peterson does not appear to be recovering, nor mentally adjusting well to his recent social-(((justice))) driven ostracization. he is still quite shattered and not reconstructing himself.
separately from his person, this was also painful to watch due to his lecture content. much of academia is very schizophrenic; mis-attributing, mis-associating, mis-ranking, mis-sequencing, and mathematically mis-modeling extensive swaths of history. the parts of history jpeterson references are not only no exception, but particularly more prone to deliberate confabulation - a fact jpeterson cites and repeats several times. and yet he still accepts entire buckets of sand from it as components for his arguments, while being more selectively aware at other times.
in addition jpeterson cites math, number, and work models, applying them with inconsistent comprehension on top of (or perhaps in facilitation of) that same schizophrenia-riddled history. one moment he's giving the implication of 'all are just numbers' and 'inexplicable' (accepts stochastic fallacy, but uses it for 'all numbers are equal'), at another moment he shows understanding to some degree that equality is bullshit by correctly stating things like gaussian distribution is a bad model (rejects equalist fallacy). it's as if he doesn't actually understand numbers, criticizes correctly that many do not understand numbers, forgets to apply this to data (zero sanity checking), and opts to cite/use a thing that looks like it fits his personal case and run with it. but he's suppose to be teaching a lecture, not giving a blogpost.
side note: in math, accepting randomness is accepting 'all things being equal'. that is, all of this these {X} are made of the same class. but none of what he uses for his application is 'just equal'. he hints comprehension of this suits, and blindly ignores comprehension of when it doesn't. needless to say, the race lineages of man are finite (rather, not infinite), each having an internal attainment distribution, of which is simply not relevant when looking at disjoint - by definition separate - races. if i superimpose the attainment of all the niggers of the world with the attainments of all the whites in the world –and– then weight them by population size, i will arrive at what looks like a distribution. this is not a distribution, it is a construction.
taking just one example of this, his use of the post first revolution farmers numbers with pareto distribution math to prove various elements of how personalities emerge by the state. (1) first, this was actually to prove that in any 'society' there are a few who are mightier than the all the dependent rest-of-society, so the many should shut up and fuck off, which is his –personal– sjw-persecution case bleeding through the seems of his lecture and causing dis-focus. (2) second, the farmers who were high productive were mostly christains in race and religion, not jews. the other farmers who made up the 'majority' in his application were the failed bolsheviks and useful idiots who fucking led and carried the revolution (not farmers, by definition, failed at farming, why call them farmers damn it?). mixing all together to prove a pareto distribution is ignorant and artificial. (3) third, the thesis drive to "personalities that emerged from this are" discussion is a failure to understand what actually happened. the second russian revolution was a repeat of the first, whereby the best-in-class had their shit stolen again, along with alot of other sub-jews too, all by the same arch-type/centralist bolsheviks jews. while this state-driven lunacy certainly would make despondent individuals, who would be more likely to kill each other when prompted to (such as the sjw's attacking jpeterson), this is a bit of a tangential reach. the first russian revolution was a degenerate/jewish insurgency, the second revolution is better described as a degenerate/jewish civil war done the jewish way – both sucked in all, getting all non-productive races to steal, so the bolsheviks could steal too. but throughout the entire period, certain people not-of-the-productive were –always– prone to violence. particularly the violence the state selected, not generated, and prone from the very beginning. to jump into the middle of a story because it has similar persecution in it that you want to use is the close same thing that the sjw's do (jumping into a story that has any perceived persecution in it), just a chapter or two ahead and slightly less insane.
i think this is all just wishful thinking on his part. and he needs more time to unwind. good fortune to him moving forward.
