RegDunlopCPA wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:19 pm
Finridge wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:53 pm
jdb wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 14, 2018 6:50 pm
MJW wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 14, 2018 6:45 pm
RegDunlopCPA wrote: ↑
Fri Sep 14, 2018 4:42 pm
12 Rules for Life by Jordan B. Peterson. It has been fantastic thus far.
Haven't read this book but 12 seems like a lot.
Very funny. Could probably do all of us without interest In actually reading the book to list the 12 rules. Probably too many for me to remember.
You can find lists of the rules online and the actual rules are fine enough. They are right along the lines of what your mother or an aunt might tell you. But I found the text "explaining" the rules to be tedious and pedantic and sometimes ridiculous. This included claims that "order" is male and "chaos" is feminine, and a lot of talk about lobsters in discussing dominance hierarchies--I could have thought of a dozen better examples.
A review I found myself nodding in agreement with:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... tellectual
Well he's a psychologist and it requires some thought while reading (so it's no Harry Potter). You don't have to like it. It's just what I'm reading right now as the thread asks.
It is currently in the amazon.com top 5 bestsellers and over the course of 2018 topped the non fiction bestsellers list in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Reuters, and USA Today, etc. There are millions of people reading it. Perhaps your "I can think of a dozen better examples" will make it into your own 2 million plus copies sold bestseller someday?
Yes, in certain demographics it has become a smash hit. That's why I read it. It was easy enough to google up the list of rules, but I am fascinated by the "rock star" personality cult that has developed around Jordan Peterson, and wanted to better understand it. How better to understand that then reading his best-seller? Seemed like a good idea at the time. (This was before I realized that watching his youtube videos was probably a better route to this.) It's worth understanding the movement that he's a part of. I would recommend his book as being skim-worthy. Like I said, the rules are solid enough--see below. I can't see any that people wold object to. My favorite is Rule 2. That said, having read both Harry Potter and 12 Rules, I wouldn't consider 12 Rules to be a better book, and it's only marginally more challenging. When it comes to psychological insights, you'll find more meat in Harry Potter. This is not because 12 Rules is horrible (it is not, it's just not that great either)--but rather because it is probably a mistake to stack it up against Harry Potter. I would agree that 12 Rules is probably better than most of the books that make a pass through the best-seller's list--but that's not saying much.
1. Stand up straight with your shoulders back
2. Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping
3. Make friends with people who want the best for you
4. Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today
5. Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them
6. Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world
7. Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient)
8. Tell the truth – or, at least, don't lie
9. Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't
10. Be precise in your speech
11. Do not bother children when they are skateboarding
12. Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street
See? Not too bad. I don't think anyone would disagree with any of these rules. All are worth following. But it's not Shakespeare (or even Harry Potter
) either. It's when you get the the extrapolations on these (and extensive digressions from them) in the book where it starts to get "iffy."
Undoubtedly, it is a runaway best seller and beloved by millions. I would assume that most of them find more insight and value than I did. That's great for them. This is just my own review of the book for others who might want to buy it or invest their time reading it. And ironically my earlier post was not prompted by your post, but by the skeptical responses--see it as a lukewarm defense of the rules... Like I say, the rules themselves really aren't that bad and shouldn't be seen as outrageous or controversial in anyway. But I don't see any ingenious new insights in them either...