Enjoy fast, free delivery, exclusive deals, and award-winning movies & TV shows with Prime
Try Prime
and start saving today with fast, free delivery
Amazon Prime includes:
Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.
Amazon Prime members enjoy:- Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
- Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
- Instant streaming of thousands of movies and TV episodes with Prime Video
- A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
- Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
- Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access
Important: Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.
Buy new:
$15.94$15.94
FREE delivery: Thursday, Dec 14 on orders over $35.00 shipped by Amazon.
Ships from
Amazon.com
Sold by
Amazon.com
Returns
Returnable until Jan 31, 2024
Payment
Secure transaction
Buy used: $13.06
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Image Unavailable
Color:
-
-
-
- To view this video download Flash Player
Follow the author
OK
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos Hardcover – January 23, 2018
| Price | New from | Used from |
|
Audible Audiobook, Unabridged
"Please retry" |
$0.00
| Free with your Audible trial | |
|
Spiral-bound
"Please retry" | $37.81 | — |
|
Mass Market Paperback
"Please retry" | $12.29 | $14.08 |
|
Audio CD, CD, Unabridged
"Please retry" | $29.46 | $11.85 |
- Kindle
$16.99 Read with our free app -
Audiobook
$0.00 Free with your Audible trial - Hardcover
$15.94107 Used from $5.00 59 New from $11.95 3 Collectible from $144.00 - Paperback
$29.201 Used from $13.88 7 New from $8.95 - Spiral-bound
$37.811 New from $37.81 - Mass Market Paperback
$14.761 Used from $14.08 6 New from $12.29 - Audio CD
$31.1912 Used from $11.85 10 New from $29.46
Purchase options and add-ons
#1 INTERNATIONAL BESTSELLER
What does everyone in the modern world need to know?
Renowned psychologist Jordan B. Peterson's answer to this most difficult of questions uniquely combines the hard-won truths of ancient tradition with the stunning revelations of cutting-edge scientific research.
Humorous, surprising and informative, Dr. Peterson tells us why skateboarding boys and girls must be left alone, what terrible fate awaits those who criticize too easily, and why you should always pet a cat when you meet one on the street.
What does the nervous system of the lowly lobster have to tell us about standing up straight (with our shoulders back) and about success in life? Why did ancient Egyptians worship the capacity to pay careful attention as the highest of gods? What dreadful paths do people tread when they become resentful, arrogant and vengeful?
Dr. Peterson journeys broadly, discussing discipline, freedom, adventure and responsibility, distilling the world's wisdom into 12 practical and profound rules for life. 12 Rules for Life shatters the modern commonplaces of science, faith and human nature, while transforming and ennobling the mind and spirit of its readers.
- Length
409
Pages
- Language
EN
English
- PublisherRandom House Canada
- Publication date
2018
January 23
- Dimensions
6.6 x 1.4 x 9.3
inches
- ISBN-100345816021
- ISBN-13978-0345816023
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now
Frequently bought together

Similar items that may ship from close to you
So, attend carefully to your posture. Quit drooping and hunching around. Speak your mind. Put your desires forward, as if you had a right to them—at least the same right as others. Walk tall and gaze forthrightly ahead. Dare to be dangerous. Encourage the serotonin to flow plentifully through the neural pathways desperate for its calming influence.Highlighted by 32,258 Kindle readers
There is very little difference between the capacity for mayhem and destruction, integrated, and strength of character. This is one of the most difficult lessons of life.Highlighted by 30,103 Kindle readers
It is far better to render Beings in your care competent than to protect them.Highlighted by 18,866 Kindle readers
Because these really are rules. And the foremost rule is that you must take responsibility for your own life. Period.Highlighted by 13,679 Kindle readers
Editorial Reviews
Review
“Jordan Peterson, has become one of the best-known Canadians of this generation. In the intellectual category, he’s easily the largest international phenomenon since Marshall McLuhan. . . . By combining knowledge of the past with a full-hearted optimism and a generous attitude toward his readers and listeners, Peterson generates an impressive level of intellectual firepower.” —Robert Fulford, National Post
“Like the best intellectual polymaths, Peterson invites his readers to embark on their own intellectual, spiritual and ideological journeys into the many topics and disciplines he touches on. It’s a counter-intuitive strategy for a population hooked on the instant gratification of ideological conformity and social media ‘likes,’ but if Peterson is right, you have nothing to lose but your own misery.” —Toronto Star
“In a different intellectual league. . . . Peterson can take the most difficult ideas and make them entertaining. This may be why his YouTube videos have had 35 million views. He is fast becoming the closest that academia has to a rock star.” —The Observer
“Grow up and man up is the message from this rock-star psychologist. . . . [A] hardline self-help manual of self-reliance, good behaviour, self-betterment and individualism that probably reflects his childhood in rural Canada in the 1960s. As with all self-help manuals, there’s always a kernel of truth. Formerly a Harvard professor, now at the University of Toronto, Peterson retains that whiff of cowboy philosophy—one essay is a homily on doing one thing every day to improve yourself. Another, on bringing up little children to behave, is excellent…. [Peterson] twirls ideas around like a magician.” —Melanie Reid, The Times
“You don’t have to agree with [Peterson’s politics] to like this book for, once you discard the self-help label, it becomes fascinating. Peterson is brilliant on many subjects. . . . So what we have here is a baggy, aggressive, in-your-face, get-real book that, ultimately, is an attempt to lead us back to what Peterson sees as the true, the beautiful and the good—i.e. God. In the highest possible sense of the term, I suppose it is a self-help book. . . . Either way, it’s a rocky read, but nobody ever said God was easy.” —Bryan Appleyard, The Times
“One of the most eclectic and stimulating public intellectuals at large today, fearless and impassioned.” —The Guardian
“Someone with not only humanity and humour, but serious depth and substance. . . . Peterson has a truly cosmopolitan and omnivorous intellect, but one that recognizes that things need grounding in a home if they are ever going to be meaningfully grasped. . . . As well as being funny, there is a burning sincerity to the man which only the most withered cynic could suspect.” —The Spectator
“Peterson has become a kind of secular prophet who, in an era of lobotomized conformism, thinks out of the box. . . . His message is overwhelmingly vital.” —Melanie Philips, The Times
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
It does not seem reasonable to describe the young man who shot twenty children and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012 as a religious person. This is equally true for the Colorado theatre gunman and the Columbine High School killers. But these murderous individuals had a problem with reality that existed at a religious depth. As one of the members of the Columbine duo wrote:
"The human race isn’t worth fighting for, only worth killing. Give the Earth back to the animals. They deserve it infinitely more than we do. Nothing means anything anymore."
