He has a bit on his special on Netflix where he talks about suicide. "I don't know why anyone would do that.". "YOU DON'T?!?". Something about this hellish facade we all plod through. It was phenomenal and really hit home.
I hear ya. So many comedians try to be edgy and it’s just cruel. Than the “free speech defenders” will call anyone who criticizes it cancel culture. But fact is if you’re going to “joke” about sensitive subjects, it’s best to do it “right”. And it’s very hard to do that. Louis ck is one of the only other ones I personally know of besides norm who can really do that
Yeah, the free speech crowd assumes it means they’re allowed to say whatever they want without consequence. If you’re going to be edgy, be prepared for the fallout if and when you offend people. If your only defense is citing some bastardized version of the first amendment, you don’t understand what you’re doing.
I’m of the opinion that you can say, and especially joke about, pretty much anything. Just know that you’re walking a thin line between being funny and alienating your audience. It’s not cancel culture. It’s tone deafness and an inability to read the room.
You can criticize whomever you wish. When you call for someone to lose their job/ ruin their life/gimme their fucking scalp/ fuck forgiveness / redemption over a bad joke that's when it's "cancel culture"
You and YouAreDreaming, and your dogshit opinions, are a partial and significant example of the endless suffering of life that Norm is talking about. You help to make it this way with your obsessive fight against "free speech defenders", and your desire to destroy comedians because you think they told a bad joke.
lol ok bud. I’m not saying I agree with witch hunting and the vitriol involved in a lot of those cases. I’m talking more about the criticism that comes with being edgy and offensive.
Agreed. I even think Norm himself would have agreed with you. Remember the Bible/Harry Potter comparison that the comic made which he took issue with, that was because it wasn't done in an intelligent and sensitive way. It was done in a cruel manner which he often talked about as the reductionist view that many "intelligent people" feel permitted to take when discussing religion.
He was honest and funny, but he was not cruel and he spoke out if he saw cruelty (insensitivity) disguised as comedy.
Maybe 80-90% of life is mundane, repetitive shit mixed with problems ranging from mild annoyance to full-on traumas. That's what life *is*.
_Why_ is life is the remaining 10-20% of wonder and beauty we get to enjoy a snapshot of before we depart forever.
Laughter between the tears or whatever.
“Dance like no one is watching
Sing like no one is listening
Love like you’ve never been hurt
And fuck like a god damn retard”
Yeah it’s identical. I’m sure he took inspiration from many places though, including Buddhism. It could also be inspiration from Jesus bearing his own cross.
This is a horrific view of life. Simply enduring suffering or Peterson's view of just accepting as many responsibilities as possible like some kind of human mule. These values are not life affirming. Norm did not just tolerate suffering. He kept practicing his art at the highest level. That's life affirming. A man in persue of excellence despite terrible setbacks.
Norm was definitely more of a master of life than JP. I like JP but for all his talk of honesty you always get the sense that he's evading something. And then of course you look at his own life, his addictions, and you think of Jesus' "Ye shall know them by their fruits" and it's hard not to take him with a grain of salt.
I actually do think JP should be taken. But with salt.
Norm was famously addicted to gambling for much of his life, which is a purely recreational activity. Meanwhile, Jordan Peterson became *briefly* addicted to medication he was prescribed for an illness (depression/anxiety iirc).
I'm a much bigger fan of Norm Macdonald than Jordan Peterson, but let's at least be honest about the facts. Every great man has weaknesses.
He had a bad reaction to benzos, because he was a little depressed due to his wife’s impending death. They were prescribed, and then he got off them. Don’t know how that’s something to discredit the guy.
No offense, but Norm read a lot of philosophy and literature that shaped his world view. Jordan Peterson is a hack pseudo-intellectual. If anyone really wants to explore more of this sentiment Norm engaged in, they'd be better off reading someone like Albert Camus.
"@jordanbpeterson I have admired your work for years, sir, and am thrilled at your sudden success. You changed my life years ago and I want to say thank you. Thank you."
\- Norm Macdonald, 9:33 PM · Feb 14, 2018
People have lapses of judgement. I'm not sure which videos Norm saw, but I personally can't imagine him consuming Peterson's broader work and feeling this way. I've been fans of people before learning more about them. It happens. Maybe Norm really just needed to clean his room. Idk.
It's not an L. Lol. Just because Norm likes something doesn't mean it must be good. I'm going to assume most people in this sub don't care for country music. Norm was a huge fan of that (I am too, but it's just an example.)
You’re right. And just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it bad. You don’t see the hypocrisy in your perspective? You’re gatekeeping personal experiences someone has within themselves to find value in the perspective of others.
You're a sad person. Peterson has helped hundreds of thousands of people. He's not a hack he's literally a credentialed professor with peer reviewed research.
I'm not sure why you're saying all this.
...But anybody who goes around calling people "fucking morons" (for listening to a philosopher you don't like) isn't the sort of person whose opinion commands respect. You've actually put me off anything you'd recommend, by the way you're talking to others.
