Jordan Petersonon Why PostModernism Must Be Resisted

This is a clip from a 2017 Manning Centre Conference (February 23-25 in Ottawa), where I spoke along with Professor Gad Saad and John Carpay, President of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms about the political turmoil on university campuses and in broader society, and the role of postmodern theory in producing that turmoil. The full clip is here:

I’m indebted to the YouTube channel Philosophy Insights for cutting this clip.

A transcript is available here: Thanks to Tim Hains for that.

To support this channel: Patreon:

Other relevant links:

Personality analysis:
Self Authoring:
Jordan Peterson Website:
Reading List:…

View on

About Paul Gordon 2955 Articles
Paul Gordon is the publisher and editor of iState.TV. He has published and edited newspapers, poetry magazines and online weekly magazines. He is the director of Social Cognito, an SEO/Web Marketing Company. You can reach Paul at


  1. I have shared this twice, first from another uploader and now this one, and I am met by DEAFENING silence…I ashamed to say I have surronded myself with the these postmodernists FAR to long, and have to say it is because of i thought it actually was something wrong with me…I now know it is not, it´s them…And it is the best feeling to finally know I have been right for so long

  2. Well this started well and then spiralled down POST-fascist rhetoric. As much as liberty and responcibility are values worth pursuing; there is talk of dialogue then tar every progressive thought with the same brush. Sure, there is ratbags on the left; on the right; and center. However, by the same leap of logic that extremist of one side of the divide means both sides moderates have no value.

    Liberty is tempered by consequence; so is power through altruism enables any group to survive… as a consequence.

  3. Only the most egregious:

    Derrida is only one literary voice in the post modern world and hardly it’s head trickster: Certainly Einstein and Heisenberg are far more influential in the development of the fundamental law of post-modernism: that there is no “god’s eye view” viewpoint, no master narrative, from which everything can be explained. Derrida is just an amusement for those who prefer their wordplay in French.

    “Post-modernism doesn’t have a shred of gratitude.” Ya know what else doesn’t have a shred of gratitude? Automotive engineering. A flame wall heats the air, the air expands from the heat, the expansion moves the cylinder, and from that movement we harvest work. The laws of thermodynamics don’t give a damn about how much your ancestors suffered. Chemistry has no gratitude. Electricity has no gratitude. Pretty much everything has no gratitude. Only animals, including human animals, who have been given something, are grateful. And only the most sanctimonious and judgmental people worry about whether others are grateful enough. For all of the above… I’m grateful.

    “Resentment is the worst emotion you can experience. Resentment, arrogance and deceit. If you’re bitter about everything that’s happening around you despite the fact that you’re bathed in wealth…” Says the man who, well-paid on the public’s dime (not to mention book deals and advertising), is absolutely bitter about the institutions that pay his wages and also the progress of the modern world; who bitterly – arrogantly – refuses to simply treat different people with decency; and finds it advantageous to become a mouthpiece for views he not only doesn’t share but knows in his heart are actually wrong.

    “Here’s what the post modernists believe…” which is then followed not by what they believe but by what he asserts the don’t believe in: the individual. Look. The individual is all that’s left when you remove the master narrative. It’s really the only thing the post-modernist believes in. He gets it so wrong that one could not get it more wrong than that!

    Logos is in the etymology of “logic.” True. But he neglects to make any distinctions, which are necessary for understanding. It’s also the same in “logistics.” It’s the “…ology” in biology, anthropology, sociology, etc… It points to knowing, to words, and to knowledge – but not to mind: the Greeks had a different word for that: nous. (And in the early days, the breath, which pointed to the soul: the psyche, from which “psychology” is derived, yet another “…ology.) It’s connection to logic comes from the antique idea that one could discover the Truths of Nature through contemplation alone, by applying the rules of knowledge (logic). That antique idea was – for most of us – supplanted by the empirical, experimental, scientific method 2, or 3, or 4, centuries ago… Logic doesn’t give you the objects of knowledge, it merely ensures the orderly arrangement of empirical experience.