People who think such things view Being itself as inequitable and harsh to the point of corruption, and human Being, in particular, as contemptible. They appoint themselves supreme adjudicators of reality and find it wanting. They are the ultimate critics. The deeply cynical writer continues:
"If you recall your history, the Nazis came up with a 'final solution' to the Jewish problem. . . . Kill them all. Well, in case you haven’t figured it out, I say 'KILL MANKIND.' No one should survive."
For such individuals, the world of experience is insufficient and evil—so to hell with everything!
What is happening when someone comes to think in this manner? A great German play, Faust: A Tragedy, written by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, addresses that issue. The play’s main character, a scholar named Heinrich Faust, trades his immortal soul to the devil, Mephistopheles. In return, he receives whatever he desires while still alive on Earth. In Goethe’s play, Mephistopheles is the eternal adversary of Being. He has a central, defining credo:
"I am the spirit who negates
and rightly so, for all that comes to be
deserves to perish, wretchedly.
It were better nothing would begin!
Thus everything that your terms sin,
destruction, evil represent—
that is my proper element."
Goethe considered this hateful sentiment so important—so key to the central element of vengeful human destructiveness—that he had Mephistopheles say it a second time, phrased somewhat differently, in Part II of the play, written many years later.
People think often in the Mephistophelean manner, although they seldom act upon their thoughts as brutally as the mass murderers of school, college and theatre. Whenever we experience injustice, real or imagined; whenever we encounter tragedy or fall prey to the machinations of others; whenever we experience the horror and pain of our own apparently arbitrary limitations—the temptation to question Being and then to curse it rises foully from the darkness. Why must innocent people suffer so terribly? What kind of bloody, horrible planet is this, anyway?
Life is in truth very hard. Everyone is destined for pain and slated for destruction. Sometimes suffering is clearly the result of a personal fault such as willful blindness, poor decision-making or malevolence. In such cases, when it appears to be self-inflicted, it may even seem just. People get what they deserve, you might contend. That’s cold comfort, however, even when true. Sometimes, if those who are suffering changed their behaviour, then their lives would unfold less tragically. But human control is limited. Susceptibility to despair, disease, aging and death is universal. In the final analysis, we do not appear to be the architects of our own fragility. Whose fault is it, then?
People who are very ill (or, worse, who have a sick child) will inevitably find themselves asking this question, whether they are religious believers or not. The same is true of someone who finds his shirtsleeve caught in the gears of a giant bureaucracy—who is suffering through a tax audit, or fighting an interminable lawsuit or divorce. And it’s not only the obviously suffering who are tormented by the need to blame someone or something for the intolerable state of their Being. At the height of his fame, influence and creative power, for example, the towering Leo Tolstoy himself began to question the value of human existence. He reasoned in this way:
"My position was terrible. I knew that I could find nothing in the way of rational knowledge except a denial of life; and in faith I could find nothing except a denial of reason, and this was even more impossible than a denial of life. According to rational knowledge, it followed that life is evil, and people know it. They do not have to live, yet they have lived and they do live, just as I myself had lived, even though I had known for a long time that life is meaningless and evil."
Try as he might, Tolstoy could identify only four means of escaping from such thoughts. One was retreating into childlike ignorance of the problem. Another was pursuing mindless pleasure. The third was "continuing to drag out a life that is evil and meaningless, knowing beforehand that nothing can come of it." He identified that particular form of escape with weakness: "The people in this category know that death is better than life, but they do not have the strength to act rationally and quickly put an end to the delusion by killing themselves. . . ."
Only the fourth and final mode of escape involved "strength and energy. It consists of destroying life, once one has realized that life is evil and meaningless." Tolstoy relentlessly followed his thoughts:
"Only unusually strong and logically consistent people act in this manner. Having realized all the stupidity of the joke that is being played on us and seeing that the blessings of the dead are greater than those of the living and that it is better not to exist, they act and put an end to this stupid joke; and they use any means of doing it: a rope around the neck, water, a knife in the heart, a train."
Tolstoy wasn’t pessimistic enough. The stupidity of the joke being played on us does not merely motivate suicide. It motivates murder—mass murder, often followed by suicide. That is a far more effective existential protest. By June of 2016, unbelievable as it may seem, there had been one thousand mass killings (defined as four or more people shot in a single incident, excluding the shooter) in the US in twelve hundred and sixty days. That’s one such event on five of every six days for more than three years. Everyone says, "We don’t understand." How can we still pretend that? Tolstoy understood, more than a century ago. The ancient authors of the biblical story of Cain and Abel understood, as well, more than twenty centuries ago. They described murder as the first act of post-Edenic history: and not just murder, but fratricidal murder—murder not only of someone innocent but of someone ideal and good, and murder done consciously to spite the creator of the universe. Today’s killers tell us the same thing, in their own words. Who would dare say that this is not the worm at the core of the apple? But we will not listen, because the truth cuts too close to the bone. Even for a mind as profound as that of the celebrated Russian author, there was no way out. How can the rest of us manage, when a man of Tolstoy’s stature admits defeat? For years, he hid his guns from himself and would not walk with a rope in hand, in case he hanged himself.
How can a person who is awake avoid outrage at the world?
Product details
- Publisher : Random House Canada; Later prt. edition (January 23, 2018)
- Language : English
- Hardcover : 409 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0345816021
- ISBN-13 : 978-0345816023
- Item Weight : 1.45 pounds
- Dimensions : 6.6 x 1.4 x 9.3 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #498 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #1 in Popular Applied Psychology
- #18 in Success Self-Help
- #18 in Personal Transformation Self-Help
- Customer Reviews:
Videos
Videos for this product

1:27
Click to play video

Understand these principles, change your life.
Drew’s Reviews

Videos for this product

0:46
Click to play video

Jordan Peterson 12 Rules For Life Review
Rodney Smith

Videos for this product

1:17
Click to play video

Thanks, from the lobsters
Annette Poizner, MSW, Ed.D., RSW

Important information
To report an issue with this product, click here.
About the author

Jordan Peterson is a Canadian clinical psychologist, cultural critic, and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto. His main areas of study are the psychology of religious and ideological belief, and the assessment and improvement of personality and performance.
From 1993 to 1997, Peterson lived in Arlington, Massachusetts, while teaching and conducting research at Harvard University as an assistant and an associate professor in the psychology department. During his time at Harvard, he studied aggression arising from drug and alcohol abuse, and supervised a number of unconventional thesis proposals. Afterwards, he returned to Canada and took up a post as a professor at the University of Toronto.
In 1999, Routledge published Peterson's Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief. The book, which took Peterson 13 years to complete, describes a comprehensive theory for how we construct meaning, represented by the mythical process of the exploratory hero, and provides an interpretation of religious and mythical models of reality presented in a way that is compatible with modern scientific understanding of how the brain works. It synthesizes ideas drawn from narratives in mythology, religion, literature and philosophy, as well as research from neuropsychology, in "the classic, old-fashioned tradition of social science."
Peterson's primary goal was to examine why individuals, not simply groups, engage in social conflict, and to model the path individuals take that results in atrocities like the Gulag, the Auschwitz concentration camp and the Rwandan genocide. Peterson considers himself a pragmatist, and uses science and neuropsychology to examine and learn from the belief systems of the past and vice versa, but his theory is primarily phenomenological. In the book, he explores the origins of evil, and also posits that an analysis of the world's religious ideas might allow us to describe our essential morality and eventually develop a universal system of morality.
Harvey Shepard, writing in the Religion column of the Montreal Gazette, stated: "To me, the book reflects its author's profound moral sense and vast erudition in areas ranging from clinical psychology to scripture and a good deal of personal soul searching. ... Peterson's vision is both fully informed by current scientific and pragmatic methods, and in important ways deeply conservative and traditional."
In 2004, a 13-part TV series based on his book Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief aired on TVOntario. He has also appeared on that network on shows such as Big Ideas, and as a frequent guest and essayist on The Agenda with Steve Paikin since 2008.
In 2013, Peterson began recording his lectures ("Personality and Its Transformations", "Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief") and uploading them to YouTube. His YouTube channel has gathered more than 600,000 subscribers and his videos have received more than 35 million views as of January 2018. He has also appeared on The Joe Rogan Experience, The Gavin McInnes Show, Steven Crowder's Louder with Crowder, Dave Rubin's The Rubin Report, Stefan Molyneux's Freedomain Radio, h3h3Productions's H3 Podcast, Sam Harris's Waking Up podcast, Gad Saad's The Saad Truth series and other online shows. In December 2016, Peterson started his own podcast, The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast, which has 37 episodes as of January 10, 2018, including academic guests such as Camille Paglia, Martin Daly, and James W. Pennebaker, while on his channel he has also interviewed Stephen Hicks, Richard J. Haier, and Jonathan Haidt among others. In January 2017, he hired a production team to film his psychology lectures at the University of Toronto.
Peterson with his colleagues Robert O. Pihl, Daniel Higgins, and Michaela Schippers produced a writing therapy program with series of online writing exercises, titled the Self Authoring Suite. It includes the Past Authoring Program, a guided autobiography; two Present Authoring Programs, which allow the participant to analyze their personality faults and virtues in terms of the Big Five personality model; and the Future Authoring Program, which guides participants through the process of planning their desired futures. The latter program was used with McGill University undergraduates on academic probation to improve their grades, as well since 2011 at Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. The Self Authoring Programs were developed partially from research by James W. Pennebaker at the University of Texas at Austin and Gary Latham at the Rotman School of Management of the University of Toronto. Pennebaker demonstrated that writing about traumatic or uncertain events and situations improved mental and physical health, while Latham demonstrated that personal planning exercises help make people more productive. According to Peterson, more than 10,000 students have used the program as of January 2017, with drop-out rates decreasing by 25% and GPAs rising by 20%.
In May 2017 he started new project, titled "The psychological significance of the Biblical stories", a series of live theatre lectures in which he analyzes archetypal narratives in Genesis as patterns of behaviour vital for both personal, social and cultural stability.
His upcoming book "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos" will be released on January 23rd, 2018. It was released in the UK on January 16th. Dr. Peterson is currently on tour throughout North America, Europe and Australia.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonReviews with images
Submit a report
- Harassment, profanity
- Spam, advertisement, promotions
- Given in exchange for cash, discounts
Sorry, there was an error
Please try again later.-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
5/5 stars
12 Rules For Life
*******
Of the book:
1. 12 chapters (354 pps); 1 coda (14 pps); Foreword (18 pps); Overture (10 pps).
Total: 396 pps
2. Avg chapter= 29.5 pps
3. 207 citations (in endnotes); 1 citation every 1.7 pages.
⚠️ (Abundant New Testament quotes. Unsuitable for a Jewish Home.)
I have listened to Peterson give several speeches on YouTube, and I would have to say that: 1) He is a master of the spoken word; 2)With respect to the written word, much is left to be desired.
His prose is, by turns: fluent/logical/ approachable AND verbose/vague/maddening.
This dichotomy doesn't diminish him in any way. (One of my favorite writers of all time, Eric Hoffer, came across in the most disciplined way on the page - - but he was not a speaker that anyone remembers. Jordan Peterson appears to be the opposite.)
JP is a practicing clinical psychologist, and that makes his perspective one more of asking questions about the fundamental nature of mental architecture that create a certain personality type (in order to explain situations that he sees over and over again in clinical practice) rather than a psychiatrist--who treats mental diseases as a strictly Material thing and is only interested in setting about finding the right pharmaceutical cure. (The psychiatrist couldn't care less about the psychodynamics of anyone's situation.)
The author quotes liberally from the Tanakh/Christian Bible NOT because he is saying that it is literally true, but because it brings across excellent and time-independent ideas by way of narrative.
In a way, JP's prose reminds me of the Tanakh: A *very* large number of sentences, some of which seem obscure to other people but have a profound meaning to others. Or, the same sentence could have a different meaning to the same person at different times in life.
The sheer volume of verbiage is such that everyone can (and should) take away something from this. (In that way, this book also reminds me of ones such as Marx's "Capital" and Ayn Rand's "Fountainhead.")
I don't think that "12 Rules" has anywhere the number of quotable sentences per page as someone like Eric Hoffer / Thomas Sowell/David Berlinski--but it's still not too shabby.
Synopsis of each chapter:
1. ("Stand up straight with your shoulders back.") Hierarchies are several hundred million years old and they don't depend on banalities such as "Capitalism" / "The White Male Power Structure." Being at the bottom of hierarchy is stressful for human beings, and being lower rank can be a negativebut there's no reason that you cannot choose to see yourself in a better way-and through positive feedback, maybe it will make a difference.
2. ("Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping.") A self-interested child will eat as much candy as he can, even if the results are not good. A parent will take an interest in the child's health, and limit his consumption. If you don't see yourself from the perspective of an interested outsider, you may consume to excess food/drugs/unsafe sex. But why not modulate your own behavior in the way that an interested parent would?
3. ("Make friends with people who want the best for you.") Avoid people who make friends with you because your dysfunction makes theirs look comparatively better. Avoid people who want to "fix" you as a way to avoid solving their own problems.
