Define fries
Define fries
136 评论
-
-
Unrealistic. This is way too coherent. Needs more word salad.
-
Also he should start crying at one point.
-
Everything I hate is cultural marxism.
-
-
This is only missing JP coming up with a completely deranged definition of what fries are that he demands the cashier adheres to (I don't think the vodka applies, that's more making fun of the cashier). And also him entirely dodging the question of whether he likes fries, stating that people have discussed whether he likes fries but he refuses to reveal it.
-
Obviously fries represent the western civilization. Frying oil is the chaos dragon of woke left that means to destroy the fries, but will instead transform them into something even more beautiful, an entity of culinary perfection. But you would already know that if only you had bought my online course. sob It's so sublime. sob
-
Employee listening in the background hears the timer for the fries go off. Pulls the basket out from the oil.
Looks at the fries.
Looks at the stand for them to drain.
Looks at Jordan Peterson.
Looks at the fries.
Shoves their own face into the hot oil to escape the sound of JP's voice.
-
-
Great. Make your own version and post it. I'd love to see it.
-
-
Gets plain fries, but gets charged for vodka. Cashier points to vodka line on the bill and says "potatoes", then points to fries and says "potatoes".
-
Vodka. "Boil em, mash em, stick em in a stew..."
-
What's vodka, precious?!
-
-
-
False inductive reasoning combined with butwhataboutism and sealinoning. All designed to exhaust the opponent and muddy the argument. Conservatives love this form of argument.
-
Analyzing the conversation does not the joke get.
-
Yeah, I got the joke. I was talking about the inspiration for the joke that made it funny in the first place.
-
-
-
Sealioning (source) + whataboutism. A very cheap method of trolling and exhausting the opponent of the argument which relies on the victim being unaware of sealioning and they're being sealioned. It's frustrating seeing JP fans think this is proof he's a genius. it's like Ben Shapiro, another rightwing "influencer" who constantly speaks fast and gish gallops on purpose and his fans think he's a genius for that too
-
Don’t forget the constant motte and bailey.
-
That, too. For people who don't know what that is (source)
The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument and an informal fallacy where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities: one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial and harder to defend (the "bailey").[1] The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, insists that only the more modest position is being advanced.[2][3] Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer may claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte)[1] or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).[4]
-
-
Tankie "intelligencia" power houses use this as well.
-
-
It depends on what the definition of 'is' is.
-
"Colloquialism, motherfucker! Do you speak it‽"
Edit: corrected autocorrect incorrection
-
The "motherfucker" forced me to hear this in Samuel L Jackson's voice.
-
He shoots, he scores!
-
lol the whole quote was a SLJ reference from one of his iconic lines, so you are right on the money
-
-
-
Dragging your opponent into the weeds does not a good argument make
-
Thanks Yoda
-
You i thank
-
-
-
After not receiving the fried Jordan cries in his car.
-
define cries
-
Whom is car?!
-
-
-
Currently watching a Peterson debate... This is just too perfect.
-
My dog is an intellectual powerhouse compared to Jordan Peterson fans.
Lol. I just Googled him and his YouTube channel description reads...
"Join intellectual phenomenon Dr. Jordan B. Peterson for enlightening discourse"
-
It's a phenomenon how much he lacks any intellectual capabilities.
-
with the amount of benzos he took, and coma that gave him brain damage, hes been reduced to only able to respond with emotional outbursts.
-
-
-
Reading this increased my blood pressure.
-
See? That means he won the argument. Checkmate, atheists.
-
-
-
Stupid People glom onto him like he's a genius. I guess he kinda is a genius compared to the average Trump voter.
-
He seems to genuinely be trying to understand his emotions. Are there others who equally expose their inner world, especially conservatives? I don't know another conservative person who dares to do it.
-
Nah, he just got brain damage from his Benzo addiction, and now he can't stop crying even in situations that aren't warranted.
-
-
-
My father tried to tell me what a "genius" he is. I told my father point blank, Jordan Peterson is only a genius to morons. He even gave me one of Peterson's self help books, I immediately tossed it in the trash. Though, in retrospect, I probably should have tried to return it to Amazon and used the money to buy something more worthy of reading, like Chick Tracts. 😂 At least they're entertaining.
-
JP is what a smart guy sounds like to meatheads. but a moron to anyone else.
-
-
-
It's mostly just that. The whole thing was a mess. The atheists were told they would be debating a Christian and prepared as such, but he won't define himself as a Christian. So much time is wasted dancing around that. They had to change the title from Christian debates to Jordan Peterson debates. On top of that he will barely engage properly, saying things like he won't entertain a hypothetical because he wouldn't allow himself to get in that situation in the first place. Just generally not acting in good faith.
-
The guy is a notorious rhetorical shitmuffin.
He just strings fallacies together and his crowd along.
-
-
he was seen crying while have an emotional outburst arguing someone recently.
-
This video analysing that is pretty good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrdOamPIRGY
-
-
There is a great impression of him talking about Burger King that I have to share. He's doing this same kind of stupidity in this video. https://youtu.be/-BDgQMGs7Mc
-
So close to the real thing that it wasn't funny or entertaining to me, just another instance of me being annoyed by Jordan Peterson even when it wasn't actually him.
-
-
Some person was showing me videos of him and telling me he was very smart, does anyone happen to know some good examples to get him to reconsider?
-
any of the debates against Matt Dillahunty or Sam Harris. he gets spanked pretty bad. they are a long watch though.
-
in an unedited debate he looks so sure that he seems right
-
-
Some More News has an interesting take down of JP from a couple of years ago that totally isn't 3 hours long that I really enjoyed. There's also a newer one released last week, but I haven't watched it yet.