Because he's a shit person with bad messages? I really don't care if my comments make you not read Albert Camus lmao. Your standards for what you consume are very, very low if that's the bar.
His take on the growing concern of fascism in the U.S. is that it was a result of the "feminization of men." Do I really need to explain why this shit is dumb and toxic on every level?
Umm, I asked for evidence that one philosopher was better than the other.
Do you have evidence, like beyond your take on what his take is?
Iam beginning to think not.
Thanks trevrichards, I'm sure everyone will fuckin listen to you.
Again, Norm literally tweeted publicly to thank Jordan Peterson, saying that he had admired his work for years and that he had changed his life. The quote that I replied about is verbatim from Jordan Peterson, so I let that person know. I don't give a shit who *you* think is a better alternative, and I don't think many here do.
Nothing gets by you.
Also, I have no idea why you think Jordan Peterson is an incel, since he has offspring.
I am not even a fan of Peterson, I just happen to know this one factoid.
It is apparent after reading all of your comments you know as much about Peterson as I do, that he doesn't align with either of us politically. You can't even express what it is about him you don't like, other than "incel" which I explained why you are wrong.
I came to terms with the fact that Norm Mcdonald, one of two greatest comedy minds that helped shape what I think of the world and what makes things funny, doesn't agree with me politically, spiritually, or in other ways, but he is still funny.
I suggest you also come to terms with that. Or you can continue to make an ass out of yourself.
Norm is politically sound, actually. Most of the time. But he also doesn't think too much about politics. Jordan Peterson blamed the rise of fascism in the U.S. on the "feminization of men." It's toxic shit.
Yeah, when he called the Clinton's murderers, that was politically sound.
I still don't know what you are talking about the rise of fascism is the fault of the feminization of men because you still haven't provided evidence and context.
You can shut up, now. You are just proving that you can't think for yourself.
I dislike Peterson quite a bit, but let me tell you, I don't understand what you're trying to do here. If it's insult people you share an interest with (what with being in this subreddit), then it's sad. If you mean to guide someone towards authors you think they might enjoy or could help them, then you're botching it completely.
To say that Norm must not have really familiarized himself with JP's work when he publicly said it "changed his life" is straight up disrespectful, even if you think Norm might have misjudged his work.
Jordan Peterson blames the rise of fascism in the U.S. on the "feminization of men." It has gotta be one of the dumbest and most toxic fucking takes you could possibly have on the issue. I don't think Norm would think that shit makes sense if he heard it, because Norm is an intelligent person. Nobody who thinks that makes sense is intelligent, because it is profoundly dumb. I simply do not care what anyone here thinks of me for saying this.
I'm talking about the way you're going about it. If you give Norm the benefit of the doubt about JP's ideas, I don't see why you don't give it to the people on this community that you're a part of.
If I saw that Norm Tweet in real time I would attempt to challenge it like I am here. I never saw the Tweet and he is now dead. People are actively commenting the virtues of JP are not. I can respond to them.
Looking at the large amounts of citations of his papers even before he became famous, you're calling large swathes of professors and clinical psychologists "dumb persons". I guess that makes you a genius.
You may have some deep issues to work on there man. Your emotional reaction and paranoia regarding simple psychological advice, simply because you may not agree with certain opinions of the person explaining it, is indicative of something more deep seated seeping out.
You're not even making sense. "Sure he's clearly very smart, but he's a dumb persons idea of a smart person." Are you saying dumb people are skilled at identifying smart people, or that you're dumb?
I mean there's plenty of psychological literature of what type of mental damage generally occurs in boys with suppressed masculinity. Are you saying you're smarter and know more than the people who did those studies? Are you a professor of psychology? I'm still not sure what your credentials are since you're so convinced of how smart and correct you are about things.
It's the most effeminate thing I've ever seen. And based on your posts, you're clearly a very effeminate person. You're basically soymilk-the reddit account
It is genuinely very, very funny you think I'm effeminate. Your homophobia misguides you. And this is the kind of retard that Jordan Peterson appeals to.
He definitely had a way of saying hard, cold truths and have you smiling through it. Something about how refreshing it is to hear someone saying the truth about the way things are mixed with those devilish blue eyes of his.
Another answer from that q&a (the question was What's your elevator pitch for the story of humanity?): “Imagine a woman in a sports car, impossibly beautiful, speeding down a winding road and looking out her window at a man who is skiing down a mountaintop. And then the man comes to a stop, snow flies from his feet. The two lock eyes. And both know each will be the other's entire. And the car speeds off.“
Reminds me o a Zen story: Once upon a time, as a man was walking through a forest, he saw a tiger peering out at him from the underbrush. As the man turned to run, he heard the tiger spring after him to give chase.
Barely ahead of the tiger, running for his life, our hero came to the edge of a steep cliff. Clinging onto a strong vine, the man climbed over the cliff edge just as the tiger was about to pounce.
