Jordan Peterson book banned and university invite rescinded.

And this agreeability angle affects both genders. Some people just want a decent job, get along with others, and don't have any deeply held ambitions for their careers. Some would call it 'having a life'.

 

What public policy statement?

 

They must follow the same standard of beliefs, the orthodoxy created by its leaders, just as it is in any religious organization. Those are the actual rules.

 

Sure, but what does that have to do with whether or not UK employment discrimination laws apply to non-British people?

 

HILARIOUS how the pathetically useless left actually think that their protests and boycotts will work! Not only do they not work, but they often generate curiosity and interest!

 

Well I would say that part of "principles" is political principles.

 

The university spokesperson didn't say anything about speaking in public.

 

Which is bad, right?

 

They don’t have to but if they’re deemed to have done something in breach of the policies they willingly signed up to, they risk losing their jobs (though I expect 99% of the time, people get away with it, especially if they’re not in the public domain). This is still no different to any other large employer. Peterson isn’t special of different, however much he’d like everyone to believe.

 

Peeps have to pass a personality test before their content is considered, he failed.

He's more interesting than Ben Shapiro, though, so there's that.

 

I think so, yes. The consequence is that students are being indoctrinated rather than educated. You can see the consequences of educational groupthink every day. Groups of them loudly and repeatedly chanting the same short phrases is often the first giveaway. The creation of 'safe zones' is another, but not as public.

 

They are both very interesting people and ad homs are a sorry substitute for not offering your own opposing views to either of these men.

What sort of 'personality test' are you referring to?

 

Do they have any guidelines available as to which thoughts may be freely expressed or which ideas must be avoided?

 

I did previously post the link to their policy. Again, every large employer will have a similar set of policies (though the specifics may vary). How consistently they’re implemented is a different question; https://www.hr.admin.cam.ac.uk/policies-procedures/dignity-work-policy

 

They only just qualify for an ad hom. That's how seriously I take them.

 

They're not deep enough for you, huh? Understood.

 

Peterson shouts at me and Shapiro has a disturbing tic and psycho's eyes. It's hardly deep stuff.

 

Dr Peterson said he had not heard about the rescinding of the offer from the faculty, which announced its decision on Twitter, and said it publicised the rescindment "in a manner that could hardly have been more narcissistic, self-congratulatory and devious".​

They pulled a Trump

 

You would, I wouldn't

Politics have become more void of principles evidenced by
the idea of what FREE SPEECH at Berkeley now means.
I remember Mario Savio and a real, Free Speech movement there.

 

Thanks for re-posting. I see that "There is no place for any form of discrimination, harassment, victimisation or sexual misconduct at Cambridge", among other pre-qualifications, but Jordan Peterson doesn't have a history of any of this behavior. Therefore the reason for his 'dis-invitation ' remains a mystery However I can believe the reason is that he's not following liberal doctrine.

 

I can see where you'd feel uncomfortable. Adam Schiff effects me the same way.

 

True. At his most eloquent, Peterson makes interesting arguments, even when I disagree with them. Although it is funny that he is so anti-trans when his own "theory of truth" would technically support the truthhood of the claims of trans people. Shapiro is a pretty low bar, though. I've met pastries more interesting than Ben Shapiro.

 

On the other side, if gender does not truly exist and is just a social construct, then the trans claim is meaningless and irrelevant.
So the progressive side is inconsistent on that too.

 

If gender is a social construct then, yes, a lot of trans people are relying on misguided essentialism. My point with Peterson is that his theory of truth is that "truth" simply means whatever aids in survival. It has nothing to do with correspondence with reality (he criticizes the later view of truth). But he attacks trans people based on his view on the correspondence theory of truth . . . which he rejects. Meanwhile, research has shown that trans people are less likely to, say, commit suicide if people use their preferred pronouns, making their preferred pronouns the truth (in Peterson's philosophy).

 

A little tidbit of advice, never immediately respond in the first few minutes to someone who quoted you but didn't type any answer.
They probably are still typing their reply.

The reason they didn't wait is they wanted their response to be included directly below yours, and in the fast paced thread were afraid several other posts might appear in between and break the continuity of the discussion.