PART II of II
The Cult of Jordan Peterson: What the Canadian Intellectual Gets Right About Young Men
The Economist
November 19, 2024
Universities are tripping over the contradictory intellectual positions where truth has given way to ideological rectitude. Ironically, universities have become environments where uniformity is rewarded and contrary thought is ostracized. A simple example is that of Nigel Biggar, an esteemed Oxford professor of ethics and theology.
Biggar had the temerity to suggest that there might be facts to be checked and conclusions to be rethought regarding the toppling of statues and the nature of colonialism. He was soon ostracized by the University of Oxford with dons calling for his figurative head on a platter. He was simply asking questions. As a Christian, he became a voice of reason.
Niall Ferguson, the well-known historian, has shown in his presentations that the academic world—to no one’s surprise—is virtually entirely left-leaning (Democratic Party in US terms) other than small outposts in the business and engineering faculties. Not a place where Peterson--or Biggar--would expect a round of applause.
The Economist comically delves into Peterson’s writing style, lambasting it as archaic and confusing. Peterson has a particular style—long sentences, big words, occasional rants and comical sidebars. This should encourage The Economist to sort out the massive appeal of someone who apparently can't communicate--but it doesn't.
It’s stunning to think that a 500-page book examining the Old Testament attracts such attention and that someone can go on a speaking tour focused on that topic.
On his polemical tone, the day of milquetoast advocates of Christianity may be coming to an end. The lambs may be turning into lions, simply fed up with not returning fire. Diplomatic and winsome approaches like that of University of Oxford Professor Emeritus John Lennox are appealing but others prefer to enthusiastically return fire.
Peterson adds rhetorical flourish to his various proclamations. He adds a punctuation market occasionally--others with opposing views "be damned!" This approach is similar to that of Douglas Murray in The Ward on the West: How to Prevail in the Age of Unreason who happily intermingles sardonic comments with pity insights. .
Meanwhile, The Economist talks about the clothes Peterson wears and his appearance. Meanwhile, they miss the entire point of his book.
Peterson’s purpose in writing his book is plainly stated: “The biblical story, in its totality, is the frame through which the world of facts reveals itself, insofar as the West itself is concerned: it is the description of the hierarchy of value within which even science itself (that is, the science that ultimately pursues the good) is made possible, The Bible is the library of stories on which the more productive, freest, and most stable and peaceful societies the world have even known are predicated—the foundation of the West, plain and simple” (xxxi).
The Economist should take the measuring stick to Richard Dawkins, the evolutionary biologist from Oxford, as they do with Peterson. Despite Dawkin's sterling credentials, his mainstream books are riddled with inconsistencies and illogical arguments. Then he regularly maligns those with contrary views and engages in gutter name-calling. His shrill denigration of those which contrary views became louder as his influence has waned.
In short, The Economist is woefully and sadly out of touch. They describe Peterson as a “contrarian” and try to marginalize him. They talk about his “bro” followers who they characterize as generally younger, male and stupid.
How much is driven by jealousy? Peterson has over a billion views on YouTube. In 10 years he has eclipsed the 150-year track record of The Economist. Keep squawking.
Read our full review of Jordan Peterson's recent book: