Peterson’s positions

Re: What’s behind Peterson’s appeal, Robert Fulford; April 21

Jordan Peterson’s message and appeal have been a little mysterious to me. Fulford’s analysis is helpful to understanding Peterson’s appeal. But the advice that Peterson is giving seems rather obvious, and his views on modern society are small-minded.

For example, Peterson’s refusal to acknowledge “white privilege” is both mistaken and turns away from a bright light that explains much about modern life.

Similarly, what Peterson views as our society facing the “call to deconstruct its stabilizing traditions to include smaller and smaller numbers of people,” I see as the call to include groups of people who have historically been excluded. If he were a member of such a group, maybe he’s see things differently. Jeff Kramer, Toronto Robert Fulford is right that Jordan Peterson’s talking cure, since he is a clinical psychologist, is winning the hearts and minds of the YouTube generation, especially the young men looking for a father who knows best. But Fulford is wrong to compare Peterson’s folksy self-inhibiting pop psychology to a truly influential revolutionary creative thinker like Marshall McLuhan.

In fact, McLuhan was a truly “global village” thinker whose descriptive “medium is the message” led to the creation of media literacy to help us understand that — humans make tools that make tools of humans; whereas Peterson’s conservative thinking has no cleverly equivalent, succinctly memorable phrase that sums up his behavioural insights.

“Twelve rules to live by” is a rather banal prescription for mental health. Peterson does not embody creativity. Tony D’Andrea, Toronto