Jordan Peterson

ambush80

Senior Member
But Er, Judah's firstborn, was evil in the sight of the LORD, so the LORD took his life. Then Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother." Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother's wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother.
But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He took his life also...


For there are some eunuchs, who were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, who were made eunuchs of men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

I have known the many pleasures of intercourse, but the responsibility they engender is made plain to me I cannot bear.

Being an aging and impotent man is far more preferable to receive, and safe...(though I can blame non for despising it) than bearing responsibility for misbegotten children.

But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

I am completely impotent before this judgment.

You all help me.
See.

Is there a lesson or an observation of humanity that you're trying to convey?
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
It's all theatrics designed to expound on thoughts that have nothing to do with whatever the topic is.


"I
He
Him
Theatrical Meltdown
Biblical quotes
I am not worthy"

That is pretty much the routine reply
 

ambush80

Senior Member
It's all theatrics designed to expound on thoughts that have nothing to do with whatever the topic is.


"I
He
Him
Theatrical Meltdown
Biblical quotes
I am not worthy"

That is pretty much the routine reply


Aww. Don't be so hard. This place wouldn't be as interesting without his art and mysticism. Sometimes there's a glimmer of pertinence in Isreal's responses. Now that I've reformed my notions of what he's doing, in part because of Day Trip's recognition of Isreal as a mystic, I can enjoy his posts for what they are.
 

WaltL1

Senior Member
Aww. Don't be so hard. This place wouldn't be as interesting without his art and mysticism. Sometimes there's a glimmer of pertinence in Isreal's responses. Now that I've reformed my notions of what he's doing, in part because of Day Trip's recognition of Isreal as a mystic, I can enjoy his posts for what they are.
I had to look up mystic and the way it was used here and holy carp that certainly seems accurate. Its also not negative in any way.
a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect.
Israel whats your thoughts? Accurate? Kinda? Not really?
 

Day trip

Senior Member
I had to look up mystic and the way it was used here and holy carp that certainly seems accurate. Its also not negative in any way.

Israel whats your thoughts? Accurate? Kinda? Not really?

I’ll bet $100 he doesn’t say just “yes” or “no”! :D
 

ambush80

Senior Member
I had to look up mystic and the way it was used here and holy carp that certainly seems accurate. Its also not negative in any way.

Israel whats your thoughts? Accurate? Kinda? Not really?


"a person who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute, or who believes in the spiritual apprehension of truths that are beyond the intellect."


This part most certainly applies. It doesn't mean un-intellectual exactly. I think it means that they believe that they are using some other supernatural faculty to access ideas.
 

WaltL1

Senior Member
I’ll bet $100 he doesn’t say just “yes” or “no”! :D
In this case I would be disappointed if he did :)
And kudos to you. Israel has participated here with us for years and the best I have come up with to describe his "style" was philosophical.
But I think you nailed it right quick!
 

ambush80

Senior Member
In this case I would be disappointed if he did :)
And kudos to you. Israel has participated here with us for years and the best I have come up with to describe his "style" was philosophical.
But I think you nailed it right quick!

I've suggested that his style is some sort of parable, like the example provided by the Bible. He even said so in another thread. The obfuscation is regarded as a method of separating the wheat from the chaff; those with the gift of understanding from those who take words at their face value.
 

ambush80

Senior Member
As an artist myself, I understand the value of being suggestive, vague, and enigmatic. Some ideas are just very hard to express. Sometimes they are better expressed as a hum or a chime or a paint splotch. They won't be understood by most people the way that you intended but that's OK, too. What people will sometimes see is the struggle to communicate something. Sometimes they don't. I found that if I really try hard to express something very personal, artistically, it sometimes resonates in a universal way. Having some mastery of the medium helps allot.

Sometimes things are better expressed in a conventional way.

I like the feedback at the beginning of this song. It does "that thing" for me.

 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
Aww. Don't be so hard. This place wouldn't be as interesting without his art and mysticism. Sometimes there's a glimmer of pertinence in Isreal's responses. Now that I've reformed my notions of what he's doing, in part because of Day Trip's recognition of Isreal as a mystic, I can enjoy his posts for what they are.

Some things that he says are extremely interesting and hits home for me. When that happens I'd love to carry on the convo further but there is so much fluff in between the interesting (read: on topic and to the point) stuff quickly gets lost.
For me what I describe as the theatrical meltdowns, that always start with him asking himself his own question worded as if someone else asked it, are devised to be segways into off topic rants just to say what enters his mind at the time. Then he uses scripture to try to reinforce his thoughts(meanwhile his thoughts are based to reinforce scripture) as examples to validate the question he purposely asked himself to begin with.

When someone hits reply to a specific answer and during the course of their reply says "now you may ask....", as a way to steer a conversation away from the topic and towards whatever the person just has to get off their chest(which ends up not having anything to do with the quoted reply).....It comes off as dishonest to me. When it happens continually, it's on purpose.
 

WaltL1

Senior Member
I've suggested that his style is some sort of parable, like the example provided by the Bible. He even said so in another thread. The obfuscation is regarded as a method of separating the wheat from the chaff; those with the gift of understanding from those who take words at their face value.
Well that explains it.
That's one gift I never received :bounce:
 

bullethead

Of the hard cast variety
I've suggested that his style is some sort of parable, like the example provided by the Bible. He even said so in another thread. The obfuscation is regarded as a method of separating the wheat from the chaff; those with the gift of understanding from those who take words at their face value.

Yes, you must be one of the elect yet unworthy that was given the gift of understanding.
 

ambush80

Senior Member
Some things that he says are extremely interesting and hits home for me. When that happens I'd love to carry on the convo further but there is so much fluff in between the interesting (read: on topic and to the point) stuff quickly gets lost.
For me what I describe as the theatrical meltdowns, that always start with him asking himself his own question worded as if someone else asked it, are devised to be segways into off topic rants just to say what enters his mind at the time. Then he uses scripture to try to reinforce his thoughts(meanwhile his thoughts are based to reinforce scripture) as examples to validate the question he purposely asked himself to begin with.

When someone hits reply to a specific answer and during the course of their reply says "now you may ask....", as a way to steer a conversation away from the topic and towards whatever the person just has to get off their chest(which ends up not having anything to do with the quoted reply).....It comes off as dishonest to me. When it happens continually, it's on purpose.

Fair enough. Now that you understand the purpose you can appreciate it an appropriate context.
 
Last edited:

jmharris23

Moderator
Even though I'm a mod in here I never read his posts anymore. It takes me too long to figure out what he's talking about and I figure if he broke a rule no one would know anyway because half the participants aren't reading his posts and the other half wouldn't rat him out. :D


That said, I appreciate his heart and contribution.
 
Top