129. Book Review | 12 Rules For Life by Jordan B. Peterson

In case you haven’t heard me talk about Jordan Peterson, you should know I’m a huge fan. I think he’s one of, if not the, greatest intellectual alive. So, reading this book was a huge joy for me. That said, even if you’re not a huge fan or have never heard of him, 12 Rules for Life is an amazing read.

“It’s very hard to find your own words – and you don’t actually exist until you have your own words.”

Jordan Peterson

This book is an amazing guide to becoming a better person. It is a mixture of Psychology, Religion, Ethics, Philosophy, and Literature that shows you how all of truth is related to other types. And, each of these is a tool for us to use by participating in the truth by speaking it and defending it.

Grab your copy of 12 Rules for Life here.

Have you read 12 Rules for Life yet? If you still haven’t, check out this review to see if you’d like it. I bet you will… https://conversationofourgeneration.com/2020/06/26/129-book-review-12-rules-for-life-by-jordan-b-peterson/(opens in a new tab)

In this book, Peterson walks through 12 rules that sometimes seem apparent, and sometimes not, in order to give the reader a way of living a productive, fruitful, meaningful life. I like it because he makes his claims without religion, and thus has to be contended with without writing him off has a “religious nutjob.”

While I don’t like that classification, and find it to be lazy thinking, it is something that can’t be applied to Peterson for sure. He approaches the religious ideas from a secular, pragmatic point of view, and often backs them up with great evidence.

Join the Conversation of Our Generation.

3 thoughts on “129. Book Review | 12 Rules For Life by Jordan B. Peterson

Add yours

  1. I like Jordan Peterson. he just seems like someone who’s trying to do good. His philosophy…eh. I do like how he involves philosophy and psychology. And I like what he’s saying about how people want to grab onto these huge ideological structures before they really come to terms with one’s self. But then from a strict philosophical standpoint, he is missing a lot. I’d say he understands the philosophers that he uses probably 60%. But I like his psychological kind of mental health ideas. But I don’t agree with how he concludes that the only answer to the philosophical problem is Christianity.
    I wouldn’t say it’s love-hate; I would say it’s more compassion for someone who’s trying.

    And just the fact that he got addicted to drugs or various sorts and had to go to drug rehab, I think says something about what he’s missing in his linking of philosophy to Christianity. And this is less a judgment then just kind of a realization of a conceptual inability. For the conception of Christianity that he uses necessarily does not comprehend the philosophers that he wants to use to support it. Somehow I feel this disconnection, he felt deeply, to the extent that whatever seven says he was using, the incongruity that he didn’t want to admit of his great effort, the hole that he couldn’t fill neither conceptually nor that personally… well, that’s almost the definition of a drug addict. And there’s no judgment here because …there just isn’t. It’s a very compassionate and understanding of Peterson that I’m reflecting here.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: