12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (Hardcover) - Jordan B Peterson - £9.99 (Prime) £12.98 (Non Prime) @ Amazon
160°

12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos (Hardcover) - Jordan B Peterson - £9.99 (Prime) £12.98 (Non Prime) @ Amazon

49
Found 19th Apr
Now dropped below £10.

Come join the lobster army.

Blurb:
What are the most valuable things that everyone should know?

Acclaimed clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson has reshaped the modern understanding of personality, and now he has become one of the world's most influential public thinkers, with his lectures on topics from the Bible to romantic relationships to mythology drawing tens of millions of viewers. In an era of unprecedented change and polarizing politics, his frank and refreshing message about the value of individual responsibility and ancient wisdom has resonated around the world.

In this book, he provides twelve profound and practical principles for how to live a meaningful life, from setting your house in order before criticising others to comparing yourself to who you were yesterday, not someone else today. Happiness is a pointless goal, he shows us. Instead we must search for meaning, not for its own sake, but as a defence against the suffering that is intrinsic to our existence.

Drawing on vivid examples from his clinical practice and personal life, cutting edge psychology and philosophy, and lessons from humanity's oldest myths and stories, Peterson takes the reader on an intellectual journey like no other. Gripping, thought-provoking and deeply rewarding, 12 Rules for Life offers an antidote to the chaos in our lives: eternal truths applied to our modern problems.
Community Updates

Groups

Top comments
Anyone never heard of him just watch the channel 4 interview with Cathy Newman on YouTube. priceless.
jobibear40 m ago

Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls …Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls himself Catholic yet does not believe in a "real" Jesus. Indeed a dumb guy's intellectual. Instead read GK Chesterton and his critique of the madman Neictzche.


Hmm.

Why the 'but' in-between his dislike of postmodernism and his religious beliefs? One would follow from the other. Decrying a theory that seeks to destroy grand narratives would be an obvious position from someone who believes in one of them, not a contentious one .

People are trying to lump him as some snake oil salesman looking for an angle to get rich. In reality, he is a time honoured professor who has thought about his position for decades. The popular world came to him. Why you may ask? Because left wing politics have made a move again to the authoritarian (policing language and through deconstructionism trying to destroy and rebuild society in a utopian fashion). So he states his case without moving, and that is his appeal.

The only way you create meaning is through definition. The only way you can define is by making standards. Religious archetypes are the nascent standards by how we see good and evil today. Postmodernism wants to throw it all out, and replace it with another grand narrative (for all postmodernists are obsessed with power), the equalisation of everything.
Edited by: "cheapo" 19th Apr
33665796-ohdNS.jpg
49 Comments
Excellent book
Anyone never heard of him just watch the channel 4 interview with Cathy Newman on YouTube. priceless.
Good paid £13.90 .
A dumb person's smart man. Voted hot.

Clean your room bucko. Stand up straight daddyo.
Where's my serotonin! Damnit!
Just read Peaceful Warrior.
Original Poster
wixster28 m ago

Just read Peaceful Warrior.


Also another very good book.
Thanks for the suggestions wixter!
kruger983 h, 7 m ago

A dumb person's smart man. Voted hot.Clean your room bucko. Stand up …A dumb person's smart man. Voted hot.Clean your room bucko. Stand up straight daddyo.


Clearly you haven't read any of his material. Any of the memetic aphorisms you quote are superficial understandings of actually very deep philosophical observations about life and meaning.

How about, recognise the potential for evil in yourself, or, understand that life is painful and it is easy to give into its apparent meaninglessness, and that the true valour is in fighting against that and trying to create meaning.

His observations on meaning and morality are deeply profound. He is right in many ways. Nietzsche predicted millions of deaths in a post religious world, which was merely replaced by other utopian ideals (Communism, National Socialism - and basically all Marxist based ideological politics), and that lead to barbarism on a scale not seen in human history.

Also, his criticism of post-modernism is to my mind perceptive. Order, something that appears to be a proiri natural to all animals (hierarchies, categorisation, etc), is something to be understood and nourished, where we allow power dynamics to occur whilst always vigilantly watching for the tyrannical manifestations.

Just because he's popular, it does not mean he is gauche or populist. He is speaking truths un-uttered for a while, and that is why he has an audience.
Edited by: "cheapo" 19th Apr
sandstone16 h, 22 m ago

Anyone never heard of him just watch the channel 4 interview with Cathy …Anyone never heard of him just watch the channel 4 interview with Cathy Newman on YouTube. priceless.


Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls himself Catholic yet does not believe in a "real" Jesus. Indeed a dumb guy's intellectual. Instead read GK Chesterton and his critique of the madman Neictzche.
Edited by: "jobibear" 19th Apr
jobibear40 m ago

Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls …Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls himself Catholic yet does not believe in a "real" Jesus. Indeed a dumb guy's intellectual. Instead read GK Chesterton and his critique of the madman Neictzche.


Hmm.

Why the 'but' in-between his dislike of postmodernism and his religious beliefs? One would follow from the other. Decrying a theory that seeks to destroy grand narratives would be an obvious position from someone who believes in one of them, not a contentious one .

People are trying to lump him as some snake oil salesman looking for an angle to get rich. In reality, he is a time honoured professor who has thought about his position for decades. The popular world came to him. Why you may ask? Because left wing politics have made a move again to the authoritarian (policing language and through deconstructionism trying to destroy and rebuild society in a utopian fashion). So he states his case without moving, and that is his appeal.

The only way you create meaning is through definition. The only way you can define is by making standards. Religious archetypes are the nascent standards by how we see good and evil today. Postmodernism wants to throw it all out, and replace it with another grand narrative (for all postmodernists are obsessed with power), the equalisation of everything.
Edited by: "cheapo" 19th Apr
Cheaper, and in my opinion better, on Audible (and read by Jordan too - which is, again in my opinion, also a bonus).
33665796-ohdNS.jpg
jobibear2 h, 19 m ago

Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls …Don't see what all the fuss is about. He despises postmodernism but calls himself Catholic yet does not believe in a "real" Jesus. Indeed a dumb guy's intellectual. Instead read GK Chesterton and his critique of the madman Neictzche.


Doesn't call himself a Catholic at all. False.
Yes, I've watched probably hunderds of hours of JBP by now, he has called himself somewhat religious but not catholic. His idea of religious is nothing like being a follower of a particular church or something, it has more to do with his deep understanding of mythology, ancient culture and (Jungian) archetypes, as described in his work Maps of Meaning.

Although I love him even, I do not agree 100% with everything he says, but I would say the same thing he said about Freud at one time - '...even when he is wrong, he is wrong in an interesting way'. In particular I didn't like his stubbornness in his first interview with Sam Harris, and his insistence that correspondence theory of truth is not accurate but it is rather something that has darwinian utility with a touch of moral value. Sometimes he also seems to exaggerate the significance and and value of the Pareto distribution which he has talked a lot about; also places immense significance on IQ which I again do not really agree; but yeah, that's just my opinion; overall one of the most interesting and controversial (in a good way) public intelectuals that we have been blessed with.

This particular book borrows from his Personality lectures which are available on his Youtube channel, so if you are interested you can have a look at that; be aware that they are over 25 hours in total and some of the content could be quite dense.

Some people have mentioned his attacks on post-modernism. If you are interested in that, I'd recommend Stephen Hicks book Explaining Postmodernism, which Jordan thought it's a very good take on the subject.

Heat!
Ordered. Thanks.
This guy is a kook.

I'd advise against spending any money never mind hundreds of hours of our life on him.
retrend9 m ago

This guy is a kook.I'd advise against spending any money never mind …This guy is a kook.I'd advise against spending any money never mind hundreds of hours of our life on him.


