Mountain Project Logo

Survey on sexual harassment and sexual assault in climbing


Ashort · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Apr 2014 · Points: 35

I don't understand your meaning. Are you saying I am on the right?

Very confused what climate change has to do with the topic, or was that just a sad attempt at whataboutism?

Ashort · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Apr 2014 · Points: 35
Nate Tastic wrote: Consider bringing this back around and on topic again.

The video linked above discussed rough and tumble play and its benefits in reducing male aggression, which I think is pretty damn relevant to the topic of this thread, assault. If people want to discuss why the ideas in that video are pseudoscience by all means, please do. If you want to discredit someone with MSM hit pieces without discussing the merits of the ideas presented in the video then you're playing games. 

Play and the regulation of aggression (the topic of the video linked up thread)

This chapter concludes that the individual brings to the world a set of inborn motivations, including those that underlie aggression, and these motivations are brought under control--or not--as a consequence of socialization. This control appears at least twofold. The direct inhibition and regulation of aggression appears established as a consequence of rough-and-tumble (R&T) play and also appears associated, in principle, with the development of some forms of executive control. R&T play is different from exploratory activity and from aggression-two forms of behavior with which it can easily be confused. R&T play and exploratory activity share the fact that both are enjoyable. Formal behavioral analysis clearly discriminates R&T play from genuine aggression. Furthermore, it is clear that pathological socialization experiences, first in the context of the family and second in the context of early peer experiences (variants of the institutional sickness described by Rousseau) can produce and then reinforce in a child the conviction that the world is a cruel and sadistic place, fit only for interpretation through lenses colored by the desire for revenge. Finally, it is clear that complex processes of play, beginning with R&T play and culminating in the production of sophisticated, abstract socially shared frames of reference, play an important role in the modulation of aggression, both in regard to its inhibition and in regard to its integration into fully functional individual and social identities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)
Tom Stryker · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2014 · Points: 250

I realize now how primitive my climbing experiences have been, I mostly went places and tried to get up stuff !

ubu · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2009 · Points: 0
Ryan Swanson wrote:

I prefer to cite facts and information in a debate, but ad hominem remarks work well too I hear.

Not an ad hominem, just my opinion.  You're welcome to your own as well.

Ryan Swanson · · Pepedidnothingwrong, freejg · Joined Jan 2018 · Points: 50
ubu wrote:

Not an ad hominem, just my opinion.  You're welcome to your own as well.

ad ho·mi·nemˌad ˈhämənəm/adverb & adjectiveadverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
  1. 1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
Merlin · · Grand Junction · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 10
Ashort wrote:




Psychological entropy: a framework for understanding uncertainty-related anxiety.

Entropy, a concept derived from thermodynamics and information theory, describes the amount of uncertainty and disorder within a system. Self-organizing systems engage in a continual dialogue with the environment and must adapt themselves to changing circumstances to keep internal entropy at a manageable level. We propose the entropy model of uncertainty (EMU), an integrative theoretical framework that applies the idea of entropy to the human information system to understand uncertainty-related anxiety. Four major tenets of EMU are proposed: (a) Uncertainty poses a critical adaptive challenge for any organism, so individuals are motivated to keep it at a manageable level; (b) uncertainty emerges as a function of the conflict between competing perceptual and behavioral affordances; (c) adopting clear goals and belief structures helps to constrain the experience of uncertainty by reducing the spread of competing affordances; and (d) uncertainty is experienced subjectively as anxiety and is associated with activity in the anterior cingulate cortex and with heightened noradrenaline release. By placing the discussion of uncertainty management, a fundamental biological necessity, within the framework of information theory and self-organizing systems, our model helps to situate key psychological processes within a broader physical, conceptual, and evolutionary context.

Pseudoscience?

Since his first line of the abstract is, objectively incorrect in three places, I'd be inclined to ignore everything he writes. And I read over the paper, he presents a bit of math, an incorrect understanding of entropy, and a spurious (at best) connection between an objective scientific theory and very subjective interpretations as to how his view of emotional reactions can be tied back to it.  So yeah, he doesn't understand the only real science in there and conflates his understanding with a hypothesis that can't be tested in any reliable, repeatable, meaningful fashion.  So, yeah, pseudoscience.  

