Professor Votes With His Feet

[mahagonny]

Never mind my own opinions on any specific question dealt with by Prof. Peterson, or anybody else's, the crucial issue is whether he should have the right to give his own answers.

So far no one wants to address that. Ad hominems are more fun.

ETA:

He's a chronic liar who couldn't properly relate real scholarship if he tried.

Clear example of a lie, please? I'm getting it that you don't like his views, but that's not what the thread was supposed to be for.

He's lucky he managed to land an academic job, let alone at a top university like UofT, let alone tenure.

He claims that he wouldn't get one now, which is probably true at the vast majority of schools. things have changed

[mahagonny]

Sure. You could also quote pretty much any page from Maps of Meaning, which he submitted as part of his tenure bid, and which is 100% stream-of-consciousness garbage. Also note that he's retired, not resigned.



Or you could just quote Peterson directly. He's got deep views of women, for example:

women have a subconscious wish for brutal male domination

it's unfortunate that men can't control women who say crazy things because they aren't allowed to hit them

young women are outraged because they don't have a baby to suckle

if a woman doesn't want to have kids, there's something wrong with her

What a hero!

Out of curiosity, what could he, (or anyone else for that matter), say about men that would be equally upsetting? For instance, would it be equally upsetting if he said:

if a man doesn't want to have a job, there's something wrong with him

"He has had difficulty finding dates."

'Incel'

a member of an online subculture of men who want to have sex but are unable to find sexual partners, typically blaming women or hating people who are sexually successful (often used attributively):
Perhaps unsurprisingly, contemplation and discussion of suicide features prominently on incel forums.

spinster

noun
Disparaging and Offensive. a woman still unmarried beyond the usual age of marrying.
Chiefly Law. a woman who has never married.
a woman whose occupation is spinning.

dictionary.com    2022 January

[mahagonny]

deleted

[Kron3007]

I only had to read about ten lines into the article before I found his first lie, where he claims Canadian universities have EDI hiring  mandates.  It is true that EDI is a consideration during the hiring process and there are likely diversity targets, but there is no mandate.  As with all good lies, there is a grain of truth in what he says and it may not be an outright lie, but it is also not true.  Targets are not mandates.  As mentioned, he is a good grifter and is a master at this exact thing.

Like this example, his whole perspective on this has some truth but he has twisted it.  I do agree that EDI has gone to far.  I just spent days writing EDI section a for grant proposals.  In them, I have to describe the systemic barriers etc in my field and how we will address them.  I am in STEM, and they are forcing me to be a social scientist.  I really .not qualified to write on this topic. Also,.as he says, if we fail to do this we will not get research funding so there is a lot of pandering going on.

That being said, I did take a workshop before being on a hiring committee and thought it was a worth while thing for us to do.  Even just from a legal perspective it is worth while to make sure the process is fair and legal (it is amazing how many faculty will ask things they are not supposed to).  Likewise with EDI, it has made me read and consider my own practices.  So, while I think they have taken it too far, you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Kron3007]

Also as mentioned, retiring to emeritus status is hardly voting with your feet...especially when you are making millions grifting.

[Kron3007]

Never mind my own opinions on any specific question dealt with by Prof. Peterson, or anybody else's, the crucial issue is whether he should have the right to give his own answers.

So far no one wants to address that. Ad hominems are more fun.

ETA:

He's a chronic liar who couldn't properly relate real scholarship if he tried.

Clear example of a lie, please? I'm getting it that you don't like his views, but that's not what the thread was supposed to be for.

He's lucky he managed to land an academic job, let alone at a top university like UofT, let alone tenure.

He claims that he wouldn't get one now, which is probably true at the vast majority of schools. things have changed

Regarding his right to say things, has anyone stopped him?  Seems he has a pretty loud platform, but he and all white males are victims somehow...

[mahagonny]

He's lucky he managed to land an academic job, let alone at a top university like UofT, let alone tenure.

He claims that he wouldn't get one now, which is probably true at the vast majority of schools. things have changed

Regarding his right to say things, has anyone stopped him?  Seems he has a pretty loud platform, but he and all white males are victims somehow...

I hear his message as more we are all victims of the stupidity of the current DEI dogma. And to the charge is DEI dogma taking over and driving people away who are well qualified and through self selection getting mostly only either people who are all smoking the same DEI water pipe, or those who are too cowed to express their non-neo-liberal selves, I haven't heard any reason not to be very worried that he's right. And that's the central point.
His platform is loud now, but if liberal academia had its way he'd have none, as we can see from Para's posts. The loud platform he has now is by identifying DEI as something close to a public menace, using outlets not controlled by liberal academia. Which is the opinion increasingly held by the lay public. The left would have us believe they are all white 'cisgender' heterosexual men. But they'd be very wrong.
He has freedom of speech because of the government of the country he lives in. Academics hate him.

Also as mentioned, retiring to emeritus status is hardly voting with your feet...especially when you are making millions grifting.

So sorry I worded it that way. I could just die.
ETA: Anyway, I think the people who're voting with their feet in greater numbers are the young men who are doing something else other than college, right out of high school. And they listen to Peterson. It doesn't do that much good to hate him. Someone else would come along.

I do agree that EDI has gone to far.

Your secret's safe here.

[Kron3007]

I first heard him on CBC radio.  The media is not silencing him at all, they gave him the platform.

[Kron3007]

Young men may be choosing different paths, but I don't think you can blame it all on EDI or this dude.  It is happening around the world, in cultures with varying takes on the subject. 

As mentioned, I am no social scientist but blaming everything on EDI seems like a cop out.

[marshwiggle]

Young men may be choosing different paths, but I don't think you can blame it all on EDI or this dude.  It is happening around the world, in cultures with varying takes on the subject. 

As mentioned, I am no social scientist but blaming everything on EDI seems like a cop out.

My beef with EDI is like a beef I had with grading when I was a grad TA.
The new department chair was from another country, and decreed that the average lab grade in every lab section was to be 70-75%. (Grades would be adjusted post-hoc if that didn't occur.) It bugged me at the time, but after supervising labs for decades, I have more data on why that was so STUPID. In short, lab sections get different student populations, based on when they fit with courses in other programs. Also, keen students tend to sign up earlier in the week; the slackers sign up late and get whatever's left over, which if often the last in the schedule. Decreeing that the average in a COURSE  (of at least 100 students, for instance), may make some more sense as the stats will be more reliable. (I won't even get into differences between TAs at this point.)

My beef with EDI is for a similar reason. When I hire TAs now, I am limited by the pool of candidates available NOW. I can't control the pool. When I can re-hrie experienced people I do, and when I need to hire new people, I go with applicants who did the best in the labs themselves. A couple of years ago, I needed 5 TAs for a course. If the course typically has 30% women in it, then if I hire 1 female TA I'm a misogynist but if I hire 2 female TAs then I'm a hero. This is independent of how many women have applied, or how they did in the course. (Personally, I don't care; if the best 5 TAs are all women I'd gladly hire them. I want people who can do the job well and make things run smoothly.)

If a hiring pool has a very large and diverse group of qualified applicants, then selecting on criteria like diversity has some merit. But in reality, when very specific qualifications are needed, that often won't be the case. If EDI takes over, then the tail is wagging the dog.

[Kron3007]

Young men may be choosing different paths, but I don't think you can blame it all on EDI or this dude.  It is happening around the world, in cultures with varying takes on the subject. 

As mentioned, I am no social scientist but blaming everything on EDI seems like a cop out.