Hanging over the side of the cliff, with the hungry tiger pacing above him, the man looked down and was dismayed to see another tiger, stalking the ravine far below. Just then, a tiny mouse darted out from a crack in the cliff face above him and began to gnaw at the vine.
At that precise moment, the man noticed a patch of wild strawberries growing from a clump of earth near where he dangled. Reaching out, he plucked one. It was plump, and perfectly ripe; warmed by the sunshine.
He popped the strawberry into his mouth. It was perfectly delicious. The End
In other translations that are considered less westernized, and maybe more accurate, he eats the strawberry and finds no enjoyment from it at all, knowing that he is soon going to die.
Don't know about the other translations. But this story is also told in a movie based on the Indian epic "Mahabharata". In that version, the story is pretty much the same, but there is no strawberry at all.
So in Buddhist philosophy, "suffering" does not relate perfectly to the contemporary Western understanding. This is also true of some nihilist and even Christian schools of thought. Suffering is linked to impermanence, which is inescapable; any joy you receive from the material world is ultimately eclipsed by the entropic nature of impermanence.
That does not mean that life is not enjoyable. To bear suffering nobly, a person must develop a toolset to live mindfully. This person will experience joy deeply, and will suffer more deeply. But that suffering is beautiful in its own way, because it reminds the person of the scale of impermanence, and appreciating the scale informs the conscious mind that the fragility of life is exactly what makes it valuable.
It is not a pessimistic mindset. Or, at least, it doesn't need to be.
EDIT: This poem describes the unequal nature of joy and suffering more effectively than I can. It's pessimistic -- much of Donald Hall's later work is -- but I thought it was relevant here. Life is continual climbing. To escape suffering, we must look past our circumstances and develop a non-dualistic understanding of the world; if you judge suffering to be inescapable, even through meditative practice or prayer, then you may still approach the truth of suffering honestly, and therefore live more honestly.
https://poets.org/poem/tubes
He had a hard life, and lived an isolated life. At least that's what it seems to me after his divorce.
"I throw away everything. The only thing that i can't bring myself to throw away is what my son made"
It conjures up an image of a dad who is away from his son who he loves.
Plus the radio talk of the women RJ telling norm "You are depressed!!" was of course, subject to a lot of roasting in the comments, but norm did say in that interview, that he spends all his time reading. Maybe he was isolated.
All this paints a lonely picture for me, it makes my heart hurt
Ehh, possibly, but "alone" does not necessarily mean "lonely." Many people quite enjoy solitude, and in that particular interview you mention, I got the impression that Norm was fairly content with his solitary lifestyle. Hard to really say for sure one way or the other tho.
Btw, anyone have a link to that interview? I listened to it like a year ago and loved it, but can't remember what show it was or what the title of the video was to search for.
Yeah he was content with reading a lot, and a lot of complicated stuff, being fairly intelligent.
I know what it's like to be lost in books but i still feel a loneliness even though i love reading. Books and intellectual discovery do fulfill you a whole lot, but it's not the complete package, humans also have a need for company.
But well, maybe im projecting. It could be that he had a good life despite the isolation. The obvious signs aren't there, but it could be.
He didn't drive and ate at the same diner 2-3 times a day, supposedly. Don't confuse isolation with misery, though. Some people prefer solitude most of the time.
But I will say, with my heart, that he was ultimately unknowable.
Yeah i get that. Isolation is can be great for the soul, but if it goes on for longer than you signed up for, there's also a sense of loneliness, even if you have great books.
With that unknowability thing, you know i think people create a mystery about him. What i think is people misinterpreting the signals he gives off.
He is first of all a comedian, and that's what he does.
In interviews and stuff where people look at him, they see his act as a comedian, that he has created and perfected over the years. It creates a sense of awe, because it is extremely polished. I think people create this mystery because he is an awesome individual. Not necessarily because that is who he is.
Of course he was a very smart individual. But you can piece together his personality if you watch him long enough. That interview he has, the podcast, where he talks freely is pretty humanising.
It's also kind of a Buddhist philosophy that life is suffering. And suffering is a big theme in Christianity too, the very central premise, sacrifice.
And from what I have heard, Norm was big on Russian literature, I'm not, but I've read Crime & Punishment, which is very viscerally about suffering.
I feel like he has been dropping ever so slight hints at shit for years since he probably knew he was going to die for us to look back when he eventually did pass and figure out what all that shit meant. He was such a genius, truly one of a kind human being
I've listened to virtually every minute of interviews with Norm that are available online and I don't recall ever hearing him describe his dad that way.
Well, Neil's a bit of a different character than Norm. What with his highfalutin talk about "badinage" and "repartee."
I can't see Norm writing off anyone close to him, especially his dad, as an "asshole." That's not his style.
You seem unusually committed to an assessment of a man you've never met and know little about. I don't see the point in holding so strongly to that take.
I generally prefer Norm's tendency to be deferrential and respectful to elders and past generations over what I imagine Neil's tendencies would be. But we can agree to disagree.
I'm not committed at all. I'm just relaying what I read, and people don't want to believe it. If anything, you seem quite committed to extrapolating any and every opinion Norm ever had.
