• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jordan Peterson on White Privilege

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Notice: Jordan Peterson is a polarizing figure. Please be respectful as this is meant as a prompt for genuine discussion. Thanks!

Here is the clip, I encourage you to watch the video in full to understand the perspective.


A few questions for discussion and consideration:
  • Is Dr. Peterson correct in that because we have infinite dimensions of comparability, that the current trends focusing on race, gender, etc, may be less important than others such as wealth, attractiveness, and geography?
  • How big of a role do you think cross-dimensional traits play? For example:
    • If you are white.
    • If you are a white male.
    • If you are a gay, white male.
    • If you are an unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male, in Egypt.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
  • Now consider this:
    • If you are black.
    • If you are a black female.
    • If you are a straight, black female.
    • If you are an attractive, straight, black, female.
    • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female.
    • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female in Washington State.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
Whacha think?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Dr Peterson is not making a fact-based argument. He is instead arguing that reason alone should lead us to his conclusion. His argument is closer in character to theology than to science. If you refuse to check your reasoning against empirical facts, you can reason your way to nearly any conclusion you want to.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
If you refuse to check your reasoning against empirical facts, you can reason your way to nearly any conclusion you want to.
I can see the weakness he is pointing to, though. Is there an accepted, empirical conclusion that has isolated race as the primary factor for advantage? Can we even define what 'advantage' means? I don't have answers, just questions.

I think I should be clear in that I am not supporting the idea that racism doesn't exist. I also not believe that those very examples of racism do not play a role in how the individuals act around each other. But what I want to take from his argument is to consider adding in other dimensions to the discussion such as wealth, geography, and attractiveness. I think these are interesting examples that prejudice comes from.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Oh also, @Sunstone, the click-bait title of the video is a conclusion I do not agree with either. I do think white privilege is a thing and it can have advantages. But there are all sorts of other privileges, too.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Is there an accepted, empirical conclusion that has isolated race as the primary factor for advantage? Can we even define what 'advantage' means?

There are numerous empirical studies that provide independent lines of evidence leading to the same conclusion -- white privilege is a thing. One of the most famous such experiments is to send out the exact same resumes, but with one resume having a "white name" on it, the other a "black name" on it. The white resumes are called in for job interviews significantly more often than the black resumes, despite there being no difference between them other than the racial cast of their names. Trevor is going to get more job offers than Trevon.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Oh also, @Sunstone, the click-bait title of the video is a conclusion I do not agree with either. I do think white privilege is a thing and it can have advantages. But there are all sorts of other privileges, too.

Of course there are other privileges! That should not even need mentioning. But for someone to argue that because there are other privileges, white privilege is insignificant is mind-boggling.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Notice: Jordan Peterson is a polarizing figure. Please be respectful as this is meant as a prompt for genuine discussion. Thanks!

Here is the clip, I encourage you to watch the video in full to understand the perspective.


A few questions for discussion and consideration:
  • Is Dr. Peterson correct in that because we have infinite dimensions of comparability, that the current trends focusing on race, gender, etc, may be less important than others such as wealth, attractiveness, and geography?
  • How big of a role do you think cross-dimensional traits play? For example:
    • If you are white.
    • If you are a white male.
    • If you are a gay, white male.
    • If you are an unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male, in Egypt.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
  • Now consider this:
    • If you are black.
    • If you are a black female.
    • If you are a straight, black female.
    • If you are an attractive, straight, black, female.
    • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female.
    • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female in Washington State.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
Whacha think?

  • How big of a role do you think cross-dimensional traits play? For example:
    • If you are white.
    • If you are a white male.
    • If you are a gay, white male.
    • If you are an unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male, in Egypt.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
  • Now consider this:
  • If you are black.
  • If you are a black female.
  • If you are a straight, black female.
  • If you are an attractive, straight, black, female.
  • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female.
  • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female in Washington State.
  • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
Now compare with those above:
  • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, female, in Egypt.
  • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, male in Washington State.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Of course there are other privileges! That should not even need mentioning. But for someone to argue that because there are other privileges, white privilege is insignificant is mind-boggling.