My beef with EDI is like a beef I had with grading when I was a grad TA.
The new department chair was from another country, and decreed that the average lab grade in every lab section was to be 70-75%. (Grades would be adjusted post-hoc if that didn't occur.) It bugged me at the time, but after supervising labs for decades, I have more data on why that was so STUPID. In short, lab sections get different student populations, based on when they fit with courses in other programs. Also, keen students tend to sign up earlier in the week; the slackers sign up late and get whatever's left over, which if often the last in the schedule. Decreeing that the average in a COURSE  (of at least 100 students, for instance), may make some more sense as the stats will be more reliable. (I won't even get into differences between TAs at this point.)

My beef with EDI is for a similar reason. When I hire TAs now, I am limited by the pool of candidates available NOW. I can't control the pool. When I can re-hrie experienced people I do, and when I need to hire new people, I go with applicants who did the best in the labs themselves. A couple of years ago, I needed 5 TAs for a course. If the course typically has 30% women in it, then if I hire 1 female TA I'm a misogynist but if I hire 2 female TAs then I'm a hero. This is independent of how many women have applied, or how they did in the course. (Personally, I don't care; if the best 5 TAs are all women I'd gladly hire them. I want people who can do the job well and make things run smoothly.)

If a hiring pool has a very large and diverse group of qualified applicants, then selecting on criteria like diversity has some merit. But in reality, when very specific qualifications are needed, that often won't be the case. If EDI takes over, then the tail is wagging the dog.

But there is no rule that says you must have a specific number here.  The intent of EDI is not to ensure you hire a specific group at a specified rate, just to make sure we are not creating barriers that prevent a fair process.  As I said, it has gone overboard IMO, but the general intent is good. 

[Kron3007]

I first heard him on CBC radio.  The media is not silencing him at all, they gave him the platform.

Also, isnt the article you posted from the leftist cabal?

[mahagonny]

Young men may be choosing different paths, but I don't think you can blame it all on EDI or this dude.  It is happening around the world, in cultures with varying takes on the subject. 

As mentioned, I am no social scientist but blaming everything on EDI seems like a cop out.

I would expect you to deflect blame away from them even though you're sane and honest enough to admit some difference of opinion with DEI, on a pseudonymous forum (whatever that difference may be specifically, if/when you tell us). You're one of the people who makes a good living as an academic. And DEI is part of higher ed's gravy train.
ETA: No I realize this is not an argument; logical fallacy. But one has to wonder how DEI could ever be reigned in from its excesses without a trumpeter like Peterson.

I first heard him on CBC radio.  The media is not silencing him at all, they gave him the platform.

Also, isnt the article you posted from the leftist cabal?

Not according to mediabiasfact check, although I'm not sure they are reliable.
The left has good reason to keep an eye on Peterson, though. Many of them might also be stupid enough to think they can turn readers against him just by telling them what he's been up to lately.
It's kind of like the CRT debate. Every time a person like Terry McAuliffe speaks, a swing voter registers republican. And he thought he was campaigning for himself.

[marshwiggle]

But there is no rule that says you must have a specific number here.  The intent of EDI is not to ensure you hire a specific group at a specified rate, just to make sure we are not creating barriers that prevent a fair process.  As I said, it has gone overboard IMO, but the general intent is good.

The whole assumption of "systemic <whatever>" is that these barriers are already created, have been in place forever, and will exist in perpetuity, so the only way to get around that is to treat people making decisions as guilty until proven innocent.
That framing basically implies that this process isn't a temporary correction, but rather a permanent necessity.

[mahagonny]

But there is no rule that says you must have a specific number here.  The intent of EDI is not to ensure you hire a specific group at a specified rate, just to make sure we are not creating barriers that prevent a fair process.  As I said, it has gone overboard IMO, but the general intent is good.

The whole assumption of "systemic <whatever>" is that these barriers are already created, have been in place forever, and will exist in perpetuity, so the only way to get around that is to treat people making decisions as guilty until proven innocent.
That framing basically implies that this process isn't a temporary correction, but rather a permanent necessity.

'Dismantle White Supremacy.'  You can't have a confession if there's no guilt. The point is the confession, the catharsis experienced by the true believers. They are now spiritually pure. For five minutes.