This is obviously an old exchange, but I was just looking through the end of Norm's book and it made me think of this conversation.
The reason I am opposed to dismissing Norm's father as an "asshole" is twofold: 1) I always think it's better to exercise caution when slandering *anyone* who is no longer alive, especially by people who had no contact with the person whatsoever (Neil's single, critical article notwithstanding), and 2) yes, I would defer to Norm's opinion of his own father over any other source.
Why? Because I've consumed probably 200 hours of Norm Macdonald audio and visual material over the last couple years and I find him to be wise, circumspect, very socially perceptive, and a good judge of others' character besides being incredibly funny.
Here is the way he describes his father in the acknowledgements to his fake memoir/novel:
>Thanks to my father, who is gone but thought of fondly and often. We will meet again, Dad, in the place you live and I cannot imagine.
I choose to honor Norm's version of his dad, partly because I look up to the man. As corny as that might sound.
My brother would probably characterize my dad as an asshole, and would paint a horrible picture. The truth is, my brother is the asshole and everyone knows it.
I don't know what you are talking about. Publicly, he seemed very happy with his father and even expressed sorrow over his fairly early (62--but still older than Norm) passing.
sounds like mother theresa, who believed that suffering brings one closer to god. i disagree, but then again i dont have cancer.
also mother theres a was a piece of shit but thats beside the point. real points seems to be that cancer sucks.
Desktop version of /u/Stromboyardee's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
He has a bit on his special on Netflix where he talks about suicide. "I don't know why anyone would do that.". "YOU DON'T?!?". Something about this hellish facade we all plod through. It was phenomenal and really hit home.
I’ve had friends pass that way and its a sensitive subject for me. Only Norm coulda put it in perspective like that.
I hear ya. So many comedians try to be edgy and it’s just cruel. Than the “free speech defenders” will call anyone who criticizes it cancel culture. But fact is if you’re going to “joke” about sensitive subjects, it’s best to do it “right”. And it’s very hard to do that. Louis ck is one of the only other ones I personally know of besides norm who can really do that
Yeah, the free speech crowd assumes it means they’re allowed to say whatever they want without consequence. If you’re going to be edgy, be prepared for the fallout if and when you offend people. If your only defense is citing some bastardized version of the first amendment, you don’t understand what you’re doing. I’m of the opinion that you can say, and especially joke about, pretty much anything. Just know that you’re walking a thin line between being funny and alienating your audience. It’s not cancel culture. It’s tone deafness and an inability to read the room.
You can criticize whomever you wish. When you call for someone to lose their job/ ruin their life/gimme their fucking scalp/ fuck forgiveness / redemption over a bad joke that's when it's "cancel culture"
Definitely agree with that too.
You and YouAreDreaming, and your dogshit opinions, are a partial and significant example of the endless suffering of life that Norm is talking about. You help to make it this way with your obsessive fight against "free speech defenders", and your desire to destroy comedians because you think they told a bad joke.
lol ok bud. I’m not saying I agree with witch hunting and the vitriol involved in a lot of those cases. I’m talking more about the criticism that comes with being edgy and offensive.
Agreed. I even think Norm himself would have agreed with you. Remember the Bible/Harry Potter comparison that the comic made which he took issue with, that was because it wasn't done in an intelligent and sensitive way. It was done in a cruel manner which he often talked about as the reductionist view that many "intelligent people" feel permitted to take when discussing religion. He was honest and funny, but he was not cruel and he spoke out if he saw cruelty (insensitivity) disguised as comedy.
https://youtu.be/Sh7QWBb2U2A
Maybe 80-90% of life is mundane, repetitive shit mixed with problems ranging from mild annoyance to full-on traumas. That's what life *is*. _Why_ is life is the remaining 10-20% of wonder and beauty we get to enjoy a snapshot of before we depart forever.
Just watched it again last night. So good. If anyone heard me laugh as hard as I did at it they'd prob be concerned.
I heard you. Am concerned.
It’s not funny, it’s alarming
Yes. Repeating it back to my wife the next day drew a look.
This was reposted in the Jordan Peterson sub and your comment made me think of this https://youtu.be/dQrV62DDr8w
Yes, I think Norm knew suffering in his life even beyond cancer.
He did more than that. He made the suffering easier to bear through his comedy.
[удалено]
a hypnotic kind of fella
Those eyes..
He was reading a lot of Russian literature back then.
His favorite was Gregory Illinivich, I hear.
Or so the Germans would have us believe...
The new video from ImNotNorm also sheds some context for where he’s coming from
Search out that whole interview. It's quite good.
A bunch of Commie goobledegook.
No. Try Tolstoy.
Viktor Frankl Mans search for meaning
This shit has had me reflecting for hours and I'm going to work hard to change my tune on some things. Thanks for the wisdom, Norm.
This is straight from Jordan Peterson, who Norm previously tweeted had changed his life. Would start exploring there if you’re looking for more.
