet their failure to actually do so.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Paul Clarry, Aurora, Ont.

Re: Open the damn country back up, before Canadians wreck something we cant fix, Jordan Peterson, Jan. 10

I would sharpen Jordan Petersons opinion that it is time for some courage in the face of COVID. People with no medical reason for not being vaccinated must have the courage of their convictions not to use our publicly funded medical system when they contract the illness. If these anti-vaxxers still want medical attention after contracting COVID, then courageous politicians must permit the private sector to provide it. This solution would recognizes the Canadian value of choice and ease the stresses COVID has caused our public health system.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Dal Corran, Toronto

Re: I see it coming: Mandatory vaccinations on the horizon, federal health minister says, Jan. 7

I am a fully vaccinated Canadian, even boosted, but I see mandatory vaccinations and vaccine passports as a huge intrusion on our freedoms and basically useless, as proven by Omicron.

Here is a novel solution for our underfunded and very inferior health-care system that so many Canadians still think is superior to other models.

Why dont we prohibit smoking and require all obese people to go on mandatory exercise programs? The money we save in health costs could be used to treat COVID patients.

After all, if were not going to be concerned about personal freedoms, we should look at all options.

E. Arndt, Yorkton, Sask.

The National Post welcomes letters to the editor (preferably 150 words or fewer). Letters should be emailed to letters@nationalpost.com. Please include your name, place of residence (town or city and province) and daytime phone number. Letters may be edited for length or clarity.

The big issues are far from settled. Sign up for the NP Comment newsletter,NP Platformed.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Read more:

Letters to the editor: Rein in the rage on the left and the right - National Post

Breadcrumb Trail Links

In Alberta, Indigenous police are patrolling non-Indigenous folks for a change

Publishing date:

First Reading is a daily newsletter keeping you posted on the travails of Canadian politicos, all curated by the National Posts own Tristin Hopper. To get an early version sent direct to your inbox every Monday to Thursday at 6 p.m. ET (and 9 a.m. on Sundays), sign up here.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Prior lockdowns have often seen Canada experience a rally round the flag effect as politicians and public health officials were held up as wise sages guiding the population through uncertain times. A new Leger poll has found that those sentiments are now headed out the window

Writing in the National Post, Rupa Subramanya pitched the case as to why lockdowns are probably doing very little to check the spread of Omicron . In this latest wave, the only European country to match Canada in terms of lockdown severity was The Netherlands. Subramanya noted that Dutch hospitalizations did indeed go down under lockdown but this was in spite of cases continuing to rise. Its not the lockdown that is keeping hospital and ICU admissions under control, but the simple fact that vaccines, and recovery from a prior infection, work to reduce the severity of the virus, she wrote .

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The Netherlands went for a hard lockdown Dec 19.But guess what, cases falling 1.8%/day on average for 3 weeks before lockdown and rising 6.7%/day since. And ICU admissions already falling before have continued to fall. Lockdown failed and was unnecessary. https://t.co/kyYz93OOIA

Former Senator Andr Pratte is currently living under curfew conditions in Quebec. In a column , he criticized the notion that Quebecs restrictions are based on science because the underlying data is becoming shoddy . Case rates are becoming increasingly arbitrary due to overwhelmed testing capacity, and even hospitalization rates have been corrupted by rising numbers of hospital patients who are admitted for other reasons but are marked down as COVID-19 patients after testing positive for an asymptomatic case.

And noted heterodox thinker Jordan Peterson is in the pages of the National Post with a much blunter assessment on the ongoing lockdowns: Open the damn country back up . Petersons chief observation is that nothing seems to work anymore in Canada : Parents cant rely on schools being open, travellers cant rely on airlines flying on schedule and shoppers increasingly cant trust shelves to be stocked. Were playing with fire Ive never seen breakdown in institutional trust on this scale before in my lifetime, he wrote.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

One of the signature experiences of the Omicron wave has been multi-hour lineups of cars queuing up for a COVID-19 test. In Burnaby, B.C., police saw a woman using her phone while in a 2.5 hour lineup and decided to slap her with a $300 ticket for distracted driving . In a statement , Burnaby RCMP said they had noticed ongoing issues among motorists in the constant crawl of test-site traffic, including using electronic devices and not wearing seatbelts.

Speaking of policing, for one of the first times in Canadian history, a First Nations police service will be policing a non-Indigenous community rather than the other way around . Albertas Tosguna Tsuutina Nation Police Service the official police authority of the Tsuutina Nation has just taken over policing duties of Redwood Meadows , a neighbouring community of 1,000 that has traditionally been serviced by the RCMP.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

After imposing vaccine mandates on health-care workers, air passengers and the civil service, Ottawa is now looking to make vaccination mandatory for American long-haul truckers crossing the border . The policy is expected to sideline up to 10 per cent of cross-border truckers, with industry groups warning that it would exacerbate rising food prices and ongoing supply chain backlogs. Everyone has been talking about inflation. And this is just going to continue to fuel that, one fruit importer told Reuters .

Trudeau government officials are getting progressively more comfortable with bad-mouthing the Peoples Republic of China . Most recently, that took the form of Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly telling Global News about Canadas new Indo-Pacific stategy a term that is essentially diplomatic code for Beijing-countering strategy.