-
lobotomy
-
If the person can watch him talk and come away with their opinion that's he's a genius they will be hard to convince otherwise.
-
Any video in which he's pandering to the Bible Belt Friends, in particular after 2020
Some of his Q/A with crowds after a talk also show him extremely defensive for no good reason - I remember a couple around 2019 or 2020, unfortunately I don't remember anything useful to locate them. These are not the ones he used to host from home mind you
-
I always enjoyed CCK Philosophy's criticism on his understanding of postmodernism.
-
Vodka with my Big Mac
I've had that quite a few times. Doesn't really go together but rather they go sequentially. First you drink vodka then later on you want greasy shit
-
Dunno, I was picturing it more like a chocolate® milk when all you've got is a squeezie of Quik & a jug of milk. One after the other, and shake your face to mix. Win.
-
-
I genuinely can't think of a better example of a modern day sophist than Jordan Peterson.
-
Yeah, though the "intellectual dark web" may as well be the modern sophists guild
-
-
That's debateble
-
No it's not. (Your turn)
-
Define turn. There is no "right" order. It's all a construct. Now tell me, what does the word Define mean to you?
-
-
-
looks like he came down from a benzo-booze binge.
-
-
Making fun of someone with an obviously fake conversation is a universal staple, from classroom to a boardroom.
+10 points if you do the voice, - 100 if the voice is a racial stereotype
-
It's just you.
-
Mandatory straw man fallacy Wikipedia link.
-
might be you, bud
-
-
I sometimes just feel bad for him, like I want to give him a big hug and talk about addictions.
He's just such a sad man
-
Sophists are not edgy and clever. They're asocial and annoying to be around.
-
I find it incredibly obnoxious when you are discussing or debating with someone and they start one of their replies with "so."
-
Noted! I try not to be an asshat, but I can be a bit of a 'splainer despite myself.
-
-
Isn't vodka made from grain?
-
Mostly, because it is cheaper and it is allowed, but potato is also an option.
-
-
That was the dumbest thing I have read today…
-
I think Rogan was the smarter one.
Actually, I know Rogan is smarter. Rogan had a craft as a fight commentator; that's a skill that takes knowledge in both tv presentation and fighting. And I bet you rogan easily talk for a full day about Pride FC without repeating a point.
JP knows how fill an essay up to four paragraphs.
-
Dont forget how he had to wrestle mike goldberg so that he wouldnt drink more than 2 monster energys per night and say something outof pocket
-
-
Define powerhouse
-
Fries are what the British would call 'chips' and the British are objectively wrong on this one specific thing
-
I’ll bite.
It might have been different a few decades ago, but in the UK these days fries are still fries. Nobody would ever ask for a Big Mac and chips. Chips are specifically much fatter ‘chipped’ potatoes. And potato chips are crisps.
So if we’re talking objectively… Fries are just the same US and UK. But US potato chips aren’t actually ‘chipped’, they’re very thinly sliced. And ‘crisps’ are indeed very crisp.
So I’d actually say the UK descriptions are more objectively correct.
-
-
I find that Jordan Peterson himself is not annoying, but his fans. Even when you give positive feedback that Peterson is actually pretty good as psychologist, as soon as you criticise his sophistry and his intentionally erroneous take on philosophy, his fans will immediately come at you like a horde of zombies. That's what Peterson's fans are: unthinking horde. It is unfortunate that his fans tend to be lonely individuals who feel lost, and Peterson is only too happy to lap it up for his own grift.
-
Oh Peterson is extremely annoying. His preferred style of discussion is essentially an upgraded version of the Shapiro method:
- Throw out an argument
- When this argument is attacked, immediately derail the discussion to talk about definitions
- Whenever it seems like your opponent tries to define something by using a different word, interrupt them by questioning the definition of that word.
It's the idea of platonic ideals but perverted, so that you cannot ever describe things, because to describe you have to use other things to compare them to. Critically, he never uses this argument against himself. His definitions, however circular they are, are unassailable and end up so distorted that he essentially creates his own language.
Take the word "believe". To Peterson, this is defined as "willing to give up your life before renouncing a thing". Who TF uses this word that way?
-
In the early days I checked out a couple of his lectures too because I knew he was problematic but couldn't articulate why. What i realized when trying to decipher these lectures is just how much time he spends approaching making a point but literally never gets there.
This man operates on plausible deniability. He litters in truisms that dumb people latch onto (like that cleaning your room will make you feel better -- no shit everyone knows that) and then goes into these half-baked diatribes like how women are agents of chaos, but never fully explains why, and then moves onto a new point, and everyone acts like he's a genius because they draw their own conclusions based on those half-baked points.
Then when his fans start saying horrible shit to women, he takes no responsibility, because he never explicitly concluded on his point, leaving him with plausible deniability.
The man is a pseudointellectual at best, and is absolutely a charlatan.
-
He’s also doing a lot of argument by definition.
For example, he argued that God exists because morals exist. This follows from his own definition, which states that morals can only come from God.
-
hes what you call a pseudointellectual, they also tend to be incel men too.
hes also well funded by the russians, as he have relations with them in the past.
-
-
I like a lot of JPs stuff l. He intruduced me to a lot of concepts but ironically i must warn that his content really is for the thinking man in the sense that you need to stay vigilant to spot the cintradictions with reality. Cleaning your room doesnt fix dating or the job market for instance and sometimes those realities that go beyond our own self discipline and talent really are overwhelming.
-
Stonksface: thinc
-
136 评论
How to order a hamburger that's mostly spit
As if they aren't already.
Jeepers, your idea of your average hospitality worker is pretty dark
They don't have the time or hydration to do that to every order. They have to save that for the special customers.
Juicy