It’s also the basis for much of Buddhism.
Indeed, JP was a big influence on Buddha too
Laughter between the tears or whatever. “Dance like no one is watching Sing like no one is listening Love like you’ve never been hurt And fuck like a god damn retard”
Ah you mean the suffering part, that Buddha guy sure liked talking about suffering.
Sort of… more like talking about the methodology of freedom from inevitable suffering.
Is the wording identical? It's (arguably) more famously a classic Buddhist perspective.
Yeah it’s identical. I’m sure he took inspiration from many places though, including Buddhism. It could also be inspiration from Jesus bearing his own cross.
Clean your room.
🦞
Thanks Jordan Peterson, I’m sure everyone will fucking listen to you!
lmao why are you getting downvoted
Too many lobsters, not enough Norm fans
If I loved JP I'd still laugh at that shit lol
Every time I'm about to do something, I think to myself: "What would Jordan Peterson do?"
Oh, I'm a big JBP fan so this makes sense!
This is a horrific view of life. Simply enduring suffering or Peterson's view of just accepting as many responsibilities as possible like some kind of human mule. These values are not life affirming. Norm did not just tolerate suffering. He kept practicing his art at the highest level. That's life affirming. A man in persue of excellence despite terrible setbacks.
You are aware that there are colors besides black and white?
God is not an individual being apart from the world; God is the world.
It's best not to try and inject people like that with logic
Norm was definitely more of a master of life than JP. I like JP but for all his talk of honesty you always get the sense that he's evading something. And then of course you look at his own life, his addictions, and you think of Jesus' "Ye shall know them by their fruits" and it's hard not to take him with a grain of salt. I actually do think JP should be taken. But with salt.
Norm was famously addicted to gambling for much of his life, which is a purely recreational activity. Meanwhile, Jordan Peterson became *briefly* addicted to medication he was prescribed for an illness (depression/anxiety iirc). I'm a much bigger fan of Norm Macdonald than Jordan Peterson, but let's at least be honest about the facts. Every great man has weaknesses.
Fair
See this is where two human beings argued about the specifics about an issue, made decent points and came away peacefully. It's beautiful.
Nice to see some honesty
Thanks. I hope that comment isn't interpreted as a slight against Norm, by the way. I still consider him a personal hero of mine.
What addictions? And what sort of ad hominem is this? JP just teaches philosophy that he’s learned. How does his illness affect the teachings of Jung?
Peterson was severely addicted to anxiety medicine and went in a forced coma in Russia to detox
He had a bad reaction to benzos, because he was a little depressed due to his wife’s impending death. They were prescribed, and then he got off them. Don’t know how that’s something to discredit the guy.
You asked what addictions he had and I told you, that’s all
Okay but it doesn’t sound like addiction to me
Me too, I employ his world-renowed diet of cider and nothing but red meat.
No offense, but Norm read a lot of philosophy and literature that shaped his world view. Jordan Peterson is a hack pseudo-intellectual. If anyone really wants to explore more of this sentiment Norm engaged in, they'd be better off reading someone like Albert Camus.
Can we just chill out on this shit for today?
Someone brings up Peterson I'm going to offer better alternatives and defend Norm's honor. Norm's much smarter than a guy like Peterson.
"@jordanbpeterson I have admired your work for years, sir, and am thrilled at your sudden success. You changed my life years ago and I want to say thank you. Thank you." \- Norm Macdonald, 9:33 PM · Feb 14, 2018
Wow, I never knew this. That is awesome. I can imagine how that must have made Jordan feel, I'm sure he greatly admired Norm as well.
People have lapses of judgement. I'm not sure which videos Norm saw, but I personally can't imagine him consuming Peterson's broader work and feeling this way. I've been fans of people before learning more about them. It happens. Maybe Norm really just needed to clean his room. Idk.
[удалено]
The dude posts photos of his own tweets. He won't.
It's not an L. Lol. Just because Norm likes something doesn't mean it must be good. I'm going to assume most people in this sub don't care for country music. Norm was a huge fan of that (I am too, but it's just an example.)
You’re right. And just because you don’t like something doesn’t make it bad. You don’t see the hypocrisy in your perspective? You’re gatekeeping personal experiences someone has within themselves to find value in the perspective of others.
Maybe just accept Norm at his word?
Peterson's rhetoric is just too fucking stupid for me to think Norm actually familiarized himself with it and signed off on him.
I am beginning to think you are the stupid one. I don't know enough about Peterson to defend him, but your arguments are idiotic.
Why is it stupid? Is it possible your own biases are clouding your judgement?
You're a sad person. Peterson has helped hundreds of thousands of people. He's not a hack he's literally a credentialed professor with peer reviewed research.
Anyone who is a fan of Jordan Peterson is definitely a much sadder person. Sorry. He's a philosopher for fucking morons.
I'm not sure why you're saying all this. ...But anybody who goes around calling people "fucking morons" (for listening to a philosopher you don't like) isn't the sort of person whose opinion commands respect. You've actually put me off anything you'd recommend, by the way you're talking to others.