Meanwhile, Canada might be sending weapons to Ukraine as the European country faces down a possible invasion from Russia . At least, Joly refused to deny as much when repeatedly pressed on the matter during an interview on CTV. In 2017, Ukraine was suddenly added to the list of countries approved for Canadian arms sales. Since 2015, Canada has kept a standing force of around 200 soldiers in Ukraine to act as military trainers.

Get all of these insights and more into your inbox every weekday at 6 p.m. ET by signing up for the First Reading newsletter here.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

More:

FIRST READING: The questionably effective lockdown everybody hates - National Post

(MENAFN- IANS)

New Delhi, Jan 11 (IANS) As we enter the New Year, some of us would want to focus on our physical health and wellbeing, while others may want to foray into new avenues related to wealth and prosperity. The list of resolutions is surely going to be a long one, but don't put down your pen just yet as Penguin India, through its new initiative -- Penguin Transform -- has another plan of action for the people who expect 2022 to be the year of great transformation.

As part of the initiative, Penguin India has curated a list of 12 international titles to be read over 12 months that promise to transform your outlook on life. On the journey that you undertake with these 12 books, you would find characters from works of fiction who would resonate with you, who would make you laugh and cry but would also teach you valuable lessons along the way about the different definitions of love and friendship, what it means to be independent and free and to live in a world that is ever changing.

Along with fiction, there are also widely recognised non-fiction titles that will make your mind reel with new information and your heart soar with new knowledge. At the end of the journey, you are sure to meet a better version of yourself -- #MeetTheNewYouIn2022.

'As humans and members of our society, we are changing every moment. Living our lives means facing uncertain experiences every now and then like this pandemic, but there are things in life that can be controlled and those are really the things that end up defining us. With this thought in mind, we at Penguin decided to initiate Penguin Transform with the help of our employees/colleagues in India to identify 12 books to go with 12 months of the year that would change a reader's perspective about life and perhaps even be transformative and make them better people,' said Richard Rowlands, Regional Sales Director, India & Asia, Penguin Random House UK.

'This campaign materialised as a result of a conversation I had with my team about what Penguin as a brand owes to its readers. A ubiquitous response was to introduce people to books that would move them, that would make them rethink one or another aspect of their life and would become a memorable and transformational experience for them,' said Manoj Satti, Vice President, International Product & Marketing, Penguin Random House India.

'A lot of thought and discussion has gone behind choosing these 12 international titles out of the innumerable books we end up publishing every year. We hope the readers are able to benefit from these titles the way our colleagues have,' he added.

Here goes:

1. Forty Rules of Love by Elif Shafaq

Ella Rubinstein has a husband, three teenage children, and a pleasant home -- everything that should make her confident and fulfilled. Yet there is an emptiness at the heart of Ella's life -- an emptiness once filled by love. So when Ella reads a manuscript about the 13th-century Sufi poet Rumi and Shams of Tabriz, and his 40 rules of life and love, her world is turned upside down. She embarks on a journey to meet the mysterious author of this work. It is a quest infused with Sufi mysticism and verse, taking Ella and us into an exotic world where faith and love are heartbreakingly explored.

2. Zen and the Art of Simple Living by Shunmyo Masuno

Zen is the perfect antidote to the stress and uncertainty of modern life...In clear, practical and easy to follow lessons -- one a day for 100 days -- renowned Buddhist monk Shunmyo Masuno draws on centuries of wisdom to show you how to apply the essence of Zen to modern life. You will learn how to exhale deeply to eliminate negative emotions, to arrange your house simply to clear your thinking, to line up your shoes at night to bring order to your mind, to plant a single flower and watch it grow, to worry less about what you cannot control, and so much more. You will even make time to think about nothing at all.

3. Think Again by Adam Grant

Discover how rethinking can lead to excellence at work and wisdom in life. Intelligence is usually seen as the ability to think and learn, but in a rapidly changing world it might matter more that we can rethink and unlearn. Organizational psychologist Adam Grant is an expert on opening other people's minds-and our own. As Wharton's top-rated professor and the bestselling author of 'Originals' and 'Give and Take', he tries to argue like he's right but listen like he's wrong. 'Think Again' invites us to let go of views that are no longer serving us well and prize mental flexibility, humility, and curiosity over foolish consistency. If knowledge is power, knowing what we don't know is wisdom.

4. Midnight Library by Matt Haig

Between life and death there is a library. When Nora seed finds herself in the midnight library, she has a chance to make things right. Up until now, her life has been full of misery and regret. She feels she has let everyone down, including herself. But things are about to change. The books enable Nora to live as if she had done things differently. With the help of an old friend, she can now undo every one of her regrets as she tries to work out her perfect life. But things aren't always what she imagined they'd be, and soon her choices place the library and herself in extreme danger. Before time runs out, she must answer the ultimate question: What is the best way to live?

5. Breath by James Nestor

There is nothing more essential to our health and wellbeing than breathing: take air in, let it out, repeat 25,000 times a day. Yet, as a species, humans have lost the ability to breathe correctly, with grave consequences. 'In Breath', journalist James Nestor travels the world to discover the hidden science behind ancient breathing practices to figure out what went wrong and how to fix it. Modern research is showing us that making even slight adjustments, for instance, jump-start athletic performance and rejuvenate internal organs.

