The "Why did nobody tell me?" parenting book ad

That’s interesting Baggs.
I’m left wondering who F1000 actually are, as they appear to be mysterious, self-appointed publishers of research papers?
What scrutiny are they subjected to?

Must be harmless.

Oh my gosh! The MN book is by Justine!

I wouldn't want to read any book by that man. He is obviously endorsing the generalisation of Islam displayed on the other man's T-shirt.

Not sure what the connection is with the book advertised on MN. No way would they endorse that. Perhaps a little out of order to link it?

Apropos the original “Why did nobody tell me” train of thought I tend to think that Robert Fulghum has it all worked out! Can I recommend “All I Really Needed To Know I Learned In Kindergarten” as a model for everyone’s behaviour.

Link to a thread about academic peer review —an individual's experience.

book

The books I mentioned upthread, The Tyranny of Opinion by the philosopher Russell Blackford is good on the apparent weakness of some academics to support their colleagues.

The story about Prof Biggar at Oxford is another one that's a bit of a disgrace. Fortunately Oxford stuck up for him, or at least didn't capitulate to the outrage mob.

Oxford Union welcomed Jordan Peterson very warmly too.

Come on, Cambridge: buck up!

Any research involving race, genetics and IQ is bound to cause controversy, isn’t it?
And the motives of the researcher scrutinised and called into question.
What I couldn’t help wondering was the role of the young scholar’s supervisor(s) in all of this.
They must have approved his research and could have been expected to come out in his defence?

If anyone's interested, This is another story about academics accusing a young scholar of guilt by association and trying to wreck his promising early career while they're at it. This is at Cambridge Uni too.

Bit rambly! ?

Sorry, janea, I missed that you hadn't read anything of JP's.

The "appearance" of his endorsing that T-shirt is very shallow, I think, given the circumstances of the meeting and greeting, his support of free expression, which must include support towards the free expression of ideas one disagrees with if it is genuine, and this that he said (because people pay and often travel very long distances to meet him): ""Every single person that comes to meet me I want to be present for."

As I've already said, the rescinding by the Cambridge faculty seemed to happen before they knew about That Photograph.

Yes, I would say your conclusion about JP does support the bandwagon theory. I've had trouble finding the relevant sections of the book I'm reading on my Kindle. Not got the full hang of bookmarking and highlighting, etc. But the bandwagon theory, as I understand it, is about the importance of the social rewards (things like peer approval) and punishments for expressing 'right' or 'wrong' preferences in public interactions. This is a description rather than a criticism in the book. We are, after all, very social creatures with a need to conform with our peers if we are to feel comfortable.

I found one of my bookmarks. Blackford says: "Speakers want to persuade, and they certainly do not want to be dismissed, even demonized, without consideration of what they are actually trying to say." I think this is happening to JP. It has occurred to me to wonder if this sort of thing is more likely when a person appears to have a sort of fan base, as JP seems to. I can remember other Gransnet discussions, for example about what Richard Dawkins was saying about something or other, where there was the same sort of reaction.

With regard to Boris, I can't say I've ever wanted to find out much about him or to listen to his outpourings, as you put it. Perhaps what I have heard him say has simply been uninteresting. I seem to remember that he got the biggest audiences at the last Tory Conference, or was that somebody else?

Baggs I said earlier in the thread that I haven’t read any of Peterson’s articles etc. At the moment I’m in deepest rural Alabama with limited, very intermittent WiFi , so sorry I’ve not been able to look at any of the links you posted yet.
But it’s not his clinical psychology I’m talking about.
It’s his appearing to endorse that t-shirt, and the reaction of the Christchurch booksellers and the Cambridge faculty.

I don’t think it’s necessary to have read all someone’s work or literary output to come to a conclusion about one aspect of their behaviour. People should be judged by their actions and omissions.

I haven’t read much of Boris Johnson’s outpourings, but I have still formed the impression that he’s an arrogant, self serving pr*ck, a view clearly shared by many other people.
Which I suppose supports the bandwagon theory.

That Cambridge faculty needs to check out JP's work if they think he is against the advancement of interfaith understanding based on their own supposition of political endorsement by association. I'd expect Cambridge brains to be able to deal with the deeper philosophical aspects of the case. I find it quite shocking that they apparently can't.

Also, I'd love to know the real timeline of the rescinding, because I saw news about it quoting the stuff about his views not agreeing with the views of Cambridge students a couple of days before Cambridge made the announcement that it was about the photo. Students should be exposed to views they disagree with. What on earth is the matter with academics who don't endorse and support this? It's really weird.

I bet the people objecting to JP's views do not really know what his views are. Remember how Cathy Newman misunderstood almost everything he said until she was rendered speechless for a minute as she slowly realised that she agreed with him? Well, I suspect a lot of people are doing that misunderstanding.

Have you read his book or listened to his lectures, janea? I don't find him easy to listen to because he often speaks in quite complex sentences, but he talks sense based on many years of experience in clinical psychology and with, I think, much more knowledge of current research than most of the people who criticise him as controversial. You call him controversial but I suspect (correct me if I'm wrong) your view on that is based on what other people have said about him rather than your own first hand knowledge.