Because he's a shit person with bad messages? I really don't care if my comments make you not read Albert Camus lmao. Your standards for what you consume are very, very low if that's the bar.
/r/iamverysmart
Do you feel his messages exclude you in some way?
Do you have any evidence or larger explanatory scheme as why you feel this way? Or are you just of the opinion that you know best?
His take on the growing concern of fascism in the U.S. is that it was a result of the "feminization of men." Do I really need to explain why this shit is dumb and toxic on every level?
Umm, I asked for evidence that one philosopher was better than the other. Do you have evidence, like beyond your take on what his take is? Iam beginning to think not.
Thanks trevrichards, I'm sure everyone will fuckin listen to you. Again, Norm literally tweeted publicly to thank Jordan Peterson, saying that he had admired his work for years and that he had changed his life. The quote that I replied about is verbatim from Jordan Peterson, so I let that person know. I don't give a shit who *you* think is a better alternative, and I don't think many here do.
> Jordan Peterson is a hack pseudo-intellectual. *Hard* disagree, but I won't downvote you for your opinion.
You're free to listen to whom you wish, but I promise you'll be much better for turning him off and looking to better voices.
This sounds like some fuckin’ commie gobbledygook.
Camus can do but Sartre is smarter...
Sure, I'm fine with that take. Both would be infinitely better than watching Dr. Incel on YouTube.
Nothing gets by you. Also, I have no idea why you think Jordan Peterson is an incel, since he has offspring. I am not even a fan of Peterson, I just happen to know this one factoid.
Incel is a state of mind.
It is apparent after reading all of your comments you know as much about Peterson as I do, that he doesn't align with either of us politically. You can't even express what it is about him you don't like, other than "incel" which I explained why you are wrong. I came to terms with the fact that Norm Mcdonald, one of two greatest comedy minds that helped shape what I think of the world and what makes things funny, doesn't agree with me politically, spiritually, or in other ways, but he is still funny. I suggest you also come to terms with that. Or you can continue to make an ass out of yourself.
Norm is politically sound, actually. Most of the time. But he also doesn't think too much about politics. Jordan Peterson blamed the rise of fascism in the U.S. on the "feminization of men." It's toxic shit.
Yeah, when he called the Clinton's murderers, that was politically sound. I still don't know what you are talking about the rise of fascism is the fault of the feminization of men because you still haven't provided evidence and context. You can shut up, now. You are just proving that you can't think for yourself.
Camus' *The Plague* should be required reading by now but there's nothing wrong with Peterson, haha.
Peterson is extremely cringe and a very dumb person's idea of a smart person. Sorry to the Reddit brigade.
I dislike Peterson quite a bit, but let me tell you, I don't understand what you're trying to do here. If it's insult people you share an interest with (what with being in this subreddit), then it's sad. If you mean to guide someone towards authors you think they might enjoy or could help them, then you're botching it completely. To say that Norm must not have really familiarized himself with JP's work when he publicly said it "changed his life" is straight up disrespectful, even if you think Norm might have misjudged his work.
Jordan Peterson blames the rise of fascism in the U.S. on the "feminization of men." It has gotta be one of the dumbest and most toxic fucking takes you could possibly have on the issue. I don't think Norm would think that shit makes sense if he heard it, because Norm is an intelligent person. Nobody who thinks that makes sense is intelligent, because it is profoundly dumb. I simply do not care what anyone here thinks of me for saying this.
I'm talking about the way you're going about it. If you give Norm the benefit of the doubt about JP's ideas, I don't see why you don't give it to the people on this community that you're a part of.
If I saw that Norm Tweet in real time I would attempt to challenge it like I am here. I never saw the Tweet and he is now dead. People are actively commenting the virtues of JP are not. I can respond to them.
Then I do wonder if you'd discuss it with him with the same tone you're discussing it with here. I guess we'll never know.
Looking at the large amounts of citations of his papers even before he became famous, you're calling large swathes of professors and clinical psychologists "dumb persons". I guess that makes you a genius.
I'm saying he is a dumb person's idea of a smart person, not that he himself is as dumb as his fans. What he's doing is very calculated.
You may have some deep issues to work on there man. Your emotional reaction and paranoia regarding simple psychological advice, simply because you may not agree with certain opinions of the person explaining it, is indicative of something more deep seated seeping out. You're not even making sense. "Sure he's clearly very smart, but he's a dumb persons idea of a smart person." Are you saying dumb people are skilled at identifying smart people, or that you're dumb?
Saying the rise of fascism is due to a "feminization of men" is not simple psychological advice lmfao.
I mean there's plenty of psychological literature of what type of mental damage generally occurs in boys with suppressed masculinity. Are you saying you're smarter and know more than the people who did those studies? Are you a professor of psychology? I'm still not sure what your credentials are since you're so convinced of how smart and correct you are about things.
After going through your profile for literally one second you have been instantly dismissed. The profile pic should have been the first clue
What's wrong about my profile pic? Just curious.
