Jordan Peterson: Philosophically Unorthodox, Psychologically Heterodox, Fundamentally Uncontroversial

Back when I took a deep dive into what Peterson actually thinks to understand all the controversy...

I’m a bit under the weather this week so I’ve decided to share this piece of writing, originally written for Areo Magazine in 2018, here on Peak Notions. The audio version will follow for paid subscribers as soon as I can record it.

While much has happened since this article was published, it’s worth reading if you find the Peterson phenomenon interesting. The article was the result of years of careful research and a conversation with Peterson himself. Since Peak Notions is all about asking questions we tend to presume the answers to and don’t always encourage interrogation of, I think this article will be at home here. It remains timely as a reminder that we should do our own due diligence before we decide to take a position on an issue/person/set of ideas. I put careful work into researching Peterson’s ideas and the media and popular response to him. The article below might not be what you’d expect.

---

---

It seems that in order to discuss Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson at all, a person must declare her loyalties right away, pronouncing him either a messiah or a devil. The primary problem with this is that all of the nuance of a realistic, considered look at his ideas lies outside of declarations of political fealty or ideological loyalties and speculations as to his presumed intent. There is much in what Peterson actually thinks, writes and says to criticize. The primary obstacle to this is not necessarily Peterson’s ideas themselves, but the polarization which prevents any sincere intellectual dissection of them. The discourse around Peterson has rendered what he actually thinks unclear to almost everyone. This problem is exacerbated both by Peterson’s own convoluted rhetorical style, which is digressive and esoteric, and the inaccurate, caricatured reports of his views, which are almost as ubiquitous in the media as Peterson himself. He is frequently woefully misinterpreted, while legitimate criticisms go unmade. All of this fuels polarization.

When Peterson visited Dublin in July 2018, I had the opportunity to sit down with him for an hour for an interview. We discussed the philosophical grounding of his ideas in detail. These are both more coherent and benevolent than Peterson is generally given credit for, and less philosophically straightforward or easily defensible than his fans might like. In order to look carefully at what Peterson thinks and where his ideas originate, we must wade into philosophy and psychology, because Peterson bases his ideas about how we think and function at the intersection between these two disciplines.