FosterK · · Edmonton, AB · Joined Nov 2012 · Points: 43
Ashort wrote:


I can link articles too!

http://quillette.com/2018/03/22/jordan-b-peterson-appeals-left/

Funny how a man that has spent his life as a psychology researcher, professor, and clinician is suddenly called pseudoscience when he says something that doesn't fit your narrative. Is it typical that someone who offers nothing but pseudoscience has over 100 peer reviewed articles published in professional journals?  

In the quote above it said "What he is not, however, is the author of any lasting work of scholarship, the originator of any important idea, or a public intellectual of any scientific credibility or moral seriousness."

^that is an outright lie

For example: publications unrelated to his popular material

Dr. Oz was a prominent cardiac surgeon of note as well, but previous work is only illustrative of the decline in intellectual rigor to his current role hawking reiki, detoxs, and other snake oil: Peterson is the pop psych equivalent. There's a broader debate to be had about the scientific rigour in the field of psychology, but that's not functional here. The academic material you reference is not pertinent to the criticism: we already know that Peterson can produce content that meets the requirements to be published, but his popular materials, such 12 Rules for Life and Maps of Meaning are not up to this standard.  Just because he can produce scholarship, or can generate ideas, or is a public figure, does not mean his work is lasting, important, credible, or serious. 

I referenced more comprehensive critiques exactly because there is no need to repeat those critique's here. The defense you linked to is as nebulous and poorly formed as any of Peterson's own material. Peterson is fundamentally an accidental phenomenon, seeking media attention for being a dick to a marginalized student, to get a platform for his pop psychology books, and relying on his silver tongue to never quite get pinned down or committed to any idea in an interview. He's always misunderstood, and any of his fans can identify with any number of ideologies, because what he advocates for is ill-defined, flexible, and constantly changing.
.
Ashort · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Apr 2014 · Points: 35

Psychological entropy may be seen as a measure of ‘loss of perspective’ in awareness. Maximum perspective is when I can see what I am looking at from all possible angles, and not get trapped in any of them. A loss of perspective occurs when I fixate on one way of looking at the world to the exclusion of all the others. Therefore, if I fly into a rage about some relatively trivial inconvenience, and completely lose the ability to laugh at myself and my predicament, then this is a classic manifestation of psychological entropy. There has been a dramatic collapse in the information content of the system.

jg fox · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2015 · Points: 5
FosterK wrote:
Dr. Oz was a prominent cardiac surgeon of note as well, but previous work is only illustrative of the decline in intellectual rigor to his current role hawking reiki, detoxs, and other snake oil: Peterson is the pop psych equivalent. There's a broader debate to be had about the scientific rigour in the field of psychology, but that's not functional here. The academic material you reference is not pertinent to the criticism: we already know that Peterson can produce content that meets the requirements to be published, but his popular materials, such 12 Rules for Life and Maps of Meaning are not up to this standard.  Just because he can produce scholarship, or can generate ideas, or is a public figure, does not mean his work is lasting, important, credible, or serious. 

I referenced more comprehensive critiques exactly because there is no need to repeat those critique's here. The defense you linked to is as nebulous and poorly formed as any of Peterson's own material. Peterson is fundamentally an accidental phenomenon, seeking media attention for being a dick to a marginalized student, to get a platform for his pop psychology books, and relying on his silver tongue to never quite get pinned down or committed to any idea in an interview. He's always misunderstood, and any of his fans can identify with any number of ideologies, because what he advocates for is ill-defined, flexible, and constantly changing.
.

Have you read his books or do you rely on second hand information?  Who was this student?  He became prominent for his opposition to Bill C-16 not for being a "dick" to students.


T R I G G E R  W A R N I N G ! ! !
Ashort · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Apr 2014 · Points: 35

FosterK, what exactly, in the linked video regarding rough and tumble play, do you disagree with?

