Brothers is also dead which takes her out of the running.
He first sold his training through Gottman's website Then he entered into an agreement with the DoD, CIA, etc. Then he entered into a collab company with DARPA, who automated his system to check facial expressions via cameras. An equivalent company chaired by Ekman licensed the software to such agencies as the TSA. Presumably, he used his Fox Network money from Lie to Me to found this company, although he may have some seed money from other sources.
He is totally a cool person! When I was getting my master's in clinical psych, he taught my child development class. LOVED HIM.
Agreed. I tried to limit my tier placements to folks outside my niche, but even so it is easy for such lists to become slanted toward name recognition rather than actual scientific contributions.
I was thinking that about Paul Green too. His impact on the forensic world was huge. He was also a really nice guy and very accessible. I had some beers with him years ago when I was still in training. I’d add Grant Iverson too, but again… a “niche” neuropsych is person who greatly impacted the forensic world.
Curious who you would say for this group, as I do a bit of work in this area!
Greg Strauss, Elaine Walker, Vijay Mittal off the top of my head
He's one of those guys who doesn't know (or least doesn't care) about bounds of competency or expertise. He was on some podcast with another talking head telling climate scientists their climate modeling was incorrect. He also in recent years claimed that people shouldn't use preferred pronouns because he doesn't like using them.
Also Bill Hetrick and Angus MacDonald
He also did a weird interview where he claimed more gender egalitarian societies show greater inter-gender disparities in job choice and Five Factor measurements (using Sweden as his example) while make odd statements about multivariate analysis. I can’t remember the entire context of the conversation but it was wild and showed some spurious reasoning even within an area with which he ought to be competent. Benefit of the doubt since he was on live TV and that’s probably hard to do, but no such benefits for all his other shenanigans.
it’s a sad day in our profession when we consider Peterson as a charlatan considering his massive amounts of publications and work. Just sad
This is hysterical.
Not to speak to Peterson specifically, but there are multiple psychologists who, especially later in their careers, I lost a lot of respect for based on their more recent comments, presentations, work product, etc., despite being relative giants in terms of prior contributions to the field and/or publishing more in a year than I have in my career.
You’re
thats fair, however, Peterson hasn’t done much that would warrant such ire. 99% of what he talks about is backed up and most of it is common sense
Hardly. Let's check out some highlights of a very long and frighteningly strange résumé of wrong/bat**** things he's said.
I think getting bit by the rabid left makes people wonky in the other direction. I think it's a legit psychological phenomena. Perhaps it's analogous to invalidation in childhood leading to axis 2 symptomatology. So I am a bit sympathetic.
I think it's the persecution trap - and I mean the dude was treated really badly by the left.
Oh, please. Dude deserved every bit of the flack he caught.
Your sadism is showing and you're absolutely being rude.
Peterson was lying about the effects of Bill C-16 even after multiple legal experts corrected his incorrect interpretation of the proposed statute, simply because of the people group it aimed to protect (trans individuals). Had he simply opined and then updated his claims based on the response from legal experts, he probably would have gotten by just fine, seeing as controversy only arose well after those lectures took place and after he received requests to amend his statements but chose not to do so.
This was a response mostly from college students, who are far from representative of "the left." There were plenty of protests, some of which did include violence (which is not acceptable), but Peterson had multiple opportunities to educate himself on the legal issue at hand rather than bite down on the chain and break his teeth. Death threats are never acceptable, and I do not condone them--he did, however, deserve to get academic and political flack for his demonstrably false and bigoted comments, and I think it seems unreasonable to equate random threats from people with an entire side of the political spectrum. But as it stands, he was allowed to keep his teaching position (which seems to disprove his very thesis), only leaving voluntarily a few years later. I take no pleasure in people being threatened, so allow me clarify that he deserved all of the flack he caught as regards academic and political-legal critiques of his views, but not to the point of any bad actors threatening him or anyone else.
His position on Bill C-16 was demonstrably not reasonable, and only led to major controversy after repeated instances of spouting the same nonsense even after being corrected. Again, I also don't see how him being in the midst of C-16 controversy should reasonably put the blame for his subsequent behaviors on his critics. If his views as a middle-aged, doctorally-trained academic were so fragile that he became an unabashed conspiracy theorist and junk scientist in the wake of some criticism, then maybe those more radical ideas were already there to begin with, or at the very least he was very open to them from the beginning.
Not triggered, I just find it a little disingenuous to blame "the left" for radicalizing someone who was wrong to begin with (whether or not the totality of the critical response was justified), and who has misused "psychology" as a way to cash in on his distasteful views.
Again, not discussing the content...
Sigh. I wish we could have discussions about this stuff without committing using distorted labels.
I guess we just disagree. I don’t think Peterson is complex or serious enough a scholar to warrant deep analysis. No disrespect to you, we just disagree.
I get the vibe that this forum is salty because Peterson camps leftists and efficiently farms tokens by enlisting incels. However did his attempted speedrun of benzodiazepine withdrawal nerf his self restraint/monitor competency stat? But is he real or alt for tokens.
Who self owned hardest?
