What does Jordan Peterson mean when he says "weak men"? What kind of harmful and evil deeds could these weak men possibly be capable of?
What does Jordan Peterson mean when he says "weak men"...
>weak men
non-jews
peterson is literally a weak man who had to be flown to russia because he couldn't handle minor benzo withdrawal
Stop listening to pseuds. There are countless beter intellectuals and/or self-help gurus out there, if you really need one to look up to.
Weak men are those that prioritise pleasure and short term rewards instead of long term stability. They're greedy and selfish, largely uninterested in personal sacrifice for a greater good or even for helping those around them.
I would say that this kind of weakness is encouraged by capitalist consumerism where spending money on selfish frivolities is an end in itself, and the basis of personal identity has become synonymous with our consumption habits. It's not easily changed without something seriously wrong happening.
>There are countless beter intellectuals and/or self-help gurus out there
Such as?
Not that I agree with a lot of what he says, but if I were to guess, I'd say men are weak when they avoid responsibility. He's very big on that.
He means the kind of person who spends time discussing e-celebs on Lemurian enema forums
I like Jordan Peterson. He has serious flaws - he talks about things he doesn't have a background in, and he is a pseud on many things, but he's also an experienced therapist who's taught at Harvard and Toronto. I like him because of his personal development work.
I think he gave me a framework with which to pursue other people doing similar things - social critics, philosophers, and personal development people.
Mark Fisher is a fascinating left wing philosopher, I recommend him. The leftist economist Yanis Varoufakis is good. There's a recently deceased YouTube commentator who was actually very insightful named Michael Brooks.
For personal development stuff, Cal Newport's work is fascinating. For issues with tech and modern society, Jaron Lanier is a very insightful guy, he pioneered VR. David Goggins is pretty non-intellectual, but he's great, a guy who just got his shit together and went hard as a Navy SEAL.
While I lean left, I can recommend the conservative philosopher Roger Scruton, who has great insights on art, for right-leaning people.
A doctor who has been a professor for a decade is quite literally an intellectual not a pseudo like you claim
Thinking something is stupid dont mean they are a pseudo intellectual it just shows you have no idea what that phrase means
he means men with dirty rooms
He's a pseud if he often talks on things he has no expertise in and launched himself into the public eye on lies.
weak men are people who are a detriment to the tribe. People who are as a whole making the tribe less fruitful across the board. Ranging from happiness, to how relaxed people feel, to how connected people feel, to how productive people are.
Think of an electricity grid where electricity flows through the pylon. A weak man makes it so that the electricity dampens and weakens when ti passes through it, making the future pylons have weaker electricity
When a man is weak they make everyone around them more miserable. depression and such is not an individual disease. it makes everyone they know less happy too. Depression sucks the life out of people and who they go near.
weak men simply put are broken nodes that devalue society in virtually every aspect. Its not about being 'evil'. Its about quality of life. Weak men are not virtuous. They have tunnel vision
Weak men is a symptom of a decaying society, when you give power to women, it simply means that there will be less power for men.
Women have no allegiances to the tribe; when a tribe is conquered, it is not the women who are slaughtered, their lives are spared, it is the men who have to face the consequences.
He thinks of himself watching his daughter being fucked by horde of niggers!
His fans cope by saying he was strong to get treatment for it JFL
100% I tried listening to one of his talks on autism and he kept going on babbling onto non-relevant tangents using anecdotal evidence as his greatest source of proof. He also said autists have difficulty with abstractions despite so many of them being involved in math/CS, which is the industry of dealing with abstractions.
He's living proof of how being a rhetoric is much more convincing than being of substance. He also had a drug dependency and his life was/is in shambles. Would you take advice on how to draw from someone who doesn't know how to draw? Choose your heroes wisely.
Plato. The old Greeks. Any philosophical book that has passed the test of time. Stop listening to these manosphere gurus reaffirm your biases and push you into politics so you can feed your ego. These guys are really just here to make money and sell merch to fund their lifestyles.
To supplement my answer; Think about what a 'strong man' is. A strong man in my eyes is someone who:
>Has goals
>is happy
>confident
>always has contingents for when things go wrong
>does not overpanic, overworry, or get over emotional
>is resilient to hardship
>has a well connected social circle
>is humerous
>sticks up for himself
All of these things are a pleasure to be around. When you are around the inverse of this person it is a drain on the soul.
He's not an e-celeb.
he means manlets.
>e's not an e-celeb.
He means someone unprincipled, who is led around, without ever being true to themselves or what they think is important. There are lots of people who will just go along with the crowd or the leader even when they know the leader is doing bad things. There are people who will allow themselves to act on their worst impulses, and treat others badly because some pathetic part of themselves wants to. You're strong by not feeding those weak parts of yourself, and by not going along with the crowd when you disagree with it. You're strong when you do the hard thing because you know it's right. This could be dragging yourself to the gym when you don't feel like it. It could be going after a job you want or a difficult degree even though you know it's going to be tough. It could be making the unpopular decision because you know it's right. It could be defending the pariah that the community is unfairly abusing. Doing what you think is right, no matter what the scum think.
I imagine that's what he means, but whether or not it is, that's what I think is meaningful. If you just go along with the crowd and do things you think are wrong because it's easier, that's weakness. You have to go through the fire.