Without taking "sides" -- I don't have a horse in the "is postmodernism true?" race -- it bears pointing out that afaict Jordan Peterson doesn't really know what he's talking about when it comes to 20th-century philosophy. Most of his views on postmodernism, and philosophy in general, make absurd claims without actually referring to any philosophical literature. He doesn't even refer to much literature critical of postmodernism (and there is lots of this).

In fact, this pattern of not really knowing what he talks about could be stretched to cover basically everything but clinical psychology (which is what he works in). To quote the man himself[0], in a recent Deepak Chopra moment:

> Proof itself, of any sort, is impossible, without an axiom (as Godel proved). Thus faith in God is a prerequisite for all proof.

Most of his knowledge about postmodernism isn't from actually reading the texts he so dislikes; he just gets it[1] from a self-published/vanity-press book (Hicks' Explaining Postmodernism) that ... just isn't very good. From a review of the book, which could very well be applied to Peterson's videos:

> Second, although it accuses (rightly I think) postmodernism of being too polemical, Hicks' text is itself an extended polemic. Instead of disproving postmodernism, Hicks dismisses it; instead of taking postmodernism seriously and analyzing it carefully on its terms, Hicks oversimplifies and trivializes it, seemingly in order to justify his own prejudice against postmodernism. If postmodernism is in fact untenable, which it very well might be, Stephen Hicks has unfortunately not demonstrated that.

A quick search for his name on /r/askphilosophy will turn up a ton of reasons (from people actually working in philosophy) why anyone is -- to put it charitably -- better served engaging with other critics of postmodernism.

His current popularity is largely due to the controversy around him bravely "sticking it to feminists" by daringly refusing to call trans people by their preferred pronouns. Another reason is his conspiracy-theorizing on "cultural Marxism",

> 'Cultural Marxism' in modern political parlance refers to a conspiracy theory which sees the Frankfurt School as part of an ongoing movement to take over and destroy Western society.[2]

both of which find favor with a section of the right today.

--

[0]: https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/40520012623631155...

[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/6n6rhg/why_a...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marx...