6. A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle

This classic sci-fi adventure for children by bestselling US author Madeleine L'Engle is now a major new motion picture from Disney. When Charles Wallace Murry goes searching through a 'wrinkle in time' for his lost father, he finds himself on an evil planet where all life is enslaved by a huge pulsating brain known as 'It'. How Charles, his sister Meg and friend Calvin find and free his father makes this a very special and exciting mixture of fantasy and science fiction, which all the way through is dominated by the funny and mysterious trio of guardian angels known as Mrs Whatsit, Mrs Who and Mrs Which.

7. Normal People by Sally Rooney

Connell and Marianne grow up in the same small town in the west of Ireland, but the similarities end there. In school, Connell is popular and well-liked, while Marianne is a loner. But when the two strike up a conversation -- awkward but electrifying -- something life-changing begins. 'Normal People' is a story of mutual fascination, friendship and love. It takes us from that first conversation to the years beyond, in the company of two people who try to stay apart but find they can't.

8. Girl, Woman, Other by Bernardine Evaristo

This is Britain as you've never read it -- Britain as it has never been told. From Newcastle to Cornwall, from the birth of the 20th century to the teens of the 21st, 'Girl, Woman, Other' follows a cast of 12 characters on their personal journeys through the country and the last hundred years. They're each looking for something - a shared past, an unexpected future, a place to call home, somewhere to fit in, a lover, a missed mother, a lost father, even just a touch of hope

9. Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

Why is there more chance we'll believe something if it's in a bold typeface? Why are judges more likely to deny parole before lunch? Why do we assume a good-looking person will be more competent? The answer lies in the two ways we make choices: fast, intuitive thinking, and slow, rational thinking. This book reveals how our minds are tripped up by error and prejudice (even when we think we are being logical), and gives you practical techniques for slower, smarter thinking. It will enable you to make better decisions at work, at home, and in everything you do.

10. 12 Rules for Life by Jordan B. Peterson

How should we live properly in a world of chaos and uncertainty? Jordan Peterson has helped millions of people, young and old, men and women, aim at a life of responsibility and meaning. Now he can help you. Drawing on his own work as a clinical psychologist and on lessons from humanity's oldest myths and stories, Peterson offers 12 profound and realistic principles to live by. After all, as he reminds us, we each have a vital role to play in the unfolding destiny of the world. Deep, rewarding and enlightening, '12 Rules for Life' is a lifeboat built solidly for stormy seas: ancient wisdom applied to our contemporary problems.

11. When Breath Becomes Air by Paul Kalanithi

At the age of 36, on the verge of completing a decade's training as a neurosurgeon, Paul Kalanithi was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer. One day he was a doctor treating the dying, the next he was a patient struggling to live. 'When Breath Becomes Air' chronicles Kalanithi's transformation from a medical student asking what makes a virtuous and meaningful life into a neurosurgeon working in the core of human identity, what makes life worth living in the face of death, what do you do when life is catastrophically interrupted, what does it mean to have a child as your own life fades away? Paul Kalanithi died while working on this profoundly moving book, yet his words live on as a guide to us all.

12. Educated by Tara Westover

Tara Westover and her family grew up preparing for the End of Days but, according to the government, she didn't exist. She hadn't been registered for a birth certificate. She had no school records because she'd never set foot in a classroom, and no medical records because her father didn't believe in hospitals. As she grew older, her father became more radical and her brother more violent. At 16, Tara knew she had to leave home. In doing so she discovered both the transformative power of education, and the price she had to pay for it.

So, there you have it. Dig in and start reading!

--IANS

vm/dpb

MENAFN11012022000231011071ID1103519024

Read the original:

#MeetTheNewYouIn2022 the Penguin Transform Way | MENAFN.COM - MENAFN.COM

USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin

ASHWAUBENON 74, SHEBOYGAN SOUTH 33

ASHWAUBENON - Marcus Tomashek scored 19 points and Matt Imig added 16 to lead the Jaguars to the win.

Sheboygan South was led by Alex Kaffine with 14 points.

Sheboygan South 16 17 - 33

Ashwaubenon 41 33 - 74

Sheboygan South: Ladwig 6, Kaffine 14, Peterman 3, Leonhard 10. 3-pt: Kaffine 2, Ladwig. FT: 8-11. Fouls: 12.

Ashwaubenon: Imig 16, M. Tomashek 19, D. Tomashek 9, Hurd 1, Kelly 8, Herzog 3, Schoen 5, Huguet 5, Walton 1, Kirst 7. 3-pt: D. Tomashek 3, Imig 2, M. Tomashek 2, Herzog, Schoen, Kirst. FT: 12-14. Fouls: 12.

REEDSVILLE 76, SEVASTOPOL 34

REEDSVILLE - Brennen Dvorachek had a double-double with 23 points and 16 rebounds in the Panthers win over the Pioneers.

Carter Salm and Zach Dvorachek added 14 and 13 points, respectively, for Reedsville. Camden Dvorachek had 10 assists.

Sevastopol was led by Carter Bieris 15 points

Sevastopol 22 12 - 34

Reedsville 49 27 - 76

Sevastopol: Peterson 7, Jandu 5, Ash 5, Bieri 15, Sandoval 2. 3-pt: Peterson, Ash, Bieri. FT: 5-7. Fouls: 10.

Reedsville: B. Dvorachek 23, Taddy 2, Salm 14, Kenneke 2, Schenian 8, Z. Dvorachek 13, Eichhorst 4, C. Dvorachek 2, Schwahn 4, Ossmann 4. 3-pt: Z. Dvorachek 3. FT: 5-8. Fouls: 10.

MANITOWOC LUTHERAN 64, RANDOM LAKE 44

RANDOM LAKE - The Lancers led by 20 points at halftime in their win over the Rams.

Jenna Lischke scored 16 points and Emma Miller had 14 to lead Manitowoc Lutheran.

Random Lake was led by Abby Borchardt with 18 points and Halle Van Horn with 11.

Manitowoc Lutheran 39 25 - 64

Random Lake 19 25 - 44

Manitowoc Lutheran: H. Marohn 1, E. Marohn 2, Miller 14, Mehlhorn 7, Bessler 6, Lischka 16, Luebke 8, Ermis 10. 3-pt: Miller 4, Bessler 2, Lischka 2, Mehlhorn. FT: 1-7. Fouls: 17.

Random Lake: C. Noll 3, Borchardt 18, Harter 3, T. Noll 4, Wittenberg 2, Rathke 3, Van Horn 11. 3-pt: Borchardt 2, C. Noll, Rathke, Van Horn. FT: 7-14. Fouls: 11.

SHEBOYGAN LUTHERAN 52, HOWARDS GROVE 44

SHEBOYGAN - The Crusaders overcame a four-point halftime deficit to defeat the Tigers.

Faith Pape led Sheboygan Lutheran with 17 points. Anna Splittgerber and Addy Verhagen both added 12 points.

Ellie Schueler and Destiny Benton led Howards Grove with 13 and 11 points, respectively.

Howards Grove 23 21 - 44

Sheboygan Lutheran 19 33 - 52

Howards Grove: Larson 2, Benton 11, Heim 2, Reichwald 4, Bramstedt 8, M. Schueler 4, E. Schueler 13. 3-pt: E. Schueler 3. FT: 11-20. Fouls: 16.

Sheboygan Lutheran: Splittgerber 12, Verhagen 12, Brigham 4, Stricker 2, Beger 5, Pape 17. 3-pt: Splittgerber 4, Verhagen. FT: 9-13. Fouls: 16.

BRILLION 51, TWO RIVERS 33

BRILLION - The Lions led by 12 points at halftime and cruised to the victory.

Megan Schuman led Brillion with 15 points, while Makenna Dietrich scored 11 and Aubrie Williams had 10.

Two Rivers was led by Allyson Kakes with 12 points and Mackenzie Graff with 10.

Two Rivers 17 16 - 33

Brillion 29 22 - 51

Two Rivers: Slickman 2, Zimney 2, Kakes 12, McPherson 2, Delleman 5, Graff 10. 3-pt: Graff 2. FT: 7-13. Fouls: 12.

Brillion: Schuman 15, Dietrich 11, Schwahn 5, Schuh 6, Williams 10, Eichmeier 2, Shimek 2. 3-pt: Schuman, Dietrich 3. FT: 8-10. Fouls: 10.

ST. MARY CATHOLIC 68, SHEBOYGAN CHRISTIAN 13

SHEBOYGAN - Chloe Vogel scored all 19 of herpoints in the first half of the Zephyrs win over the Eagles.

Mackenna Epping hadseven points for Sheboygan Christian.

St. Mary Catholic 42 26 - 68

Sheboygan Christian 6 7 - 13

St. Mary Catholic: Griffith 7, C. Vogel 19, E. Vogel 6, Ripley 6, A. Norville 1, J. Vosters 9, Anderson 8, Voss 2, Brenn 4, Nackers 4, Ruess-Markley 2. 3-pt: Griffith, C. Vogel. FT: 6-11. Fouls: 10.

Sheboygan Christian: Zylstra 3, Epping 7, Bulkow 1, Young 2. 3-pt: None. FT: 3-8. Fouls: 7.

HILBERT 51, CEDAR GROVE-BELGIUM 35

CEDAR GROVE - The Wolves built a 14-point halftime lead and made it stand up in their win over the Rockets.

Laney Halbach led Hilbert with 21 points. Meghan Propson finished with 10 points.

Katelyn Morris led Cedar Grove-Belgium with 10 points.

Hilbert 29 22 - 51

Cedar Grove-Belgium 15 20 - 35

Hilbert: M. Propson 10, Halbach 21, Raymond 1, Diedrich 8, Sheets 5, Wiese 2, Woelfel 4. 3-pt: M. Propson 2, Halbach, Diedrich. FT: 5-9. Fouls: 12.

Cedar Grove-Belgium: Marti 3, O. Bahr 2, A. Bahr 7, Schmitz 5, Morris 10, Beightol 5, Hopeman 3. 3-pt: Marti, Schmitz, Beightol. FT: 6-8. Fouls: 9.

MISHICOT 45, PLYMOUTH 30

145: Logan Marquardt M pinned Jordan Lensmire :53. 152: Jacob Hibbard M dec. Jaden Papenfus 8-2. 160: Brant Cracraft M won by forfeit. 170: Silas Dailey P pinned Brian Lambrecht 2:28. 182: Nico Desotelle M pinned Deacon Allen 1:09. 195: Ben Griffey M pinned Jordan Trejo 1:02. 220: Logan Marshall M pinned Collin Harvey :54. 285: Wyatt Moore P pinned Harrison Sauer 1:44. 106: Double forfeit. 113: Kaden Tesarik M won by forfeit. 120: T.J Havlovitz M pinned Connor Murray 1:14. 126: Brooke Schuenemann P won by forfeit. 132: Kade Novak P won by forfeit. 138: Luke Hartenstein P won by forfeit.

RANDOM LAKE 78, ELKHART LAKE/HOWARDS GROVE 3

106: Chase Koepp RL won by forfeit. 113: Grant Gibson RL pinned Lacota Lisowe 6:37. 120: Dylan Brody RL pinned Josiah Horn 4:12. 126: Jackson Averill RL won by forfeit. 132: David San Felippo RL won by forfeit. 138: Natron Daggett RL won by forfeit. 145: Stone Pomeroy RL won by forfeit. 152: Jayden Young RL won by forfeit. 160: Toren Vandenbush RL won by forfeit. 170: Yuki Sesoko ELGHG dec. Tyler Schoneman 8-6. 182: Samuel Schwabe RL pinned Aaron Schorer :46. 195: Michael Upson RL won by forfeit. 220: Jordan Arendt RL won by forfeit. 285: Diego Brandt RL won by forfeit.

SHEBOYGAN 119.825, KAUKAUNA 66.4

Vault: 1, Elle Matczak S 8.6; 2, Naomi Harder S 8.35. Bars: 1, Elle Matczak S 7.25; 2, Elliot Zugel S 6.10. Beam: 1, Kailey Kaltenbrun S 8.35; 2, Elle Matczak S 7.95. Floor: 1, Kailey Kaltenbrun S 8.375; 2, Norah Bowers K 7.90. All-around: 1, Elle Matczak S 31.20; 2, Kailey Kaltenbrun S 30.225.

Varsity high school coaches or their statisticians should email results to sports@gannettwisconsin.com.

Continue reading here:

Here are Tuesday's high school sports results for the Manitowoc and Sheboygan area - Herald Times Reporter

Cobra Kai is back. Season 4 begins Friday and my family will be watching what is perhaps the most surprising hit of the decade and, personally, our favorite.

The Karate Kid spin-off had everything to go wrong. After several sequels and reboots, the franchise felt exhausted. Additionally, it was launched as part of YouTubes ill-fated plan to compete with Amazon and Netflix in producing original content.

However, Cobra Kai turned out to be a success. After being acquired by Netflix in June 2020, the show topped the Nielsen streaming charts. [empresa que faz medio de audincia], quickly racking up over 2 billion streaming minutes. The acquisition, as Forbes said, turned Cobra Kai from an obscure hit to Americas # 1 show.

The program works for a variety of reasons and has reached out to young people (my kids cant get enough), largely because it goes against the sacred cows of postmodernity and embraces radical ideas: self-ownership, personal responsibility, and individualism (in the best thick shell style of the 80s).

Cobra Kai does everything with humor and a different twist. The themes of individualism and self-improvement are channeled not by a wise sensei like Miyagi, but by degenerate Johnny Lawrence, the Karate Kid villain who was kicked in the face in the fifth. act.

Lawrence (William Zabka) is not a likely protagonist. If there had ever been a Mount Rushmore of 80s pop villains, Johnny Lawrence would be in it, stuck somewhere between Ed Rooney (Laughing Life Crazy), Judge Smails (Rubbish Club) and Biff Tannen (Back to the Future).

In the original Karate Kid, Johnny was the seemingly privileged bully who tormented Jerseys new working-class kid, leading Daniel Larussos transformation from punching bag to karate student and All Valley champion. (Larusso takes the title from Johnny, who until then was the champion.)

In Cobra Kai, things have changed.

Johnny is an unlucky handyman and beer drinker who watches American Eagle alone in his dingy apartment. From his red Firebird, he sees billboards popping up everywhere for the car dealerships of his old nemesis, Larusso Motors. He is divorced, separated from his son and arrested from the first episode. However, her life changes when a young man from her apartment building named Miguel asks for help dealing with bullies at school. Seems familiar?

Johnny agrees to train Miguel, but hes not Mr. Miyagi. He is gruff, a walking personification of toxic masculinity and intolerant. He calls Miguel Menudo (a successful Puerto Rican band in the 1980s), mocks immigrants, generalizes and sometimes uses a derogatory word that refers to a female body part. At one point, Miguel asks why he didnt let the women into Cobra Kai.

For the same reason that there are women in the army. It just doesnt make sense, says Johnny. Dont tell me that machismo bullshit. Im just saying that women are not made to fight. They have little hollow bones.

Johnny quickly gives in by letting the girls join Cobra Kai, however, this is only one step on his path to growth. And its this growth that makes the series so interesting. Johnnys weaknesses would be terrifying to modern audiences if they werent weighed against the larger story arc: Johnnys transformation from degenerate to true sensei.

Viewers see that Cobra Kai the dojo that tormented Daniel Larusso in Karate Kid isnt that bad. Under Johnnys tutelage, a host of misfit students learn something important: they dont have to be victims.

I will teach you the style of karate that I was taught. A method of combat that your generation desperately needs, says Johnny. You will gain strength. You will learn the discipline. And when the time is right, you will retaliate.

This post is a bit controversial, but the authors actually show that its not just physical strength that is taught. Johnny teaches his students that they have power and agency. One student, Eli, is mercilessly mocked at school for having a cleft palate. Even Johnny mocks Eli, calling him the lip. He describes the other students as a crater face and a piercing.

If the story ended there, we would see Johnny as a ruthless bully who hasnt changed at all since Daniel Larusso kicked him in the face in the tournament 30 years ago. Instead, however, after briefly leaving Cobra Kai because of Johnnys mean jokes, Eli returns changed (in both good and bad ways).

This is just one of many examples of Johnny showing his students that they have the power to shape their own destiny if they can find their inner strength, courage and identity. Equally important, we see how this philosophy is transformative in Johnnys own growth.

No doubt some will find Johnnys actions appalling; others will find them funny. The important thing is that Cobra Kai basically offers a philosophy of life taught by Jordan Peterson: use your power and influence as an individual to take control of your life.

Johnny does not remain unhappy, a man without a stable job who watches television alone and is mistaken for homelessness. After being fired, he arranges his life. He starts a dojo, takes Miguel as a student, drinks less, learns to give his students valuable lessons and not to belittle them. He cleans his apartment.

This last element may seem unnecessary. Its not. This fits perfectly with the philosophy of self-possession, taught by Peterson as a path to personal growth.

If you cant even clean your own room, who are you to give the world advice? Peterson says, I think if you want to change the world, start with yourself and work outside, because you develop your skills that way.

In essence, Johnny decides its time to take responsibility for his life the most important rule for Peterson and this is just one example of Cobra Kais broader exploration of individualism and of empowerment, themes that are explored in the first three seasons. .

Autonomy was once an American creed. Seen as the key to a fulfilling life the great essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson observed that nothing can bring you peace but yourself philosophy is out of fashion. But its a theme that permeates Cobra Kai.

In the series first three seasons, we see Miguel and his friends overcome lifes challenges not by chatting with teachers or running away from threats, but by learning to cope with their fears and the externalities that they are. faced. They make mistakes along the way. Friendships are broken. People get hurt. But they become stronger in body, soul, and spirit, and they learn that their newfound power must be balanced with other virtues, including mercy.

For the generations who have grown up in what Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff call a culture of safetyism, a type of fetish for safety and victimization, Cobra Kai may be the tonic they need to show that true strength and growth are unattainable. society or appeal to authority to resolve conflicts. It is done by changing yourself.

* Jonathan Miltimore is the editor-in-chief of FEE Foundation for Economic Education (FEE.org)

2021 Foundation for Economic Education. Posted with permission. Original in English.

See original here:

What Cobra Kai can teach a generation marinated in victimization The Oxford Spokesman - The Oxford Spokesman

My first introduction to Jordan B. Peterson, a University of Toronto clinical psychologist, came by way of an interview that began trending on social media last week. Peterson was pressed by the British journalist Cathy Newman to explain several of his controversial views. But what struck me, far more than any position he took, was the method his interviewer employed. It was the most prominent, striking example Ive seen yet of an unfortunate trend in modern communication.

First, a person says something. Then, another person restates what they purportedly said so as to make it seem as if their view is offensive, hostile, or absurd.

Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, and various Fox News hosts all feature and reward this rhetorical technique. And the Peterson interview has so many moments of this kind that each successive example calls attention to itself until the attentive viewer cant help but wonder what drives the interviewer to keep inflating the nature of Petersons claims, instead of addressing what he actually said.

This isnt meant as a global condemnation of this interviewers quality or past work. As with her subject, I havent seen enough of it to render any overall judgmentand it is sometimes useful to respond to an evasive subject with an unusually blunt restatement of their views to draw them out or to force them to clarify their ideas.

Perhaps she has used that tactic to good effect elsewhere. (And the online attacks to which shes been subjected are abhorrent assaults on decency by people who are perpetrating misbehavior orders of magnitude worse than hers.)

But in the interview, Newman relies on this technique to a remarkable extent, making it a useful illustration of a much broader pernicious trend. Peterson was not evasive or unwilling to be clear about his meaning. And Newmans exaggerated restatements of his views mostly led viewers astray, not closer to the truth.

* * *

Peterson begins the interview by explaining why he tells young men to grow up and take responsibility for getting their lives together and becoming good partners. He notes he isnt talking exclusively to men, and that he has lots of female fans.

Whats in it for the women, though? Newman asks.

Well, what sort of partner do you want? Peterson says. Do you want an overgrown child? Or do you want someone to contend with who is going to help you?

So youre saying, Newman retorts, that women have some sort of duty to help fix the crisis of masculinity. But thats not what he said. He posited a vested interest, not a duty.

Women deeply want men who are competent and powerful, Peterson goes on to assert. And I dont mean power in that they can exert tyrannical control over others. Thats not power. Thats just corruption. Power is competence. And why in the world would you not want a competent partner? Well, I know why, actually, you cant dominate a competent partner. So if you want domination

The interviewer interrupts, So youre saying women want to dominate, is that what youre saying?

The next section of the interview concerns the pay gap between men and women, and whether it is rooted in gender itself or other nondiscriminatory factors:

Newman: that 9 percent pay gap, thats a gap between median hourly earnings between men and women. That exists.

Peterson: Yes. But theres multiple reasons for that. One of them is gender, but thats not the only reason. If youre a social scientist worth your salt, you never do a univariate analysis. You say women in aggregate are paid less than men. Okay. Well then we break its down by age; we break it down by occupation; we break it down by interest; we break it down by personality.

Newman: But youre saying, basically, it doesnt matter if women arent getting to the top, because thats what is skewing that gender pay gap, isnt it? Youre saying thats just a fact of life, women arent necessarily going to get to the top.

Peterson: No, Im not saying it doesnt matter, either. Im saying there are multiple reasons for it.

Newman: Yeah, but why should women put up with those reasons?

Peterson: Im not saying that they should put up with it! Im saying that the claim that the wage gap between men and women is only due to sex is wrong. And it is wrong. Theres no doubt about that. The multivariate analysis have been done. So let me give you an example

The interviewer seemed eager to impute to Peterson a belief that a large, extant wage gap between men and women is a fact of life that women should just put up with, though all those assertions are contrary to his real positions on the matter.

Throughout this next section, the interviewer repeatedly tries to oversimplify Petersons view, as if he believes one factor he discusses is all-important, and then she seems to assume that because Peterson believes that given factor helps to explain a pay gap between men and women, he doesnt support any actions that would bring about a more equal outcome.

Her surprised question near the end suggests earnest confusion:

Peterson: Theres a personality trait known as agreeableness. Agreeable people are compassionate and polite. And agreeable people get paid less than disagreeable people for the same job. Women are more agreeable than men.

Newman: Again, a vast generalization. Some women are not more agreeable than men.

Peterson: Thats true. And some women get paid more than men.

Newman: So youre saying by and large women are too agreeable to get the pay raises that they deserve.

Peterson: No, Im saying that is one component of a multivariate equation that predicts salary. It accounts for maybe 5 percent of the variance. So you need another 18 factors, one of which is gender. And there is prejudice. Theres no doubt about that. But it accounts for a much smaller portion of the variance in the pay gap than the radical feminists claim.

Newman: Okay, so rather than denying that the pay gap exists, which is what you did at the beginning of this conversation, shouldnt you say to women, rather than being agreeable and not asking for a pay raise, go ask for a pay raise. Make yourself disagreeable with your boss.

Peterson: But I didnt deny it existed, I denied that it existed because of gender. See, because Im very, very, very careful with my words.

Newman: So the pay gap exists. You accept that. I mean the pay gap between men and women existsbut youre saying its not because of gender, its because women are too agreeable to ask for pay raises.

Peterson: Thats one of the reasons.

Newman: Okay, so why not get them to ask for a pay raise? Wouldnt that be fairer?

Peterson: Ive done that many, many, many times in my career. So one of the things you do as a clinical psychologist is assertiveness training. So you might sayoften you treat people for anxiety, you treat them for depression, and maybe the next most common category after that would be assertiveness training. So Ive had many, many women, extraordinarily competent women, in my clinical and consulting practice, and weve put together strategies for their career development that involved continual pushing, competing, for higher wages. And often tripled their wages within a five-year period.

Newman: And you celebrate that?

Peterson: Of course! Of course!

Another passage on gender equality proceeded thusly:

Newman: Is gender equality a myth?

Peterson: I dont know what you mean by the question. Men and women arent the same. And they wont be the same. That doesnt mean that they cant be treated fairly.

Newman: Is gender equality desirable?

Peterson: If it means equality of outcome then it is almost certainly undesirable. Thats already been demonstrated in Scandinavia. Men and women wont sort themselves into the same categories if you leave them to do it of their own accord. Its 20 to 1 female nurses to male, something like that. And approximately the same male engineers to female engineers. Thats a consequence of the free choice of men and women in the societies that have gone farther than any other societies to make gender equality the purpose of the law. Those are ineradicable differencesyou can eradicate them with tremendous social pressure, and tyranny, but if you leave men and women to make their own choices you will not get equal outcomes.

Newman: So youre saying that anyone who believes in equality, whether you call them feminists or whatever you want to call them, should basically give up because it aint going to happen.

Peterson: Only if theyre aiming at equality of outcome.

Newman: So youre saying give people equality of opportunity, thats fine.

Peterson: Its not only fine, its eminently desirable for everyone, for individuals as well as societies.

Newman: But still women arent going to make it. Thats what youre really saying.

That is not what hes really saying!

In this next passage Peterson shows more explicit frustration than at any other time in the program with being interviewed by someone who refuses to relay his actual beliefs:

Newman: So you dont believe in equal pay.

Peterson: No, Im not saying that at all.

Newman: Because a lot of people listening to you will say, Are we going back to the dark ages?

Peterson: Thats because youre not listening, youre just projecting.