Indeed, that's the whole point of the concept of intersectionality. Being a white male confers a different degree and type of privilege and experience than being a white female, a rich white male more than a non-rich white male, and so on.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Oh also, @Sunstone, the click-bait title of the video is a conclusion I do not agree with either. I do think white privilege is a thing and it can have advantages. But there are all sorts of other privileges, too.
IMO (as required by rule #8)......
"White privilege" is a perspective.
"Black disadvantage" is a perspective on the other side of that coin.
Both are not even wrong.
Although it appears dysfunctional to see one group's privilege as the
problem. The disadvantage of the other is what needs addressing.
Focusing upon "white privilege" has low potential to yield any positive
in public policy or personal action. But it does cause eyes to roll.

Disclaimer.....
Not watching anyone's videos at the moment.
If this violates requirements of the OP, I'll delete this post.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
IMO (as required by rule #8)......
"White privilege" is a perspective.
"Black disadvantage" is a perspective on the other side of that coin.
Both are not even wrong.
Although it appears dysfunctional to see one group's privilege as the
problem. The disadvantage of the other is what needs addressing.
Focusing upon "white privilege" has low potential to yield any positive
in public policy or personal action. But it does cause eyes to roll.

Disclaimer.....
Not watching anyone's videos at the moment.
If this violates requirements of the OP, I'll delete this post.

But sometimes you can't see neither "white privilege" nor
"black disadvantage", because how natural your privilege is to you.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
That's a perspective too....one not at all clear though.

Let me explain it to you with a story.
I made it all by myself, I am the son of single mother on social disability pension, I used public health as a children, went to public school and I put myself through college and now I am rich and resent paying higher taxes because I am rich.
It is not even a story as a fairy tale. It is the story of a white male in the US. What is he overlooking?
There is one thing I haven't mentioned, that might be relevant not just in his case, but is generally overlook in some of these cases.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Let me explain it to you with a story.
I made it all by myself, I am the son of single mother on social disability pension, I used public health as a children, went to public school and I put myself through college and now I am rich and resent paying higher taxes because I am rich.
It is not even a story as a fairy tale. It is the story of a white male in the US. What is he overlooking?
There is one thing I haven't mentioned, that might be relevant not just in his case, but is generally overlook in some of these cases.
The story of whom?
I'm skeptical of the underlined claim.
It doesn't sound like anything that anyone would say.
As for using public benefits, that is not the sole province of white folk.
I see no point in the post other than criticism of a hypothetical tax hater.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
The story of whom?
I'm skeptical of the underlined claim.
It doesn't sound like anything that anyone would say.
As for using public benefits, that is not the sole province of white folk.
I see no point in the post other than criticism of a hypothetical tax hater.

Precisely, the person couldn't see the breaks he got. Further sometimes when you hear stories of people making it despite the odds based on a disadvantaged upbringing something is overlooked. Look up resilient children. Even the genes you get is a lottery. Of course you can train children to be more resilient, but there seems to be a genetic factor.

Further if you are a mediocre child with the right race, sex, gender, parents and close social group you can a lot further in some cases than a bright child with the wrong race, sex, gender, parents and close social group and just because some bright/resilient children make it from a disadvantage doesn't mean that the mediocre child doesn't have an advantage because of in effect being born into better social circumstances.

Read John Rawls and A theory of justice. Some times some people are unaware of the advantages that they are given and which others don't have and those with the advantages take them for granted.
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
. But what I want to take from his argument is to consider adding in other dimensions to the discussion such as wealth, geography, and attractiveness. I think these are interesting examples that prejudice comes from.

You mean intersectionality, that thing that was developped by feminist philosophers and sociologists in the early 90's and that is pretty much standard in the current discourse about sexism, racism and other forms of social prejudices? Yeah, of course this can be important to any analysis. That you are unaware of intersectional framework when it comes to social justice issues is pretty strange.
 

