From: tree of knowledge system discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joseph Michalski
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2018 8:42 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: JP again

Since JP's at the UofT, he's quite familiar with  a radical leftist school that's actually part of UofT:  OISE (Ontario Institute for Studies in Education). It houses an eclectic group of radical feminists, Marxists, post-modernists, SJWs, and various other "types" - all of whom teach in graduate programs relating to teaching and education. While OISE's overall "mission" is laudable, if you actually read the words, in practice the folks actually teaching there are, as a whole, such extreme ideologues as to be absurd. Of course, they have some great folks and a few brilliant writers (e.g., radical feminist Margrit Eichler, who's now Emerita), but in the main their research is of the lowest quality possible. At times, laughably bad. I should know too, having interviewed people from there and read a number of c.v.'s from potential applicants over the years. Most people at UofT are embarrassed to have OISE affiliated with their fine institution.

In short, when you hear Peterson ranting about the pseudo-science or lack of intellectual integrity in terms of grad studies in education and sociology, it's at least in part a direct reflection of that link. From his perspective, disciplines such as sociology do not deserve to be listed in the pantheon of "real sciences." He deals with student reactions, protests, and even some degree of administrative pressure in carrying out his work every day. He has become an increasingly hardened veteran waging his battle as part of the broader "culture wars" we are witnessing. Universities in Canada, for instance, have had to continue another round of debates about "free speech" on campus and whether JP should be invited. My university (I'm part of the University of Western Ontario) chose wisely and we have had JP and a number of other speakers from across the ideological spectrum speak here in recent years.

Finally, it seems to me that part of the difficulty in assessing JP is the fact that there are multiple JPs one could critique. There's the scientific JP, who's actually quite well-established in his research area, has published profusely, and, in one area I know about (authoritarianism), has done some quite credible work. Then there's the JP who's a dynamic speaker and who has developed a cult following in terms of his 12 Rules for Life. Even his critics acknowledge that, while sometimes banal, he nevertheless offers many reasonably helpful, practical suggestions regarding getting control of one's life (I have a brother who just 'discovered' JP and excitedly has been sending me texts and links to several of these talks. My brother wants to know if the guy's as brilliant as he seems to be, or perhaps a "false prophet". The problem is that my brother's a multi-millionaire, real estate mogul & Trump supporter - and sees the world purely in terms of individual control, personal responsibility, and naked transactionalism. Yikes!). And, of course, there's the naive (IMO) political Peterson, who has some legitimate critiques of the left, but also proves himself woefully ignorant of virtually everything sociological, structural, and meta-cultural about his own narrow worldview. It's fascinating to hear him talk about gender dynamics, for example, because he has a filter that allows him to recast extant research in such a way as to support his 1950s idealism about how there could be healthier gender relations. He'll speak about "agreeableness" and the importance of challenging power structures in one breath, but then in the next stress the incompatibility of men & women working together for a variety of psych reasons - and ends up asserting his binary tropes to make sense out of a far more nuanced & complex reality.

In closing, I have to say that to me the most important issue is the one Chance raised in terms of his link to the article on Christopher Wylie previously and the informational cyber-warfare that has been waged. Related to that,Chance's final few paragraphs are worth re-reading and bearing in mind as we continue to direct our own research and peddle our own intellectual wares. That's why, IMO, a diverse group such as ours and those attending the ToK conference need to be as sensitive to the information dynamics as possible and strategic in our communication. We have an enormous cultural challenge ahead, for a variety of reasons that transcend our own disciplines and social positions. For example, I was called out last year when I made a joke in a public gathering of students about the tensions between my Muslim wife and my own Catholic background. Yet this was after I set the record straight about the creative ways we can develop our minds at the university, embrace diversity, and learn multiple "languages" (which I talked about in the broadest sense of different forms of communication and cultural connections) to understand people better from all over the world and be more enlightened citizens. The whole point of my little talk was to challenge the students to get out of their own bubbles & meet and hang out with folks different than themselves - and how I personally had benefited and grown so much over the years by being married to my Muslim wife from Iran! (Side note: I have to say I'm not a huge fan of fasting during Ramadan - but that's my own, if you understand Islam, personal "jihad"; the Catholic "Lent" thing is way easier by comparison!). It's a challenge trying to deal with these complex issues sensitively while at the same time not taking oneself too seriously. 

Yours kindly, -Joe