I understand that nobody actually gives a shit about what i have to say. so writing a book is the last thing i would do. and yeah he has classrooms full of people listening to him
I get it. who am i to question people like him or slyvia browne when they have a whole crowd listening ?
You can question anything that you want. Who are you to question? Well, damn it, you are sovereign individual with a brain that allows you to perceive the world, that's who you are. You have every right, in fact the responsibility and obligation, to question anything and everything. If you want to people to care about your opinions you must articulate them well in a way that people can understand and to which they can relate. Isn't that our job as filmmakers? Dr. Peterson makes a point that great artists, no matter the format - be it painting, theater/film, sculpture, dance, music, etc. - are all storytellers who tell stories to which their target audience can relate, and that they are always at the forefront of cultural trends.
You seem to feel that I am an advocate for Dr. Peterson. Yes, I find many of the things he has to say quite interesting. That does not mean that I advocate everything he says. That's why I pause the lectures and then spend time researching what he has said, because I don't understand, or I need clarification, or I need verification. I don't agree with some of his positions, agree with others and have suspended judgement on the rest. That's why I said if you want to argue his points you should argue with him, because I am not his advocate, although you want to debate with me as if I were.
I am about to embark on the last lecture of this particular series. What I have gleaned so far about his viewpoint is this...
As human beings we are the products of the evolutionary process. Therefor we are subject to the most basic of biological impulses - survival, which means propagation of the species.
As the only self aware species on the planet survival lessons needed to be passed on. These lessons were passed on in the form of narrative stories.
For tens of thousands of years oral history was the only form of education that could be applied to the communal group. And that these very early stories, whether they come from the Middle East, Asia or the Americas - all of which were totally disconnected from each other - were/are the same stories; the creation of the world, etc., and share similar motifs.
In addition, these disparate cultures use very similar metaphors, such as the dragon. That these seemingly universal metaphors spring from our genetic coding as prey animals. That these stories are/were, in their essence, an attempt to understand and explain the meaning of life. That these stories are examples of our attempts to make order out of chaos (the meaning of life) and how these attempts went well or created horrors and the lessons to be learned.
It is quite obvious that Dr. Peterson has a biased viewpoint; completely understandable as he has a doctorate in psychology, teaches psychology and is a practicing clinical psychologist.
So, once again, just because I am
listening to what he has to say does not mean that I
agree with what he has to say.
My initial question was "do these concepts influence the writers on this forum?" You descended into the minutia and personalizing it instead of looking at the overall picture or even answering the question. That is why I left off of the argument.
I neither defend nor disparage Dr. Peterson. I find his viewpoints interesting. I find the way that he develops his positions informative. I am experiencing his lectures as a way of expanding my own personal viewpoint so I can reach my own conclusions. His lectures are a way of adding information to my personal data pool. That's all.
and I feel like it didn’t resonate with you at all so we are just on totally opposite pages here