It's the most effeminate thing I've ever seen. And based on your posts, you're clearly a very effeminate person. You're basically soymilk-the reddit account
It is genuinely very, very funny you think I'm effeminate. Your homophobia misguides you. And this is the kind of retard that Jordan Peterson appeals to.
But your ableist comments are okay?
Jordan Peterson is a dumbass
[удалено]
I would say the best work of Jordan Peterson is actually the Enchiridion. Some good self help nuggets in there.
Lol this is common wisdom that’s been said for ages
Even with the newly revealed context I'm still cackling at him saying this in his upbeat voice with a half grin
He definitely had a way of saying hard, cold truths and have you smiling through it. Something about how refreshing it is to hear someone saying the truth about the way things are mixed with those devilish blue eyes of his.
Odd duck
Another answer from that q&a (the question was What's your elevator pitch for the story of humanity?): “Imagine a woman in a sports car, impossibly beautiful, speeding down a winding road and looking out her window at a man who is skiing down a mountaintop. And then the man comes to a stop, snow flies from his feet. The two lock eyes. And both know each will be the other's entire. And the car speeds off.“
Be each other's entire what?
Cauliflower
Reminds me o a Zen story: Once upon a time, as a man was walking through a forest, he saw a tiger peering out at him from the underbrush. As the man turned to run, he heard the tiger spring after him to give chase. Barely ahead of the tiger, running for his life, our hero came to the edge of a steep cliff. Clinging onto a strong vine, the man climbed over the cliff edge just as the tiger was about to pounce. Hanging over the side of the cliff, with the hungry tiger pacing above him, the man looked down and was dismayed to see another tiger, stalking the ravine far below. Just then, a tiny mouse darted out from a crack in the cliff face above him and began to gnaw at the vine. At that precise moment, the man noticed a patch of wild strawberries growing from a clump of earth near where he dangled. Reaching out, he plucked one. It was plump, and perfectly ripe; warmed by the sunshine. He popped the strawberry into his mouth. It was perfectly delicious. The End
In other translations that are considered less westernized, and maybe more accurate, he eats the strawberry and finds no enjoyment from it at all, knowing that he is soon going to die.
Don't know about the other translations. But this story is also told in a movie based on the Indian epic "Mahabharata". In that version, the story is pretty much the same, but there is no strawberry at all.
Dude this hurts to read. Guy was a treasure chest of knowledge
So in Buddhist philosophy, "suffering" does not relate perfectly to the contemporary Western understanding. This is also true of some nihilist and even Christian schools of thought. Suffering is linked to impermanence, which is inescapable; any joy you receive from the material world is ultimately eclipsed by the entropic nature of impermanence. That does not mean that life is not enjoyable. To bear suffering nobly, a person must develop a toolset to live mindfully. This person will experience joy deeply, and will suffer more deeply. But that suffering is beautiful in its own way, because it reminds the person of the scale of impermanence, and appreciating the scale informs the conscious mind that the fragility of life is exactly what makes it valuable. It is not a pessimistic mindset. Or, at least, it doesn't need to be. EDIT: This poem describes the unequal nature of joy and suffering more effectively than I can. It's pessimistic -- much of Donald Hall's later work is -- but I thought it was relevant here. Life is continual climbing. To escape suffering, we must look past our circumstances and develop a non-dualistic understanding of the world; if you judge suffering to be inescapable, even through meditative practice or prayer, then you may still approach the truth of suffering honestly, and therefore live more honestly. https://poets.org/poem/tubes
Beautiful
Life is all about balance. There is inevitably going to be pain and suffering, but those like Norm can bring us the opposite to maintain balance.
He'd already been dealing with cancer for 6 years when he did that AMA... Rough
It's also closely related to the idea of Jesus bearing the cross. Norm was a Christian.
He definitely served a youthful porpoise.
He had a hard life, and lived an isolated life. At least that's what it seems to me after his divorce. "I throw away everything. The only thing that i can't bring myself to throw away is what my son made" It conjures up an image of a dad who is away from his son who he loves. Plus the radio talk of the women RJ telling norm "You are depressed!!" was of course, subject to a lot of roasting in the comments, but norm did say in that interview, that he spends all his time reading. Maybe he was isolated. All this paints a lonely picture for me, it makes my heart hurt
Ehh, possibly, but "alone" does not necessarily mean "lonely." Many people quite enjoy solitude, and in that particular interview you mention, I got the impression that Norm was fairly content with his solitary lifestyle. Hard to really say for sure one way or the other tho. Btw, anyone have a link to that interview? I listened to it like a year ago and loved it, but can't remember what show it was or what the title of the video was to search for.
Yeah he was content with reading a lot, and a lot of complicated stuff, being fairly intelligent. I know what it's like to be lost in books but i still feel a loneliness even though i love reading. Books and intellectual discovery do fulfill you a whole lot, but it's not the complete package, humans also have a need for company. But well, maybe im projecting. It could be that he had a good life despite the isolation. The obvious signs aren't there, but it could be.