As Russell Blackford says in his book, The Tyranny of Opinion forthright people are very often viewed as intemperate simply because they express their views confidently and strongly. I suspect this is what is happening with JP.

Baggs , JP's views did not reflect the views of most of their students, or some such claptrap
The article I read in Times says the reason was ‘the casual endorsement by association of this message was thought to be antithetical to the work of a faculty that prides itself on the advancement of interfaith understanding. Some difficult decisions will always be necessary to ensure that our universities remain places of robust, often challenging and even uncomfortable dialogue, while balancing academic freedom with respect for members of our community’.

Seems to me they have the balance right.
Sorry can’t write more just now, being nagged to get out of bed

From the Twitter feed called "Shit Academics Say", which is amusing: Retweets are not endorsements. They are performative engagement markers... (Clink, or click even, on link for more.

As a result of the fallout from that photograph—though I thought Cambridge had rescinded the fellowship offer before they knew about that; I forget on what grounds...no! wait! it was because, they said, JP's views did not reflect the views of most of their students, or some such claptrap. If universities can't cope with what they deem controversial views, who can? Isn't debate over sticky issues what universities are for?—JP has responded and there will be reports in good newspapers. In the Times he says he has asked the organisers of his meet and greet sessions to ask people politely to "refrain from more political garb", even though he believes in free expression. He also challenges anyone to find "a single phrase that marks me as a prejudiced person regarding sex, race, ethnicity, or indeed any of the multiplicity of identities that have become so quickly and strangely dominant in our culture so recently".

In the age of "instant devastation by pitchfork- and torch-wielding Twitter mobs" it would not be possible to have the opinions he is accused of holding, he says.

So, detractors, take the challenge. Read his stuff. Listen to his youtube lectures. Controversial is not a dirty word. JP claims his lectures save lives by giving people previously with out it and in danger of suicide, hope.

More on bandwaggoning anon because it's interesting.

Yes, I see that Cambridge has withdrawn the offer of a visiting Fellowship because of the photograph. Personally I think that's the right call, although in general I don't like no-platforming. So far, I haven't seen anything by Peterson himself, defending the photograph or the man's right to wear it, or his own decision to pose with the man, apart from a shouty response that was quoted at the end of the article. I'd take more notice of something measured and considered. I didn't buy Melanie Phillips' rather hysterical response.

I haven't read anything by Blackford, but his ideas about bandwaggoning sound like the idea of social reinforcement - that if we think a lot of other people think something or do something, we're more likely to do or think those things ourselves.
It's why noticed in doctors' waiting rooms castigating patients for missing appointments ('last month 385 appointments were missed, equivalent to 70 hours of surgery time') are actually counter-productive. Patients read it and (perhaps subconsciously) register that because nearly everyone else misses their appointment, it's ok for them to do so too.

There are two articles in the Times this morning about the JP and "Islamaphobe" story, including a clear picture of what some of the writing on that T-shirt so I had a good look. I hate all the things on that T-shirt too. Does that make me an Islamophobe? Rhetocial question. It doesn't.
I'm beginning to wonder if that guy misspelled the word deliberately and is actually taking the piss about people calling things islamophobic which aren't. The trouble is, people conflate Muslim-hating with hatred of some of the things that radical Islam seems to endorse, which things most Muslims also hate of course.

I think all other gransnetters probably hate the things spelled out on that T-shirt too.

janea, my comments about bandwaggoning were much more general than about a few gransnetters on this thread. This probably wasn't clear from what I wrote. My mistake.
Actually, what Blackford writes about it is really interesting and bandwaggoning is a description as he uses it, not a derogation. More later when I have the energy.

Off to work.... (I read Blackford on the bus on the way and one the sea wall as I wait for the bus home afterwards) ?

I am only just finding out about some misdemeanours nearly 30 years later!
In fact, things they thought that I didn't know (but did)

I thought that too, jalima.
And sorry I missed jane10 off the bandwagon.

Don't let your children do anything that makes you dislike them. That strikes me as a good thing to be told.

As Jane10 says - how do you stop them?
And will you always find out?

I thought the preferred expression was 'I may not like what you have done but I still love you'.

Baggs
maryeliza, jalima and I agreeing with each other hardly constitutes jumping on a bandwagon. Your implication that we haven’t arrived at broadly similar conclusions about Peterson independently is rather unfair.
No, I haven’t read Peterson’s books. I haven’t listened to his podcasts.
I did watch (in its entirety) his interview with Cathy Newman on Ch4 news.

I don’t think it’s necessary to have done any of the above, to reach a conclusion about the appropriateness and wisdom of a public figure allowing himself to be photographed with someone wearing that t-shirt.

Perhaps, if you’ve read the books and listened to the podcasts, you could enlighten us as to why we’re wrong and Peterson is so great.

Hmm. With regard to my comment about people being weird, I'm also reading the philosopher, Russell Blackford's book, The Tyranny of Opinion, which explains what I'm calling bandwaggoning rather well in terms of social pressure (approval, rewards, etc). So I'll retract that thing about people being weird. It's weirder, it seems, not to jump on bandwagons of opinion.

Off to work...