This thread is about assault, and there have been many instances on this site lately where men have been described as being innately violent which contributes to these types of assault. It is interesting that biological reasons can be made for male violence but not much else regarding personality traits, etc. The tendency is to teach our boys to "unlearn" violence, and the fear is that people will shy away from engaging in things such as rough and tumble play because they see it as teaching them violence. The current literature shows that boys that have experiences with rough and tumble play grow up to be more assertive but less violent. Therefore and argument is made that rough and tumble play is essential for boys to learn delayed gratification, empathy, boundaries, and assertiveness.

Now, if you want to watch the video and actually debate the ideas, which are relevant to the thread topic, then by all means do so. That video is recent, within the last week, so I don't agree with your claim that he is currently selling snake oil.

FosterK · · Edmonton, AB · Joined Nov 2012 · Points: 43
jg fox wrote:

Have you read his books or do you rely on second hand information?  Who was this student?  He became prominent for his opposition to Bill C-16 not for being a "dick" to students.


T R I G G E R  W A R N I N G ! ! !

Lol opposition C-16. His opposition to C-16 is entirely based on his bigoted stance against transpersons, which precedes his testimony in 2017, and is traceable to news articles in back to mid 2016. 

FosterK · · Edmonton, AB · Joined Nov 2012 · Points: 43
Ashort wrote: FosterK, what exactly, in the linked video regarding rough and tumble play, do you disagree?

Since I haven't watched this video, can't find the a link to it posted earlier, and am not arguing about this specific argument, I don't have specific information to agree or disagree with, and don't have enough knowledge to agree or disagree. Given how Peterson has previous misframed social justice, identify politics, "neo-Marxism", and Bill C-16, I'm inclined to request other sources than a "video" if you'd like to provide additional information on the topic.
jg fox · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2015 · Points: 5
FosterK wrote:

Lol opposition C-16. His opposition to C-16 is entirely based on his bigoted stance against transpersons, which precedes his testimony in 2017, and is traceable to news articles in back to mid 2016. 


The source of his "bigotry."  


If you want compelled speech using unnatural pronouns (e.g. zhe, zher) that's on you but that shouldn't be forced on a population with criminal penalties for noncompliance.

FosterK · · Edmonton, AB · Joined Nov 2012 · Points: 43
jg fox wrote:


If you want compelled speech using unnatural pronouns (e.g. zhe, zher) that's on you but that shouldn't be forced on a population with criminal penalties for noncompliance.

Since both you and Mr. Peterson are under this mistaken belief that Bill C-16 did this, or would do this, enjoy your echo chamber. 
jg fox · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2015 · Points: 5
FosterK wrote: Since both you and Mr. Peterson are under this mistaken belief that Bill C-16 did this, or would do this, enjoy your echo chamber. 

Straight from Bill C-16, note that gender expression (aka pronoun usage) is a part of the criminal code.  Sorry for leaving out the French part.
ubu · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2009 · Points: 0
Ryan Swanson wrote: ad ho·mi·nemˌad ˈhämənəm/adverb & adjectiveadverb: ad hominem; adjective: ad hominem
  1. 1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

Sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings when I called Peterson a "new age right-wing uber-intellectual psychobabbler".  Thanks to a much better understanding of logical fallacies provided by the above definition, I will now change my statement to say that "Peterson's positions are new age right-wing uber-intellectual psychobabble".  Problem solved.

FosterK · · Edmonton, AB · Joined Nov 2012 · Points: 43
jg fox wrote:

Straight from Bill C-16, note that gender expression (aka pronoun usage) is a part of the criminal code.  Sorry for leaving out the French part.

318 (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. 

The changes now make specific that advocating for genocide of transpersons is now an indictable offense. Oh the horror!

718 is the sentencing provision - it adds discriminatory intent against transpersons as an aggravating factor in sentencing. Oh the horror!

Is Mr. Peterson intent on committing crimes specifically against transpersons or advocating for genocide? 
J Squared · · santa barbara, CA · Joined Nov 2017 · Points: 0
FosterK wrote:
Since I haven't watched this video, can't find the a link to it posted earlier, and am not arguing about this specific argument, I don't have specific information to agree or disagree with, and don't have enough knowledge to agree or disagree. Given how Peterson has previous misframed social justice, identify politics, "neo-Marxism", and Bill C-16, I'm inclined to request other sources than a "video" if you'd like to provide additional information on the topic.

your laziness is only outstripped by how wrong you are.   once you wrote that first sentence in the quote above... maybe you should have reflected on how... that means you don't actually have anything useful to add to the debate.  you're just showing your fully-conscious bias.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YdFlKaJv4g  - The Lindsay Shepherd scandal.

this interaction was a direct effect of bill C-16

and hey guess what, if you don't "have time to watch this video"... she was a TA in a Sexual Violence class, attempting to start some basic discussion on the issue.
I bet this woman had some Post-Traumatic-Stress from having to deal with defending her actions in this insane Tribunal meeting.
i've spent the last year and a half researching into these issues and scrutinizing hours and hours of intense videos like these.. I'm not just some acolyte.

please tell me how this was "misframed"
just, not in this thread.

it's pretty clear who's trolling vs who's contributing now.  maybe the moderators might want to get back to the old program for the womens forum?
J Squared · · santa barbara, CA · Joined Nov 2017 · Points: 0
FosterK wrote: Since both you and Mr. Peterson are under this mistaken belief that Bill C-16 did this, or would do this, enjoy your echo chamber. 

it is you who is mistaken.  

you know that video you replied to with this quote above? which was warning about the effects of bill C-16??

well hey, guess what.  the lawyers at Toronto U then drew up a letter and sent it to him which states the following

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S31Jf2WFTNU


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmNKPL1Y4g0 

Mis-framed? Mistaken??

get real.

if you think this is about him "pushing an anti-trans bigoted agenda"... you just haven't understood what's being said.  it's all laid out as plainly and directly as can be.
Merlin · · Grand Junction · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 10
andyD123 wrote:

Merlin, the first line of his abstract says "Entropy, a concept derived from thermodynamics and information theory, describes the amount of uncertainty and disorder within a system." You said this was objectively incorrect in three places. I'm not a scientist like you, but here is what I got from Wikipedia here en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy_(information_theory)

"Generally, entropy refers to disorder or uncertainty, and the definition of entropy used in information theory is directly analogous to the definition used in statistical thermodynamics."

The article cites "A Mathematical Theory of Communication" by mathematician Claude E. Shannon and credits him with developing the theory of information entropy which Jordan Peterson seems to be referencing.

In what three places was his first line objectively wrong?

Wikipedia is wrong in that article.  So 1: Entropy is not a measure of disorder 2: Entropy is not a measure of uncertainty 3: Entropy is not derived, it is an axiomatic law based on observations, just like Newton's laws are.  It can not be derived.  The second law is an axiomatic statement that explains the arrow of time seen in physics.  While consequences of the second law as well as a mathematical formulation describing how to measure entropy may be written down, its truth is based in observation.  Note, I have no idea who the author is, I didn't google search him to read what his views are.  I have no skin in the game there.  He simply has about the same understanding of entropy that creationists have when they say "Evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics".  The author is simply using a topic in physics incorrectly and some very basic mathematical formulae, to demonstrate that he has no real understanding of said concept. His citations may be sound, I didn't check them, his understanding is barely at the level of a freshman student when it comes to entropy.

My first degree was in psychology.  My latter degrees diverged from this path.  There is no possible way to enumerate the microstates associated with human emotion.  Even if there were, there is no possible way to assume human emotion follows the same laws that dictate the various ways in which energy tends to partition itself to how human behaviour works.  It would be akin to saying "you get this much useable energy from burning a gallon of gas therefore I can say how long a person can remain calm". Its an idiotic article at best.  I didn't read any of the other articles.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Women's Forum
Post a Reply to "Survey on sexual harassment and sexual assault…"

There is ZERO tolerance for being a jerk in the Women's Forum.

This topic is locked and closed to new replies.