4. ("Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not who someone else is today.") One can avoid going between the Scylla of Nihilism ("There are no absolute standards, so who cares anyway?") and the Charybdis of impotent envy ("I'm going to piss away this life for the World to Come where Everyone is Equal and the Rich Pay Their Fair Share")
In reality, there is no place on the planet where people are all equal, and so it becomes meaningless to compare because we don't all start at the same place. Indeed, CANNOT start at the same place.
5. ("Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them.") Children are little barbarians that need to be civilized in an orderly way before it is too late. The idiocy of Rousseau notwithstanding (who just dropped his kids off at orphanages - - all five of them), people in a natural state do not create gentle societies. (That was the point of "Lord of the Flies.")
6. ("Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world.") A lot of mass movements throw away a lot of lives by selling them the idea that they can change the world. And that is a meaningless / futile goal. It is possible and feasible, however, to change and improve oneself.
7. ("Pursue what is meaningful, not what is expedient.") Delayed gratification / self control is a civilized / civilizing practice--And that is because freedom requires constraint. (If violin strings are installed taut enough to make sound, then one is free to make music with them. Detached strings laying on a table are not constrained, but also not free to make music.) Being a religious person is not only about the escapes of faith and afterlife, but also about the Quest for a more perfect form of Being (with JP's capital "b").
8. ("Tell the truth, or at least don't lie.") To thine own self be true- and the easiest person to fool is oneself. If you live a life that is honest about your surroundings and your own limitations, that is the path to some type of comfort. If you are not honest with yourself, that sets you up to spend an entire lifetime trying to "topple the windmills of your imagination." (p.210). When you lie to others, it's a lot more difficult to maintain the lie all the way through than it would seem. It could be something so simple as an enabling parent shielding their child from reality for some number of decades and NEVER equipping them to deal with reality.
9. ("Assume that the other person you are listening to might know something that you don't.") Conversations with other human beings should be some amount of give and take and not just waiting for the other person to stop talking so that you can make your own points. Listening can be therapeutic (because it gives a speaker a chance to organize his thoughts). When speaking publicly, there are techniques to know your audience.
10. ("Be precise in your speech") Simple problems can become very big ones if you don't precisely address them as they arise. He uses several examples from his clinical practice of marriages that had so many things go wrong over such a long time that when they fell apart it was impossible to point to one single causative agent.
11. ("Don't bother children when they are skateboarding.") This was probably the deepest chapter, and it could have been a book in its own right. Peterson is conscious that the current woke movement is rehashed Marxism and also profoundly misanthropic.
This idea of people having children because they are evil sinners who do not care about Mother Earth finds its logical conclusion in the extermination of mankind. (It's interesting how often school shooters pick up on misanthropic ideas--and you can find these ideas in any of their rambling manifestos, provided you have the patience to fish for them.)
12. ("Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street"). Being of any sort requires reasonable limitation/ if everyday is a sunny day, then what's a sunny day?
Superman became most boring (and almost failed as a franchise) once his powers were unlimited. Where are the challenges for someone who can do anything?
This is true for human beings as well: when we might have health / other challenges, it can make us more appreciate when times are good.
Coda: Do you want to be right or do you want to be smart? Proper Being is a process, and not a state.
*******
New words:
Grapefruit foam
feint
triage
monastic novitate
Diane Arbus
Hieronymus Bosch
Rogerian/Adlerian/Jungian/Freudian/behavioral schools
toque
Zen loan
forMication
*******
Good quotes:
1. "Aristotle defined the virtues simply as the ways of behaving that are most conducive to happiness in life; vice was defined as the ways of behaving least conducive to happiness." (xx).
2. "Our society faces the increasing call to deconstruct stabilizing traditions to include smaller and smaller numbers of people who do not or will not fit into the categories up on which even our perceptions are based....... Each person's private trouble cannot be solved by social revolution, because revolutions are destabilizing and dangerous." (p.118).
3. "And after the solution was implemented, even the fact that such problems had ever existed disappeared from view..... The fact that automobiles pollute only becomes a problem of sufficient magnitude to attract public attention when the far worse problems that the internal combustion engine solves has vanished from view. People stricken with poverty don't care about carbon dioxide." (p.187)
4. "Deceitful, inauthentic individual existence is the precursor to social totalitarianism." (p.215).
5. "The faculty of rationality inclines dangerously toward pride: all I know is all that needs to be known. Pride falls in love with its own creations, and tries to make them absolute." (p.210)
6. (p.235) "She had no self. She was, instead, a walking cacophony of unintegrated experiences."
7. (p.290) "If you cannot understand why someone did something, look at the consequences--and infer the motivation" (Jung). "When someone claims to be acting from the highest principles, for the good of others, there is no reason to assume that the person's motives are genuine."
Second order thoughts:
1. "If circumstances force you to put all your eggs in one basket.... A son is a better bet, by the strict standards of evolutionary logic, where the proliferation of your genes is all that matters." (p.115) NONONO. Women are the limiting reagent in the reaction of childbearing. Too few men means that some of them just double up on women. (How many black guys do you know that have a stomach for black women that don't have 2~5 in rotation?) Too few women means that a lot of men are going to kill each other trying to get to scarce brides. (They're learning this the hard way in China/India.)
2. In the case of listening to people (Chapter 9): being a good listener is probably a secondary skill to deciding who is likely to even have a conversation worth having. Is it worth sorting through some huge number of ghetto bunnies that can't even read at grade level (such as you might meet from Detroit) to figure out something useful they might have to say? How many ignorant / provincial / neanderthal Haredim is it worth sorting through to find that one who might have read a single English book in his life?
3. (p.268). Peterson appears to have read the Bible in Hebrew. He actually quotes transliterated Hebrew. Also, it appears that he can fly a plane (p.286).
4. Is Western civilization in terminal decline? It might be. Donald Trump was a symbol of a country reacting against toxic Western oikophobia. And we see how it works out for him. You can describe all of the symptoms of a disease and treat them one by one, but a patient ("civilization")has a natural lifetime and that's just it.
This book seems to be selling at a rate comparable to "50 Shades of Gray" (which makes me cautiously optimistic).
Verdict: Recommended.
Much like the Tanakh, this would be one of those books that a person wanted to review over and over and over.
But, there's just not enough time and there are too many other books to read; most readers will probably just take what they can get out of it and let it go.
That's my strategy, after organizing my thoughts on the book with this review.
One of the main themes of this book is: Personal change is possible. There's no doubt you can be slightly better today than you were yesterday. Because of Pareto's Principle (small changes can have disproportionately large results), this movement towards the good increases massively, and this upward trajectory can take your life out of hell more rapidly than you could believe. Life is tragic and full of suffering and malevolence. But there's something you can start putting right, and we can't imagine what good things are in store for us if we just fix the things that are within our power to do so.
The 12 Rules for Life:
In Peterson’s own words, it’s 12 rules to stop you from being pathetic, written from the perspective of someone who himself tried to stop being pathetic and is still working on it. Peterson is open about his struggles and shortcomings, unlike many authors who only reveal a carefully curated façade.
Rule 1: Stand up straight with your shoulders back. People have bad posture, and the meaning behind it can be demonstrated by animal behaviors. Peterson uses the example of the lobster. When a lobster loses a fight, and they fight all the time, it scrunches up a little. Lobsters run on serotonin and when he loses, levels go down, and when he wins, levels go up and he stretches out and is confident. Who cares? We evolutionarily diverged from lobsters 350 million years ago, but it’s still the same circuit. It’s a deep instinct to size others up when looking at them to see where they fit in the social hierarchy. If your serotonin levels fall, you get depressed and crunch forward and you’re inviting more oppression from predator personalities and can get stuck in a loop. Fixing our posture is part of the psycho-physiological loop that can help you get started back up again.
Rule 2: Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping. People often have self-contempt whether they realize it or not. Imagine someone you love and treat well. You need to treat yourself with the same respect. Take care of yourself, your room, your things, and have respect for yourself as if you’re a person with potential and is important to the people around you. If you make a pattern of bad mistakes, your life gets worse, not just for you, but for the people around you. All your actions echo in ways that cannot be imagined. Think of Stalin’s mother and the mistakes she made in life, and how the ripple effects went on to affect the millions of people around him.
Rule 3: Choose your friends carefully. It is appropriate for you to evaluate your social surroundings and eliminate those who are hurting you. You have no ethical obligation to associate with people who are making your life worse. In fact, you are obligated to disassociate with people who are trying to destroy the structure of being, your being, society’s being. It’s not cruel, it’s sending a message that some behaviors are not to be tolerated.
Rule 4: Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today. You need to improve, and you may even be in real bad shape, but many unfairly compare themselves to some more seemingly successful person. Up till around age 17, random comparisons to other people can make sense, but afterwards, especially age 30+, our lives become so idiosyncratic that comparisons with others become meaningless and unhelpful. You only see a slice of their life, a public facet, and are blind to the problems they conceal.
Rule 5: Don't let children do things that make you dislike them. You aren't as nice as you think, and you will unconsciously take revenge on them. You are massively more powerful than your children, and have the ability and subconscious proclivity for tyranny deeply rooted within you.If you don't think this is true, you don't know yourself well enough. His advice on disciplinary procedure: (1) limit the rules. (2) use minimum necessary force and (3) parents should come in pairs.It's difficult and exhausting to raise children, and it's easy to make mistakes. A bad day at work, fatigue, hunger, stress, etc, can make you unreasonable.
Rule 6: Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world. Life is tragic and there's malevolence. There's plenty to complain about, but if you dwell on it, you will become bitter and tread down a path that will take you to twisted places. The diaries of the Columbine killers are a chilling look into minds that dwelled on the unholy trinity of deceit, arrogance, and resentment) . So instead of cursing the tragedy that is life, transform into something meaningful. Start by stop doing something, anything, that you know to be wrong. Everyday you have choices in front of you. Stop doing and saying things that make you weak and ashamed. Do only those things that you would proudly talk about in public.
Rule 7: Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient). Meaning is how you protect yourself against the suffering that life entails. This means that despite the fact that we’re all emotionally wounded by life, we’ve found something that makes it all worthwhile. Meaning, Peterson says, is like an instinct, or a form of vision. It lets you know when you’re in the right place, and he says that the right place is midway between chaos and order. If you stay firmly ensconced within order, things you understand, then you can’t grow. If you stay within chaos, then you’re lost. Expediency is what you do to get yourself out of trouble here and now, but it comes at the cost of sacrificing the future for the present. So instead of doing what gets you off the hook today, aim high. Look around you and see what you can make better. Make it better. As you gain knowledge, consciously remain humble and avoid arrogance that can stealthily creep on you. Peterson also says to be aware of our shortcomings, whatever they may be; our secret resentments, hatred, cowardice, and other failings. Be slow to accuse others because we too conceal malevolent impulses, and certainly before we attempt to fix the world.
Rule 8: Tell the truth—or, at least, don't lie. Telling the truth can be hard in the sense that it’s often difficult to know the truth. However, we can know when we’re lying. Telling lies makes you weak. You can feel it, and others can sense it too. Meaning, according to Peterson, is associated with truth, and lying is the antithesis of meaning. Lying disassociates you with meaning, and thus reality itself. You might get away with lying for a short while, but only a short time. In Peterson’s words “It was the great and the small lies of the Nazi and Communist states that produced the deaths of millions of people.”
Rule 9: Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't. A good conversation consists of you coming out wiser than you went into it. An example is when you get into an argument with your significant other, you want to win, especially if you get angry. If you’re more verbally fluent than the other person then you can win. One problem is that the other person might see something better than you, but they can’t quite articulate it as well. Always listen because there’s a possibility they’re going to tell you something that will prevent you from running headfirst into a brick wall. This is why Peterson says to listen to your enemies. They will lie about you, but they will also say true things about yourself that your friends won’t. Separate the wheat from the chaff and make your life better.
Rule 10: Be Precise in Your Speech: There is some integral connection between communication and reality (or structures of belief as he likes to say). Language takes chaos and makes it into a ‘thing.’ As an example, imagine going through a rough patch in your life where you can’t quite put your finger on what’s wrong. This mysterious thing that’s bothering you—is it real? Yes, if it’s manifesting itself as physical discomfort. Then you talk about it and give it a name, and then this fuzzy, abstract thing turns into a specific thing. Once named, you can now do something about it. The unnameable is far more terrifying than the nameable. As an example, the movie the Blair Witch project didn’t actually name or describe the evil. Nothing happens in the movie, it’s all about the unnameable. If you can’t name something, it means it’s so terrifying to you that you can’t even think about it, and that makes you weaker. This is why Peterson is such a free speech advocate. He wants to bring things out of the realm of the unspeakable. Words have a creative power and you don’t want to create more mark and darkness by imprecise speech.
Rule 11: Don’t bother children when they are skateboarding. This is mainly about masculinity. Peterson remembers seeing children doing all kinds of crazy stunts on skateboards and handrails, and believes this is an essential ingredient to develop masculinity, to try to develop competence and face danger. Jordan Peterson considers the act of sliding down a handrail to be brave and perhaps stupid as well, but overall positive. A lot of rebellious behavior in school is often called ‘toxic masculinity,’ but Peterson would say to let them be. An example would be a figure skater that makes a 9.9 on her performance, essentially perfect. Then the next skater that follows her seems to have no hope. But she pushes herself closer to chaos, beyond her competence, and when successful, inspires awe. Judges award her 10’s. She’s gone beyond perfection into the unknown and ennobled herself as well as humanity as well.
Rule 12: Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street. This chapter is mainly autobiographical and he writes about tragedy and pain. When tragic things are in front of you and you’re somewhat powerless, you must keep your eyes open for little opportunities that highlight the redemptive elements of life that make it all worthwhile. The title of this chapter comes from his experience of observing a local stray cat, and watching it adapt to the rough circumstances around it. Another thing you must do when life is going to pieces is to shorten your temporal horizon. Instead of thinking in months, you maybe think in hours or minutes instead. You try to just have the best next minute or hour that you can. You shrink the time frame until you can handle it, this is how you adjust to the catastrophe. You try to stay on your feet and think. Although this chapters deals about harsh things, it’s an overall positive one. Always look for what’s meaningful and soul-sustaining even when you’re where you’d rather not be.
Top reviews from other countries
Rule 1: Stand up straight with your shoulders back
This is the chapter about lobsters.
Cathy Newman and other commentators have been choking on the crustaceans Peterson offers as evidence for his first rule, but I wonder if they have actually read the chapter. It's all pretty self-explanatory and obvious: dominance hierarchy is "an essentially permanent feature of the environment to which all complex life has adapted." That's true for lobsters, and it's true for humans: "It's permanent. It's real. The dominance hierarchy is not capitalism…It's not the patriarchy."
If you're at the bottom of the dominance hierarchy - as either lobster or human - life is harder on you. Low status lobsters and humans produce less serotonin. "Low serotonin means decreased confidence. Low serotonin means more response to stress and costlier physical preparedness for emergency…higher serotonin levels…are characterized by less illness, misery and death."
So what to do? Put your shoulders back! "Walk tall and gaze forthrightly ahead. Dare to be dangerous. Encourage the serotonin to flow plentifully through the neural pathways desperate for its calming influence."
Rule 2: Treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping
This is the chapter that explains why people will buy prescription medicine for their dog, and carefully administer it, but fail to do the same for themselves.
It boils down to this: "Why should anyone take care of anything as naked, ugly, ashamed, frightened, worthless, cowardly, resentful, defensive and accusatory as a descendant of Adam? Even if that thing, that being, is himself? And I do not mean at all to exclude women with this phrasing."
That humans are like this provides Peterson with what I think might be the most important insight into the problem of evil since Augustine identified original sin with pride. This is how JP describes it: "We know exactly how and where we can be hurt, and why. That is as good a definition as any of self-consciousness. We are aware of our own defencelessness, finitude and mortality. We can feel pain, and self-disgust, and shame, and horror, and we know it. We know what makes us suffer. We know how dread and pain can be inflicted on us - and that means we know exactly how to inflict it on others. We know we are naked, and how that nakedness can be exploited - and that means we know how others are naked, and how they can be exploited."
The solution? "You could help direct the world, on its careening trajectory, a bit more toward Heaven and a bit more away from Hell. Once having understood Hell, researched it, so to speak - particularly your own individual Hell - you could decide against going there or creating that. You could aim elsewhere. You could, in fact, devote your life to this. That would give you a Meaning, with a capital M. That would justify your miserable existence. That would atone for your sinful nature, and replace your shame and self-consciousness with the natural pride and forthright confidence of someone who has learned once again to walk with God in the Garden."
Rule 3: Make friends with people who want the best for you
This is the chapter about not casting your pearls before swine.
Sometimes helping is beyond us.
"But Christ himself, you might object, befriended tax-collectors and prostitutes. How dare I cast aspersions on the motives of those who are trying to help? But Christ was the archetypal perfect man. And you're you. How do you know that your attempts to pull someone up won't instead bring them - or you further down?"
Ouch.
So, how to help? "Before you help someone, you should find out why that person in in trouble." The thing is, that often takes more effort than just helping - it's easier to throw money at a problem than really understand why the problem is there. But that is to cast our pearls before swine - and it was Jesus, not just Peterson, who warned us against that.
And help yourself, by making friends with people who are going to genuinely help you - with people who are prepared to put the work in, because they want the best for you.
Rule 4: Compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today
This is the chapter about silencing your internal critic.
Is this the very heart of Petersonism? Perhaps so. Certainly, it's something I've heard him talk about in pretty much every clip and lecture of his I've listened to. It's this:
"Aim small. You don't want to shoulder too much to begin with, given your limited talents, tendency to deceive, burden of resentment, and ability to shirk responsibility. Thus, you set the following goal: by the end of the day, I want things in my life to be a tiny bit better than they were this morning. Then you ask yourself, 'What could I do, that I would do, that would accomplish that, and what small thing would I like as a reward?' Then you do what you have decided to do, even if you do it badly. Then you give yourself that damn coffee, in triumph. Maybe you feel a bit stupid about it, but you do it anyway. And you do the same thing tomorrow, and the next day, and the next. And, with each day, your baseline of comparison gets a little higher, and that's magic. That's compound interest. Do that for three years, and your life will be entirely different. Now you're aiming for something higher. Now you're wishing on a star. Now the beam is disappearing from your eye, and you're learning to see. And what you aim at determines what you see. That's worth repeating. What you aim at determines what you see."
Peterson is brutally honest about the human condition: "What do you know about yourself? You are, on the one hand, the most complex thing in the entire universe, and on the other, someone who can't even set the clock on your microwave. Don't over-estimate your self-knowledge."
So, you - amazing, ignorant you - aim at something, and "compare yourself to who you were yesterday, not to who someone else is today."
Rule 5: Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them
This is the chapter every parent needs to read.
If you are a parent you must read it. And if you are not a parent but know someone who is, you need to persuade them to read it.
Peterson sees, "today's parents as terrified by their children." We are heirs of the revolutions of the 1960s and have forgotten what children need and what parents are meant to provide. What children need is parents who will give them the right kind of attention, and that means parents remembering that they are parents. "A child will have many friends, but only two parents - if that - and parents are more, not less, than friends. Friends have very limited authority to correct. Every parent therefore needs to learn to tolerate the momentary anger or even hatred directed towards them by their children, after necessary corrective action has been taken."
Parents must learn to correct their children, and socialise them. After all, "Two-year-olds, statistically speaking, are the most violent of people." If parents don't take this responsibility seriously, their children will be disciplined by the much harsher realities of the world. "If a child has not been taught to behave properly by the age of four, it will forever be difficult for him or her to make friends. The research literature on this is quite clear."
So what should parents teach their kids? Peterson suggests the following:
"Do not bite, kick or hit, except in self-defence. Do not torture or bully other children, so you don't end up in jail. Eat in a civilised and thankful manner, so that people are happy to have you at their house, and pleased to feed you. Learn to share, so other kids will play with you. Pay attention when spoken to by adults, so they don't hate you and might therefore deign to teach you something. Go to sleep properly, and peaceably, so that your parents can have a private life and not resent your existence. Take care of your belongings, because you need to learn how and because you're lucky to have them. Be good company when something fun is happening, so that you're invited for the fun. Act so that other people are happy you're around, so that people will want you around. A child who knows these rules will be welcome everywhere."
And that is why so many children are unwelcome, pretty much everywhere. If you are a parent, don't let this be your child.
Rule 6: Set your house in perfect order before you criticize the world
This is the chapter that tells you to take responsibility for yourself.
"Don't blame capitalism, the radical left, or the iniquity of your enemies. Don't reorganise the state until you have ordered your own experience. Have some humility. If you cannot bring peace to your own household, how dare you try to rule a city?"
Rule 7: Pursue what is meaningful (not what is expedient)
This is the longest and densest chapter.
"Life is suffering. That's clear. There is no more basic, irrefutable truth. It's basically what God tells Adam and Eve, immediately before he kicks them out of Paradise." The way to deal with this is by learning delayed gratification - that is, to work and to sacrifice. Be Abel, not Cain. "Cain turns to Evil to obtain what Good denied him, and he does it voluntarily, self-consciously and with malice aforethought." Don't do that. Aim higher.
It is here that Peterson gives the clearest definition of his ethic, his "fundamental moral conclusions":
"Aim up. Pay attention. Fix what you can fix. Don't be arrogant in your knowledge. Strive for humility, because totalitarian pride manifests itself in intolerance, oppression, torture and death. Become aware of your own insufficiency - your cowardice, malevolence, resentment and hatred. Consider the murderousness of your own spirit before you dare accuse others, and before you attempt to repair the fabric of the world. Maybe it's not the world that's at fault. Maybe it's you. You've failed to make the mark. You've missed the target. You've fallen short of the glory of God. You've sinned. And all of that is your contribution to the insufficiency and evil of the world. And, above all, don't lie. Don't lie about anything, ever. Lying leads to Hell. It was the great and the small lies of the Nazi and Communist states that produced the deaths of millions of people."
And that leads us to the next chapter…
Rule 8: Tell the truth - or, at least, don't lie
This is the chapter to put courage into your moral spine.
We lie in order to make others like us more than they otherwise would, to make ourselves look better, to avoid difficult tasks or conversations - because we think lying makes life easier. But lying makes things worse:
"If you say no to your boss, or your spouse, or your mother, when it needs to be said, then you transform yourself into someone who can say no when it needs to be said. If you say yes when no needs to be said, however, you transform yourself into someone who can only say yes, even when it is very clearly time to say no. If you ever wonder how perfectly ordinary, decent people could find themselves doing the terrible things the gulag camp guards did, you now have your answer. By the time no seriously needed to be said, there was no one left capable of saying it."
Rule 9: Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't
This is the chapter Cathy Newman should have read.
Peterson is not only an academic, he is a clinical psychologist, and he knows how to listen. He has some things to teach those of us who aspire to hear people.
Peterson recounts the case of 'Miss S' who came to see him, saying, "I think I was raped. Five times." Peterson explains how he could have convinced her of the truth, which could have been either, "You are an innocent victim" or "You have made yourself a victim." To have done so would have been to give her advice; but Peterson didn't give advice, he listened.
Peterson gives advice (ha!) about how to listen well. And it is this that Cathy Newman should have read and applied before tangling with the clinical psychologist:
"When someone opposes you, it is very tempting to oversimplify, parody, or distort his or her position. This is a counterproductive game, designed both to harm the dissenter and unjustly raise your personal status. By contrast, if you are called upon to summarize someone's position, so that the speaking person agrees with that summary, you may have to state the argument even more clearly and succinctly than the speaker has yet managed. If you first give the devil his due, looking at his arguments from his perspective, you can (1) find the value in them, and learn something in the process, or (2) hone your positions against them (if you still believe they are wrong) and strengthen your arguments further against challenge. This will make you much stronger. Then you will no longer have to misrepresent your opponent's position (and may well have bridged at least part of the gap between the two of you). You will also be much better at withstanding your own doubts."
Rule 10: Be precise in your speech
This is the chapter that might save your marriage.
The world is only simple when it is working. That is so obvious we miss it all the time. Peterson illustrates with the story of a woman who believes herself to be in a happy, stable, marriage, only to discover her husband is having an affair. Suddenly chaos roars, the dragon is unleashed. This is what happens when we don't communicate, precisely.
"One day it bursts forth, in a form that no one can ignore. It lifts the very household from its foundations. Then it's an affair, or a decades-long custody dispute of ruinous economic and psychological proportions. Then it's the concentrated version of the acrimony that could have been spread out, tolerably, issue by issue, over the years of the pseudo-paradise of the marriage. Every one of the three hundred thousand unrevealed issues, which have been lied about, avoided, rationalized away, hidden like an army of skeletons in some great horrific closet, bursts forth like Noah's flood, drowning everything. There's no ark, because no one built one, even though everyone felt the storm gathering."
So, how about this suggestion?
"Maybe a forthright conversation about sexual dissatisfaction might have been the proverbial stitch in time - not that it would be easy. Perhaps madame desired the death of intimacy, clandestinely, because she was deeply and secretly ambivalent about sex. God knows there's reason to be. Perhaps monsieur was a terrible, selfish lover. Maybe they both were. Sorting that out is worth a fight, isn't it? That's a big part of life, isn't it? Perhaps addressing that and (you never know) solving the problem would be worth two months of pure misery just telling each other the truth (not with intent to destroy, or attain victory, because that's not the truth: that's just all-out war)."
Like I say, this chapter could save your marriage.
Rule 11: Do not bother children when they are skateboarding
This is the chapter that refutes the "postmodern/neo-Marxist claim that Western culture, in particular, is an oppressive structure, created by white men to dominate and exclude women."
