Unconscious bias has become a bit of a buzz concept lately, but from what I understand, the research that introduced the idea never managed to raise the concept to the level where is was even loosely predictive of anything, even in controlled tests, never mind in the real world.
Regardless of that, there are government departments and corporations using it to root out the heathens.
We need to avoid turning into the freaking dream police.
Too many inconvenient facts like sexual harassment in the workplace being caused by women wearing make up?
I assume you’ve read his book, not the banal self help one. You believe his cherry picked mythological archetype bastardisation of jung is factual? Hang on, is the bible factual, Andrew?(apologies in advance if you choose not to answer that, I ask it only in order to establish what level of ‘facts’ i’m dealing with here)
You do know he’s a darling of the alt-right, don’t you? A hero to the men’s rights movement?
You can be rid of me for good with simple replies:
do you support men’s rights? Do you sympathise with the alt-right? Do you support LGBTQ rights? Do you support treaty? #metoo?
Well, that’s not a fact, and not something that Peterson ever claimed either. I’m pretty sure I know the interview that you’d claim that came from, and it was a total hit piece, where he just edited together arbitrary parts of a much larger interview, and refused to publish the full recording. Slimy journalism.
I’m an atheist.
The Bible is a collection of stories, but they are stories about the human condition. They have value as such.
I don’t even know what the alt-right really means. I’m not sure there is a definite meaning. It seems to be used to label anyone that disagrees with any of the tenets of the social justice ideology, but that’s most of the population, so it’s a big category.
I’ve spent most of this thread talking about how I believe that forming identity groups in opposition to each other is a really bad idea, and now you are asking me which of these groups I want to align myself with.
I can’t give you simple answers to your questions because they are not simple questions, even if your ideology wants to pretend they are.
I don’t call myself a feminist, but women do have issues. These are already widely represented.
I don’t call myself an MRA, but men do have issues, and I’m quite aware of many of them. The prison reform policy I wrote would help quite a lot of men if implemented.
I don’t call myself an LGBTIQ+ activist, but they clearly have their own unique issues too. I worked with @LMK on transgender and intersex updates to the policy portfolio a couple of years back. I think that worked out well.
Treaty? Yeah, not sure. I’d like to be more sure. I haven’t seen clear signs of a consensus amongst the indigenous population yet, or clarity of representation. Very complex issue. PPAU took a run at it while Simon was president (it was a hot topic for him), but no clear answer emerged.
#metoo? Another complex issue. For awareness and support purposes, it’s been fantastic, but I see a lot of signs that it’s had a large chilling effect on men and women just working well together in the workplace. It’s associated challenges to legal standards of evidence is dangerous.
I don’t see any conflict at all between my understanding of Jordan Petersons work and the policies of PPAU. They seem quite compatible to me. Complementary even.
I suggest you find better unedited sources.
I’ve read his book, Andrew. What is more unedited, exactly?
I don’t know - you’re the one throwing out dodgy paraphrased non-quotes.
I don’t see anything more productive coming out of this thread. I’ve been about as clear as I can despite endless recasting of my position to mean something opposite.
If anybody wants to discuss related topics in an open and honest manner, start a new thread. I’m out of this one.
LoL, you could’ve just asked Andrew about it from the beginning 
I mean a few things are crystal clear, like the the replies that followed to your question. Not really useful to start talking about people in this thread, because we’re already cured of bias, else we wouldn’t have been in the PP 
We quite root-out evil people, so meh.
I feel exactly the same way! I guess we have found agreement.
Nice one, mate. Classy.
You can’t be cured of bias, Stefan, but i understand your intent, and i doubt your confidence.
Everyone doubts and should doubt everything, it’s quite natural.
I know my actions, and I prefer to be judged by them alone
I speak out of personal lived experience, and I know I helped cure biases with the help of science and social science. [or the end result was that satisfying that I stopped believing I didn’t?]
What have you given? Where are your actions? Do you have anything to prove that you helped? Mere words supporting ideas do not lead anywhere without actions
Actions indeed matter, i too think this. You also don’t know me from a bar of soap, nor i you and so I don’t understand your questions. Where are my actions? I’m typing on a keyboard at the moment. Are you suggesting we list our good deeds or something?
Would be wonderful a new topic on that, to share the good practices with everyone 
Fighting racist memes is on my list.
That’s cute & good. But how exactly do you do that? [this is the part where we insert good practices]
I’m usually reporting them for them to be hidden from the public
Well, one practice would be to express disgust and then, if the meme is defended, to point out forcefully why this should not be tolerated. To explain why the meme is racist and to explore the idea racism and it’s impact and why we need to fight it.
From a recent Guardian article regarding the rise of Neo-nazism in Germany.
‘We also have to understand that allowing nationalist slogans to gain currency in the media and politics, allowing large neo-Nazi events to take place unimpeded and failing to prosecute hate crimes all contribute to embolden neo-Nazis. I see parallels with an era we thought was confined to the history books, the dark age before Hitler.’
Well, in Europe it goes like this:
fair enough, I can see how that could cause confusion.
I would put it this way: Foley does not want to make a treaty and thereby legitimize a corrupt, abusive government which does not and cannot represent the people it rules. He wants First Nations to come to an agreement with the Australian people themselves. If non-Indigenous people had only just got here I’m sure he would not be talking about equal parties at the table. He is however not an advocate of making millions of people stateless but unlike some recognizes their/our connection to the land.
What about closing the Homelands? The recent forced closure of Aboriginal communities, including demolition of housing(!) has displaced a lot of people in recent years, landing many in separatist prisons (for very minor offences) and assimilative state care (for being too poor) rather than sustaining their living of their land practising their culture. This is modern Australian genocide: With policies like these it is no accident that young Aboriginal men and boys have the highest suicide rate in the world.
It is all very well to advocate equality under the law. However, in the context of Australia it raises a crucial dilemma: if the first peoples of the invaded country continue to resist the invader’s law, does the latter have any legitimacy? Does it have legitimacy only for the invading state’s citizens? Does the invading state have a right to enforce it’s law on all the inhabitants with the high risk of continuing the genocidal and assimilative process colonialism started? I don’t have the answers here. I hope though, that whatever treaty processes are happening, at the end of it there will be a solution to this dilemma.
You are quite right and it’s a long road with a lot of pitfalls. Very complex issue.
A complex and difficult issue indeed, but there’s a simple starting point. Open handed good faith willingness to talk, from all stakeholders, including general public spaces.
It would certainly help if Australia was better able to face up to the hideousness of our post-colonial history of dispossession and genocide too. Given we’re about to spend $500 million on a fucking war memorial i suspect this not on the Conservative list of priorities.