What leads you to believe he's a kook?
zurich12 h, 19 m ago

Here's an article that I think pretty much hits the nail on the head.


Interesting read.

A few points.

This is a refutation of Peterson's work, stating that it's obscurantism is a cover for saying little, comically taking his diagrams from maps of meaning and adding "wtf?!" style commentary. In context the diagrams are exploring the obscure, mythical archetypes from separate strands of civilisation that have commonality of meaning, and thus he implies are intrinsic to the way human beings see and act in the world. Is it terribly dense? Yes. So? Should he just say what I have said and print it on the bag of used fag packets, or can he be allowed to academically probe the nuances, that he himself states he can hardly perceive. He is a lover of Jung, and as a result is dealing with trying to understand the metaphysical. When speaking on such a topic the accusation that you cannot be refuted is a permanent one, much like an atheist such as myself would accuse a religious believer who uses faith as an argument. Does that mean he should not ponder such topics? Can virtually all of western philosophy be tarred with the same obscurantish brush?

Peterson is verbose I agree, but he is also accused of being plain ("clean your room"). He states obvious things, and backs them up with the echoes of our human stories, and uses modern day metrics to justify his positions. The guy you cite is accusing him of Nietzschean like appeals to the superman. In fact, his theory to my mind is stressing the importance of the individual, and when an individual is properly socialised they can have a positive effect on society.

He is not perfect, but he is a man for our time. Entropy is a constant, but this does mean we have to succumb to it willingly.
GibsonSt191 h, 14 m ago

What leads you to believe he's a kook?


Because he states basic truths and some self help stuff in a very long and wordy way so as to make them seem complex and clever. While at the same time hanging around with a bunch of fascists.
retrend16 m ago

Because he states basic truths and some self help stuff in a very long and …Because he states basic truths and some self help stuff in a very long and wordy way so as to make them seem complex and clever. While at the same time hanging around with a bunch of fascists.


Please evidence your claim that he has fascist sympathies or alliances. Showing that some fascists like him is not enough, prove that he has sympathies with the far right/far left (for both can be fascist).

He understands, as much as anyone can, why the 20th century created so many dead bodies. That does not mean he supports why they did it, he just understands, and tries to inform people of the evil of class based ideological politics, both national socilaist, and communist.
Edited by: "cheapo" 20th Apr
nybooks.com/dai…sm/


OK, even if he's not a fascist, he just condones it and regularly features at the same speaking events (where they fleece their muggy fans blind) as popular neo nazis and alt righters. Not the sort of person I really want to read.

I was tidying my room and washing my cock before he told his fans/victims about the benefits of it.
Edited by: "retrend" 20th Apr
retrend19 m ago

http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/03/19/jordan-peterson-and-fascist-mysticism/OK, even if he's not a fascist, he just condones it and regularly features at the same speaking events (where they fleece their muggy fans blind) as popular neo nazis and alt righters. Not the sort of person I really want to read.I was tidying my room and washing my cock before he told his fans/victims about the benefits of it.


Ah, so he isn't. Right. All you have is some tenuous guilt by association implications.

He does not condone fascism, nor any other of the authoritarian tyrannical ideologies. He specifically speaks against them. He came to popular prominence because of his stance against compelled speech laws in Canada. He is also against the idea of considering yourself a victim. in fact, he says we are all victims of mortality and existence (and therefore no one is a victim), and by accepting this, we can all struggle to do good in the world.

If you don't want to read him because your genitals are already clean, then good for you.
He is, but my point was that even if he wasn't, he'd be a very questionable character.

He's a nazi apologist.

There's gotta be better self help authors out there. It's not a genre I particularly enjoy so I've no recommendations sadly.
Edited by: "retrend" 20th Apr
retrend20th Apr

He is, but my point was that even if he wasn't, he'd be a very …He is, but my point was that even if he wasn't, he'd be a very questionable character.He's a nazi apologist.There's gotta be better self help authors out there. It's not a genre I particularly enjoy so I've no recommendations sadly.


Evidence that he's a nazi apologist please.
He features at the same speaking events as them.
retrend38 m ago

He is, but my point was that even if he wasn't, he'd be a very …He is, but my point was that even if he wasn't, he'd be a very questionable character.He's a nazi apologist.There's gotta be better self help authors out there. It's not a genre I particularly enjoy so I've no recommendations sadly.


We don't want recommendations for self help books, we want evidence that he is a Nazi sympathiser.

You don't have any, but reinforce Godwin's law as usual.
retrend26 m ago

He features at the same speaking events as them.



WOW , thats possibly the dubmest thing i heard this week.
You labeling people by words nazi and facist make me think you are
a) too dumb to understand what is going on
b) have very little information on who he is and what he stands for.
Insated of getting your informnations from social media, step out of your buble and get some info about him/read his work/ watch some interviews.
Than come back and tell us how what he says makes him facist or nazi and on what dont you agree on with him and why...
Edited by: "freshcarrot" 20th Apr
Victims.

He appeals to a certain type of person so I feel sorry for you.
Edited by: "retrend" 20th Apr
retrend9 m ago

Victims.He appeals to a certain type of person so I feel sorry for you.



No argument , the classics
Edited by: "freshcarrot" 20th Apr
Actually, in an appeal to the JP fans, the argument he's a fascist is in the first link I gave when asked. It's overly wordy and a waste of time, it's perfect for you.
retrend17 m ago

Actually, in an appeal to the JP fans, the argument he's a fascist is in …Actually, in an appeal to the JP fans, the argument he's a fascist is in the first link I gave when asked. It's overly wordy and a waste of time, it's perfect for you.



The thing is , that argument is so unbelievably dumb, that i had hard time believing that you are serious.
Whats next ? Jesse Owens was a nazi because he sat in the same crowd that Hitler did in Berlin back in 1936 ?
The flawless logic ...
Edited by: "freshcarrot" 20th Apr
Yes it's not as if regularly appearing on the bill at the same events as neo nazis, alt righters fascists has any reflection on someone.

Such a great self help author.
Edited by: "retrend" 20th Apr
retrend52 m ago

He features at the same speaking events as them.


Ouch. If that's how you classify people, everyone's a nazi at some point.
Yes, because everyone has featured as a speaker at an event with alt righters and neo nazis on the bill. Totally normal behaviour.
retrend6 m ago

Yes it's not as if regularly appearing on the bill at the same events as …Yes it's not as if regularly appearing on the bill at the same events as neo nazis, alt righters fascists has any reflection on someone.Such a great self help author.



Still no argument
You also seem to be a person who basicly calls everybody who disagree with the left a "nazi, facist, altright" without using single brain cell ...
I don't call everyone that, but when they are famous solely for appealing to those groups, famous for speaking at their events, well it's clear what they are.

Not all nazis look like they do in Wolfenstein. Some of them look like charlatan conmen for simple boring people who are impressed by wordiness and a lack of clarity.
Edited by: "retrend" 20th Apr
Original Poster
Guys, please can we all just put down our glasses of soy milk and appreciate that it is a good deal.
retrend42 m ago

I don't call everyone that, but when they are famous solely for appealing …I don't call everyone that, but when they are famous solely for appealing to those groups, famous for speaking at their events, well it's clear what they are.Not all nazis look like they do in Wolfenstein. Some of them look like charlatan conmen for simple boring people who are impressed by wordiness and a lack of clarity.


He has no control on what audience will he appeal to.
He wuold be very happy to talk on left or alt left events, but they will never invite him for obvious reasons, he would make them look as dumb , as he made look Cathy "so you saying" Newman dumb.
The only way you can justify calling him nazi and facist is on basis of what he SAID, and you still didnt provide any shred anything.

Will you finaly enlight us ?
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text