Newman: Im listening very carefully, and Im hearing you basically saying that women need to just accept that theyre never going to make it on equal termsequal outcomes is how you defined it.

Peterson: No, I didnt say that.

Newman: If I was a young woman watching that, I would go, well, I might as well go play with my Cindy dolls and give up trying to go school, because Im not going to get the top job I want, because theres someone sitting there saying, its not possible, its going to make you miserable.

Peterson: I said that equal outcomes arent desirable. Thats what I said. Its a bad social goal. I didnt say that women shouldnt be striving for the top, or anything like that. Because I dont believe that for a second.

Newman: Striving for the top, but youre going to put all those hurdles in their way, as have been in their way for centuries. And thats fine, youre saying. Thats fine. The patriarchal system is just fine.

Peterson: No! I really think thats silly! I do, I think thats silly.

He thinks it is silly because he never said that the patriarchal system is just fine or that he planned to put lots of hurdles in the way of women, or that women shouldnt strive for the top, or that they might as well drop out of school, because achieving their goals or happiness is simply not going to be possible.

The interviewer put all those words in his mouth.

The conversation moves on to other topics, but the pattern continues. Peterson makes a statement. And then the interviewer interjects, So youre saying and fills in the rest with something that is less defensible, or less carefully qualified, or more extreme, or just totally unrelated to his point. I think my favorite example comes when they begin to talk about lobsters. Heres the excerpt:

Peterson: Theres this idea that hierarchical structures are a sociological construct of the Western patriarchy. And that is so untrue that its almost unbelievable. I use the lobster as an example: We diverged from lobsters evolutionarily history about 350 million years ago. And lobsters exist in hierarchies. They have a nervous system attuned to the hierarchy. And that nervous system runs on serotonin just like ours. The nervous system of the lobster and the human being is so similar that anti-depressants work on lobsters. And its part of my attempt to demonstrate that the idea of hierarchy has absolutely nothing to do with sociocultural construction, which it doesnt.

Newman: Let me get this straight. Youre saying that we should organize our societies along the lines of the lobsters?

Yes, he proposes that we all live on the sea floor, save some, who shall go to the seafood tanks at restaurants. Its laughable. But Peterson tries to keep plodding along.

Peterson: Im saying it is inevitable that there will be continuities in the way that animals and human beings organize their structures. Its absolutely inevitable, and there is one-third of a billion years of evolutionary history behind that Its a long time. You have a mechanism in your brain that runs on serotonin thats similar to the lobster mechanism that tracks your statusand the higher your status, the better your emotions are regulated. So as your serotonin levels increase you feel more positive emotion and less negative emotion.

Newman: So youre saying like the lobsters, were hardwired as men and women to do certain things, to sort of run along tram lines, and theres nothing we can do about it.

Where did she get that extreme and theres nothing we can do about it? Peterson has already said that hes a clinical psychologist who coaches people to change how they relate to institutions and to one another within the constraints of human biology. Of course he believes that there is something that can be done about it.

He brought up the lobsters only in an attempt to argue that one thing we cant do is say that hierarchical organization is a consequence of the capitalist patriarchy.

At this point, were near the end of the interview. And given all that preceded it, Newmans response killed me. Again, she takes an accusatory tack with her guest:

Newman: Arent you just whipping people up into a state of anger?

Peterson: Not at all.

Newman: Divisions between men and women. Youre stirring things up.

Actually, one of the most important things this interview illustratesone reason it is worth noting at lengthis how Newman repeatedly poses as if she is holding a controversialist accountable, when in fact, for the duration of the interview, it is she that is stirring things up and whipping people into a state of anger.

At every turn, she is the one who takes her subjects words and makes them seem more extreme, or more hostile to women, or more shocking in their implications than Petersons remarks themselves support. Almost all of the most inflammatory views that were aired in the interview are ascribed by Newman to Peterson, who then disputes that she has accurately characterized his words.

There are moments when Newman seems earnestly confused, and perhaps is. And yet, if it were merely confusion, would she consistently misinterpret him in the more scandalous, less politically correct, more umbrage-stoking direction?

To conclude, this is neither an endorsement nor a condemnation of Petersons views. It is an argument that the effects of the approach used in this interview are pernicious.

For one, those who credulously accept the interviewers characterizations will emerge with the impression that a prominent academic holds troubling views that, in fact, he does not actually believe or advocate. Some will feel needlessly troubled. And distorted impressions of what figures like Peterson mean by the words that they speak can only exacerbate overall polarization between their followers and others, and sap their critics of credibility to push back where they are wrong.

Lots of culture-war fights are unavoidablethat is, they are rooted in earnest, strongly felt disagreements over the best values or way forward or method of prioritizing goods. The best we can do is have those fights, with rules against eye-gouging.

But there is a way to reduce needless division over the countless disagreements that are inevitable in a pluralistic democracy: get better at accurately characterizing the views of folks with differing opinions, rather than egging them on to offer more extreme statements in interviews; or even worse, distorting their words so that existing divisions seem more intractable or impossible to tolerate than they are. That sort of exaggeration or hyperbolic misrepresentation is epidemicand addressing it for everyones sake is long overdue.

Read more from the original source:

Why Can't People Hear What Jordan Peterson Is Actually ...