Tambourine

Well-Known Member
I can see the weakness he is pointing to, though. Is there an accepted, empirical conclusion that has isolated race as the primary factor for advantage? Can we even define what 'advantage' means? I don't have answers, just questions.

I think I should be clear in that I am not supporting the idea that racism doesn't exist. I also not believe that those very examples of racism do not play a role in how the individuals act around each other. But what I want to take from his argument is to consider adding in other dimensions to the discussion such as wealth, geography, and attractiveness. I think these are interesting examples that prejudice comes from.
The core of Privilege Theory doesn't suggest that there's some nebulous "advantage" that is doled out in a specific order, but that certain groups of people are being concretely disadvantaged in a myriad of very specific, everyday situations, to an extent that people who have not suffered these disadvantages often are not even aware of the sheer number of situations where these issues are present. Not suffering these disadvantages is "privilege" in that specific sense, and this "privilege" blinds people to the myriad everyday ways that bigotry can exist.

Just to take the obvious example, Dr. Peterson has never experienced a situation where his gender identity has come into question; he has never experienced this on a regular basis, and he has never suffered from gender related dysphoria. Therefore, he has no experience in the myriad ways in which the identity of transgender people is being undermined on an everyday basis, and does not realize how people who live through this daily could suffer from it.
He is "privileged" in this specific regard.
 

bobhikes

Nondetermined
Premium Member
Notice: Jordan Peterson is a polarizing figure. Please be respectful as this is meant as a prompt for genuine discussion. Thanks!

Here is the clip, I encourage you to watch the video in full to understand the perspective.


A few questions for discussion and consideration:
  • Is Dr. Peterson correct in that because we have infinite dimensions of comparability, that the current trends focusing on race, gender, etc, may be less important than others such as wealth, attractiveness, and geography?
  • How big of a role do you think cross-dimensional traits play? For example:
    • If you are white.
    • If you are a white male.
    • If you are a gay, white male.
    • If you are an unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male.
    • If you are an impoverished, unattractive, gay, white, male, in Egypt.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
  • Now consider this:
    • If you are black.
    • If you are a black female.
    • If you are a straight, black female.
    • If you are an attractive, straight, black, female.
    • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female.
    • If you are a wealthy, attractive, straight, black, female in Washington State.
    • Which of the traits above has the greatest impact on how the world perceives you?
Whacha think?

All that I have to say is that all of the white traits have the ability to be hidden. The Black person can never hide the color of there skin.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
White privilege is just another veiled form of racism set against white people.

Does anybody in their right mind think all white people are privileged?

A simple yes or no would suffice.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
The core of Privilege Theory doesn't suggest that there's some nebulous "advantage" that is doled out in a specific order, but that certain groups of people are being concretely disadvantaged in a myriad of very specific, everyday situations, to an extent that people who have not suffered these disadvantages often are not even aware of the sheer number of situations where these issues are present. Not suffering these disadvantages is "privilege" in that specific sense, and this "privilege" blinds people to the myriad everyday ways that bigotry can exist.

Just to take the obvious example, Dr. Peterson has never experienced a situation where his gender identity has come into question; he has never experienced this on a regular basis, and he has never suffered from gender related dysphoria. Therefore, he has no experience in the myriad ways in which the identity of transgender people is being undermined on an everyday basis, and does not realize how people who live through this daily could suffer from it.
He is "privileged" in this specific regard.

Here is my story. I am white, male, heterosexual and somewhat intelligent. Yet I have a limit. I am an Aspie and I didn't quite make it so I was both unlucky and lucky in that I got a disability pension, because I can't hold a normal job. I then got a sheltered job at a normal workplace and there is the joke. I in effect got fired, because I wasn't normal. Doh, right. :D

I have privilege and yet, I don't.
 
Top