    In my opinion the root word of dialogue isn’t logos. It’s the “dia” part. It means “across.” When the doctor diagnoses you he crosses into knowing what your condition is – gnosis – another word for knowing, meaning the measure of knowledge – as a gnomon was a type of measuring stick. The diatonic scale plays across the modes, for all you musicologists out there… (Another “…ology” ending, BTW.) Dialogue means “words across.”

    So eventually, he reveals his true colours, and urges identity politics on his various factions as they form a force to storm the Reichstag… or, at least, the Student Union building! He warns them that they can’t dialogue with their opponents because he sees the world as a Hobbesian struggle for raw power. Dialogue would threaten that. There will be no dialogue. He wants a world with no apologies. No shows of weakness. Never retreat. No universities. Down with knowledge! No rights, only responsibilities. Duty replaces choice. The very same appeals to duty that were heard by the masses in Babylon, those that built the pyramids for Pharaoh, and filled the legions for the Caesars’ empire. The same appeals to duty that inspired the herrenvolk, and urged the Workers of the World to unite. The same appeals to duty that lit the fuse of every war and massacre and pogrom and holocaust in history.

    Listen to Dr. Peterson. Take on board the good points he makes. (And sometimes he does make some.) But listen to the other side, too. And then most importantly – the truest thing of all for a postmodern citizen – think for yourself.

  4. Another erudite 'intellectual' espousing opinion as fact and false logic as reason. I am hearing arrogance and anger or is it disenchantment. Arrogance the brother of ignorance because it considers not a valid counterpoint such is its need to protect ego. Anger disguised as passion easily attracts followers – alas rather than track and trace the argument most people are swayed by emotion, the rhythm of the words, the confidence of the speaker. I am curious about the anger – its seat. I am new to both Peterson and Molyneux. I see why they might align on some issues. Though not finished with my study of them I distrust anger's agenda. Looking for fresh perspectives, enlightened minds I am so far disappointed.

  5. I know you probably won't answer professor but what is the end goal of the Post Modernists? What do they stand to gain from the tearing down of the west especially in a time when we are besieged by so many potential enemies with toxic ideologies they may come to rule in our place?

  6. So how do you reason with those whose fundamental stance is against logic and dialogue.
    If a dog is intent on biting you do you open a dialogue and say please don't bite me it is not going to benefit you ; while you are screaming in pain , or do you get hold of a stick and whack its ass. If the stick solution is not acceptable then what?
    Retrain them at a fundamental level ? But most institutions and schools are run by the same indoctrinated narrow minded fearful remote controlled drone-like servants who will teach anything for a paycheck.

  7. Stopped at the first deliberate, outright lie: 'Logos' does not refer to logic, it refers to language. Post-modernists do not believe in the absoluteness of language. If an author says 'Well, when I said "x" I meant "x1"' Derrida would say 'Tough. Once the words are out of your mouth or on the page, the audience is free to interpret what you say however they choose.' This is partly what Derrida means by 'The death of the author.' Post modernists do not reject logic.

  8. I'm so wet. I'm trying to clean my room but it's drenched with my vagina squirting out the niagra falls orgasm of the century. Dr. Peterson, if you're reading this, please go down on me and release all the stress you're feeling. I'll orgasm so hard I'll never be able to walk again. I'll be your little transgression in this life.

  9. I've noticed in the comments that the only way SJWs can respond to your arguments is through ad hominem and by pathetically building up straw men. That's when you know you're winning.
    I'm so glad someone like you is standing up for the enlightenment principles of liberty and individualism, while on my campus, you can't go five minutes without hearing the word "patriarchy."

  10. Intellectual honesty with a dash of genuine humanity mixed with a fierce sense of justice…Followed by humilty, kindness determination & courage..

    We can rebuild him better stronger faster than before..Jordan Peterson will be that man….Cue music.

  11. If a video has "Jordan Peterson" in the title, it gets 100k hits in the first day or two. It helps if it's also on a channel called Jordan B. Peterson.

    Add Frankfurt School, and consumerism — if those things are different — to the alchemy of evil, along with Marxism and Postmodernism. Also, add community to responsibility, as far as what young people — and people in general — are starving for.

Leave a Reply