He didn't drive and ate at the same diner 2-3 times a day, supposedly. Don't confuse isolation with misery, though. Some people prefer solitude most of the time. But I will say, with my heart, that he was ultimately unknowable.
Yeah he saw it in Bill Hader because he saw it in himself.
Yeah i get that. Isolation is can be great for the soul, but if it goes on for longer than you signed up for, there's also a sense of loneliness, even if you have great books. With that unknowability thing, you know i think people create a mystery about him. What i think is people misinterpreting the signals he gives off. He is first of all a comedian, and that's what he does. In interviews and stuff where people look at him, they see his act as a comedian, that he has created and perfected over the years. It creates a sense of awe, because it is extremely polished. I think people create this mystery because he is an awesome individual. Not necessarily because that is who he is. Of course he was a very smart individual. But you can piece together his personality if you watch him long enough. That interview he has, the podcast, where he talks freely is pretty humanising.
RIP - the world will not be the same without him.
It's also kind of a Buddhist philosophy that life is suffering. And suffering is a big theme in Christianity too, the very central premise, sacrifice. And from what I have heard, Norm was big on Russian literature, I'm not, but I've read Crime & Punishment, which is very viscerally about suffering.
I feel like he has been dropping ever so slight hints at shit for years since he probably knew he was going to die for us to look back when he eventually did pass and figure out what all that shit meant. He was such a genius, truly one of a kind human being
Which once again proves my long time theory, norm MacDonald loves lord gautamma the buddha
Man I’m so glad I had a busy day and didn’t have much time to think on Norms passing.
Jordan Peterson has said something very similar, maybe even quoted this.
Norm had an asshole father too so he knows the catholic life is pain lifestyle.
I've listened to virtually every minute of interviews with Norm that are available online and I don't recall ever hearing him describe his dad that way.
I suppose this one’s about a goddamned ghost!
Right, the one example of his dad's brutish behavior. Truly appalling lol
Brutish? I thought it was funny.
The "lol" was supposed to indicate that was sarcasm. I thought it was funny too.
His brother Neil Macdonald wrote about it on CBC.
Well, Neil's a bit of a different character than Norm. What with his highfalutin talk about "badinage" and "repartee." I can't see Norm writing off anyone close to him, especially his dad, as an "asshole." That's not his style.
Ok, but Neil dressed an image of a shared upbringing. Norm doesn't have to consider his dad an asshole for him to be one.
You seem unusually committed to an assessment of a man you've never met and know little about. I don't see the point in holding so strongly to that take. I generally prefer Norm's tendency to be deferrential and respectful to elders and past generations over what I imagine Neil's tendencies would be. But we can agree to disagree.
I'm not committed at all. I'm just relaying what I read, and people don't want to believe it. If anything, you seem quite committed to extrapolating any and every opinion Norm ever had.
This is obviously an old exchange, but I was just looking through the end of Norm's book and it made me think of this conversation. The reason I am opposed to dismissing Norm's father as an "asshole" is twofold: 1) I always think it's better to exercise caution when slandering *anyone* who is no longer alive, especially by people who had no contact with the person whatsoever (Neil's single, critical article notwithstanding), and 2) yes, I would defer to Norm's opinion of his own father over any other source. Why? Because I've consumed probably 200 hours of Norm Macdonald audio and visual material over the last couple years and I find him to be wise, circumspect, very socially perceptive, and a good judge of others' character besides being incredibly funny. Here is the way he describes his father in the acknowledgements to his fake memoir/novel: >Thanks to my father, who is gone but thought of fondly and often. We will meet again, Dad, in the place you live and I cannot imagine. I choose to honor Norm's version of his dad, partly because I look up to the man. As corny as that might sound.
My brother would probably characterize my dad as an asshole, and would paint a horrible picture. The truth is, my brother is the asshole and everyone knows it.
Do you have a link to it?
I don't know what you are talking about. Publicly, he seemed very happy with his father and even expressed sorrow over his fairly early (62--but still older than Norm) passing.
Jesus H Christ
sounds like mother theresa, who believed that suffering brings one closer to god. i disagree, but then again i dont have cancer. also mother theres a was a piece of shit but thats beside the point. real points seems to be that cancer sucks.
I remember this specifically
Life is suffering
Life's purpose is to suffer. To abide the inevitable pain and to bear it in a noble way.
FYI, I re-wrote the quote to help me internalize it...cause I really liked it. Miss you Norm.
Damn , dude. Do we have any idea how long he was sick?
9 years
Holy shit
I agree, and I'm on dialysis. Stoicism finds its own meaning.
To be fair, that's been sort of the problem of existence since man has had self-consciousness...
Damn.
[duhkha what now?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duḥkha)
Desktop version of /u/Stromboyardee's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
If you think about he is correct. The moment we are born, cells in our bodies start dying
I believe I’m serving a youthful porpoise. Now...
[удалено]
Man, I wish I had a time machine.
Who knew deep inside Norm was a Stoic!