|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 29, 2023 8:15:03 GMT
Ah Trilbee you don't disappoint. PS I wonder what the Big Finish's stance is shilbee on hiring people that throw false accusations of pedophelia around? I mean  This fandom is made up of Karens. |
|
|
|
Post by iank on Apr 29, 2023 8:29:44 GMT
What a tosser.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2023 14:00:23 GMT
I watched a video of his about ten years ago and I thought he was funny. Then a few years later Burrunjor posted his review of the Series 9 finale and I agreed with a lot of his criticisms. I'm not sure what the hell has happened to him since then.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on Apr 29, 2023 14:26:12 GMT
I watched a video of his about ten years ago and I thought he was funny. Then a few years later Burrunjor posted his review of the Series 9 finale and I agreed with a lot of his criticisms. I'm not sure what the hell has happened to him since then. I know I felt exactly the same way. To be honest though I think it was more just a case of we were both young DW fans, the franchise was more innocent then and we were desperate for any kind of DW videos that actually talked about the show, that Mr Tardis seemed better than he was. Then as soon as the nasty stuff started we got sight of his true colours. |
|
|
|
Post by zarius on Apr 29, 2023 18:09:44 GMT
Ironically, he caught on by riding the early wave of online grifter criticism that he currently rallies against.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on May 2, 2023 8:11:53 GMT
Yes, they don't seem particularly prolific.
Now there's a bit of Steven Moffat influenced writing...
He is also supporting Joanna Cherry being blacklisted from the Edinburgh Fringe for her transphobic views, which btw are nothing. All she has said is that you can't just say you have transitioned officially right away without anything to show it. He never disappoints. |
|
|
|
Post by Spark Doll King on May 3, 2023 11:01:01 GMT
If I ever do YouTube, I'm do my bloody best not to turn out like this guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on May 3, 2023 16:02:29 GMT
Ironically, he caught on by riding the early wave of online grifter criticism that he currently rallies against. That was the grifter wave Mr Tardis was a part of, the STFU Moffat crowd and I remember it well. It's hilarious that he had the nerve to get angry at the NMD with this in mind. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on May 3, 2023 16:14:46 GMT
If I ever do YouTube, I'm do my bloody best not to turn out like this guy. Not that you would, but honestly the best thing to do is never get drunk on your own ego and become obsessed with "owning the opposition" like Mr Tardis did. I blame Christopher Hitchens partially for that kind of toxic debate culture. Hitchens became famous for debating radical Christians who he'd easily tear apart. Got nothing against Christians obviously, but these were the really crazy types. All of Hitchens supporters and fans who were themselves often immature, edgelord atheists wanted to similarly get a chance to show off how witty and cutting they could be, so they'd adopt his approach. Being a "great debater" like Hitch was as prized online as being a great fighter is among normal people LOL. Thing is though Hitchens actually wasn't a good debater. Yeah he could tear apart some easy meat, like a mad Christian who doesn't want people to use condoms or thinks Dinosaurs were killed in the great flood. When it came to actual important issues however, his arrogant, condescending style did him no favours as it stopped there from being any real debate because he was too confrontational. Furthermore he was often quite badly educated about things. He was in a way the Jordan Peterson of his day, IE he knew about one subject so thought he knew everything. Go watch him debate Galloway. He absolutely eviscerates Hitchens who was an ignorant clown on the Iraq war. Sadly however Hitchens early death meant that he was seen as the great debater and so a lot of idiots continue to use his style, and eventually that spread beyond atheists, into things like feminist ownage videos and even the anti feminists like Mr Tardis who is desperate to show off his similar wit and how he can own his opponents. (Not saying it all comes from Hitchens obviously, but he was one of the main ones that pushed for it.) A good debater isn't someone who thinks "Haha I destroyed him with my rapier wit." It's someone who is well versed on the subject, hears the other person out, and tries to understand their perspective and is open to new ideas. Obviously I'm not saying that you shouldn't stand your ground, and nobody wants a pussy like Dave Ruben who doesn't question Stefan Molyneux when the latter goes on about black people being sub intellectuals and a drain on any society they are part of. Still don't be an arrogant wannabe Hitchens either, which is pretty much all Mr Tardis is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 3, 2023 19:52:11 GMT
Thing is though Hitchens actually wasn't a good debater. Yeah he could tear apart some easy meat, like a mad Christian who doesn't want people to use condoms or thinks Dinosaurs were killed in the great flood. When it came to actual important issues however, his arrogant, condescending style did him no favours as it stopped there from being any real debate because he was too confrontational. Furthermore he was often quite badly educated about things. He was in a way the Jordan Peterson of his day, IE he knew about one subject so thought he knew everything. I like Peterson in general but some of his views about areas he's not versed in are frankly embarrassing, not to mention the abysmal "poetry" he published and marketed as being of an extremely dark and guttural nature, which in reality reads like the produce of a precocious teenager in his edgy phase. Dude should've just got his bag as a pop-psych Jungian gateway-drug and left before shit hit the fan. Stuff like his Biblical series is great for philo/psych newcomers (emphasis on newcomers) and only moderately influenced by political dogma, though if someone were of a serious mind about Biblical analysis I'd probably just refer them straight to Aquinas or Swedenborg or someone of the like. Maps of Meaning is just Jung but less cognitively demanding and more prescription-heavy, which is what I find with a large part of Peterson's philosophy. Jung had the good sense, in the end, to eschew prescription entirely, which seems to me the obvious way to go in the realm of philosophising honestly with oneself. The thing with Peterson, however, is that every single subject he tackles leads to the same 2 or 3 conclusions; in that way he's a reductive thinker, which I suppose might be appealing to an older fellow like himself who just wants to make sense of the ever chaotic and bewildering world in which we live (not an unadmirable goal considering the various madnesses that afflict clown-world as of the present). But yeah, he's good for starters and the grindset-types, but relatively little beyond that. His interviews with Iain McGilchrist are rather painful; you can see the pain in McGilchrist's eyes whenever Peterson tries to cram the sundry fruits of the former's work into one of the latter's stultifying dialectical boxes. Doesn't help that my dad's got addicted to him, and is completely conflating the realities of my self-actualisation with the forcible conveyance of his mode of actualisation through a proxy of an entirely different temperament (namely me). It can be a right ballache at times. TLDR; Jordan Peterson is a decent vestibular component of a much larger whole. I find him more interesting as a cultural phenomenon than as a philosophical force, much in the same vain as how I feel about Andrew Tate. If you're serious about philosophy, however? I'd advise looking elsewhere; if not because of the political undercurrents, then because of the basic and over-jargonised readings of texts and concepts that have been done a million times before and a million times better by others. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on May 4, 2023 9:09:06 GMT
Jordan Peterson to me is just so hysterical about leftists and biased about his own side that I could never take him seriously. I do feel sorry for him in some respects as I think he got caught up in the culture war and was thrust into this stupid conflict and got in over his head. He probably knows that deep down he isn't the philosopher people think he is. (I mean how could he be? His advert actually referred to him as the greatest mind in western civilisation!) Still he's in too deep now.
I will say in his defence he has never stooped so low as to smear someone as a pedo, so he has that going for him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2023 9:22:14 GMT
Jordan "clean your room" Peterson.
|
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on May 4, 2023 9:30:35 GMT
Jordan "clean your room" Peterson. I don't get it? Is that one of his stupid phrases that's designed to sound really deep but isn't, like that thing with the Lobsters. PS he stole that from Phoebe from Friends LOL. She went on about Lobsters way back in the early 90s. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2023 9:31:50 GMT
Jordan "clean your room" Peterson. I don't get it? Is that one of his stupid phrases that's designed to sound really deep but isn't, like that thing with the Lobsters. PS he stole that from Phoebe from Friends LOL. She went on about Lobsters way back in the early 90s. It's something he constantly says. I think there's even a song about it. Look it up and you'll get dozens of results. |
|
|
|
Post by burrunjor on May 4, 2023 9:39:48 GMT
I don't get it? Is that one of his stupid phrases that's designed to sound really deep but isn't, like that thing with the Lobsters. PS he stole that from Phoebe from Friends LOL. She went on about Lobsters way back in the early 90s. It's something he constantly says. I think there's even a song about it. Look it up and you'll get dozens of results. Just did. God he really is a classic example of mediocrity elevated above his station. Again much like Hitch. |
|
