Science is not authority

Science is a METHOD

It's a practice

You DO science

You ARE not science

You sound mad

There is no appeal to authority

Lol

Yeah cause you're retarded

You should calm down my dude.

Bye

you're showing me studies based on a perceived authority on the subject, which indirectly helped me prove my point.

Aw, does this mean we're breaking up? 💔 @ETBrooD

https://gyazo.com/c16abdd4615e99984be7ffd113845ae9

LOL

I'm starting to think you don't know what appeal to authority is.

I said, you're showing me studies based on a perceived authority on the subject, which indirectly helped me prove my point.

That's an appeal to authority.

Because it's an authority on the subject it can't possibly wrong, that's literarily your argument, even though it also put out the idea that I'm peddling, which you ignored.

https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1186372591042252800?s=20

aww, the site is down atm. I wanted to see if I was on it.

https://youtu.be/INFl9kjZoXg

Two students charged for saying it

This is the “land of the free” everyone is trying to come to

Btw, considering that Petersonian truth is what benefits you, why does Peterson cry about his wife dying of cancer? That is not true. (I mean, you don't benefit from that cancer, suffering and death, so it's **NOT TRUE**.)

That's a real simplification of Peterson's ideas about figurative and literal truth but aight

Peterson doesn't claim to be das übermensch, he can still experience a human failure of reason in the case of an extreme trauma (if we accept your definition of his ideas)

So, you claim that it's reasonable to consider dying wife not dying? That he's being unreasonable in accepting literal truth?

Only if we accept your broken interpretation of his position on 'truth'

Even if he is breaking his own ideas, he's still a human being

I don't deny that. But how is my interpretation broken?

Because Peterson's idea of truth is two-fold. You have a literal and a figural truth. Her death is literal. Her death may in some sense not be figuratively true, since people will still remember her and she may in some sense continue to affect the world, *but* she is still literally dead. Both things are true.

But why do others have to **force** literal truth out of him since he seems to prefer figurative truth without exception?

Because he's an eccentric who's pretty bad at communicating his more cerebral ideas.

He understands literal truth to exist, but simple "truth" is always defaulted to figurative truth or Darwinian truth.

Honestly it's probably his worst trait

I've noticed the same with Hoffstadter, and maybe Plato? They communicate by way of circumnavigation, I think out of an expectation that their audience won't or can't 'get' their point straight out.

how do you determine the truth of harder problems?
how should someone live?
the problem with your definition of truth is it does not work for all persons

Who's definition? Peterson's?

whiic's

Peterson admits his ideas only work in a Judeo-Christian framework