Hacker News Reader

Reading the manifesto felt like going through a less eloquent regurgitation of Jordan Peterson's content. So far I have been unable to disprove Peterson's points and his thoughts process is a very robust way to vet ideas. I a very curious to see if anyone can seriously debunk him.

Edit: Clarified that I meant peterson's points and not the manifesto.

View on HN

It should be noted that for many of his scientific claims, not being able to disprove them says nothing. Being able to prove them is the standard of science. If you take a look at a significant number of peer reviewed studies, I think you will struggle to find any version of his points backed up.

As for his thought process, it seems to be well agreed that his argument very strongly lacks a tight argument and seemed to base itself mostly off of creating stereotypes around gender and political opinions and then proceeding to use those to loosely reason for his points. Neither the stereotypes or his reasoning are very sound.

I was talking about Jordan Peterson's content not the manifesto itself. I see now how it would be confusing though.

If you're looking for a more scientifically inclined video about this topic, take a look here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n691pLhQBkw

(The Truth Cannot be Sexist - Steven Pinker on the biology of sex differences)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com