Boys and girls are different. Sexual difference is biological in basis. Sexual difference is not a cultural construct. The current cultural narrative that denies these things is bad for boys - and for girls. Boys don't know how to compete when they are forced to compete in the girls' hierarchy. "Girls can win by winning in their own hierarchy - by being good at what girls value, as girls. They can add to this victory by winning in the boys' hierarchy. Boys, however, can only win by winning in the male hierarchy. They will lose status, among girls and boys, by being good at what girls value. It costs them in reputation among the boys, and in attractiveness among the girls." If we insist on going down this path, soon there will be no men left that any self-respecting woman would want to form a relationship with.
It was alarming to hear the president of the Marxist Society at the university where my eldest daughter is a student, defend and promote communism on national radio recently. Marxist ideology always ends in starvation and murder. That has been demonstrated, irrefutably, at the cost of millions of lives. Yet it is this very philosophy that underpins so many current cultural developments. It is Marxism filtered through the French intellectuals and now dominant in our universities and media that says things like, "There are 'women' only because men gain by excluding them. There are 'males and females' only because members of that heterogeneous group benefit by excluding the tiny minority of people whose biological sexuality is amorphous." Peterson retorts, "It is almost impossible to over-estimate the nihilistic and destructive nature of this philosophy. It puts the act of categorization itself in doubt. It negates the idea that distinctions might be drawn between things for any reasons other than that of raw power."
And then he deals with the "equal pay for equal work" argument. You should read that.
This is a powerful chapter, that deserves careful reading, not angry, knee-jerk, liberal reaction. The practical consequences are profound: "If you think tough men are dangerous, wait until you see what weak men are capable of."
Rule 12: Pet a cat when you encounter one on the street
This is the chapter that will make you cry.
The inevitability of suffering is a recurring theme for Peterson. Here he deals with it through the suffering of his daughter, who endured the misery of severe polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
How are we supposed to make sense of suffering? How are we meant to cope with it?
Peterson says that part of the answer is this: "Being of any reasonable sort appears to require limitation." It is our human limitations that make us human, and that makes suffering something we have to face. He offers wise counsel for those caught in the maelstrom of suffering - counsel about how to talk, and to listen. And he says to stop and stroke a cat: "And maybe when you are going for a walk and your head is spinning a cat will show up and if you pay attention to it then you will get a reminder for just fifteen seconds that the wonder of Being might make up for the ineradicable suffering that accompanies it."
Coda
This is the chapter in which Peterson tells us what he hopes for - he hopes for the best.
So…
So what to make of all this?
There are incredible depths of wisdom here. There is much to glean, much to feed on.
Peterson is courageous, and clear. He loves people, and hates tyranny. He is engaging and funny. Thoughtful and emotional. More of us need to share something of his courage and clarity. He is kicking down doors we should be unafraid to walk through.
In fact, my most serious complaint about 12 Rules is that the fascinating endnotes are endnotes, rather than easier to access footnotes; and that there is an incredibly irritating misnumbering of these from note 33. I don't know how that slipped through the net, but as Peterson often states, things fall apart, and chaos is always waiting to overwhelm us. What we need is order. 12 Rules will help you understand that.
He wrote the bestseller 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. It is a self-help book that tries to avoid the pitfalls of this subject by giving sound commonsense advice. God, remarkably, features significantly in this book. Unlike most self-help books, it warns that happiness is hard to hold on to and there are no guarantees. He has been accused of misogyny in his book.
His 12 rules are about not guaranteeing happiness but about putting no obstacles in its way.
His twelve rules have been summarised as
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
It is good that God does not occur in this list. But he does emphasise God at times in the book. The emphasis on finding meaning in service to God is erroneous. He says that God's existence cannot be shown to be true but says we must live as if there is a God. That is in fact a call to embrace idolatrous superstition. The only right way to serve a God is by seeing him as real and doing all out of love for him. If he is not real we are wasting our love on him and that is cruel and what about those who emulate us? It is one thing to say you cannot be good without God but another to say you cannot be good without the idea of God. Its a recipe for religious fascism. There is less humility in this than somebody saying, "I know Santa Claus lives on the moon and thinks about me night and day." God by definition is all-love and all important. You cannot truly love God if you use him or the idea of him as a crutch for you cannot do good otherwise. You would end up intolerant of secularism and atheism. The crutch idea of God leads to obscurantism and censorship. If God is just in your head then you create this idol and it says things about you and only you. It is not about you.
The only thing that can be absolutely central is principle. Even God cannot create principle. Religion says his nature is fair and loving in principle and he has not made his nature what it is. If you say morality is just a fiction you are making a moral judgment against anybody who preaches morality and against their moral systems. So principle forces us to think moral. We cannot truly be amoral. This shows there is more to us than fame, fortune and even family and God. Principle is the one thing that is unshakeablely true.
What could a Christian think of the book? Rules 3, 6, 9, 10 contradict what the gospels say about Jesus. 2 is better than love your neighbour as yourself but it too contradicts Jesus who was not saying you are to love yourself but that you do love yourself and must love others the same. The command is about others.
5 by the way contradicts how Jesus told the Jews to stone a woman to death for adultery but only if they were worthy - he meant what he said for we are told he was never conniving or trying to manipulate them not to stone her. His statement is approval for the savage laws of the Old Testament which he said was God's unerring word. A spiritual teacher approving things like that needs to be dismissed on the spot instead of Christians trying to excuse it.
The Christian faith spends more time making historical claims than on spiritual stuff. The resurrection of Jesus is central and compared to it the moral teachings of Jesus do not matter. The faith says Jesus rose bodily and transformed from the grave but even the gospels just say the body was not in the tomb and do not comment on why. Visions are not enough to base a resurrection on but that is what we have here.
The gospel writers offer not evidence for the resurrection of Christ but an interpretation they put on what they think happened. Why should we accept theirs for millions of interpretations are possible? They are the ones that say there is only one explanation so it is up to them to refute all the alternatives even if it takes to the end of the millennium so they have no right to our faith. Worse, there is no proof that the accounts are eyewitness accounts. Christians say they are. They seem to think that eyewitness accounts that have been worked over will do. They will not. We don't want something that was edited. We want the original unaltered written accounts and we want assurance that the witnesses checked over them before they were made public. They can't give us any of that.
Faith in somebody's interpretation of a revelation or miracle from God is not the same as faith in the revelation or God. It is not faith in them at all but in the person doing the interpreting.
Peterson has not as yet made any profession of Christian belief. Let us hope that never happens.
Anyway let us quote Peterson.
Quote: Cultivating judgment about the difference between virtue and vice is the beginning of wisdom, something that can never be out of date. By contrast, our modern relativism begins by asserting that making judgments about how to live is impossible, because there is no real good, and no true virtue (as these too are relative). Thus relativism’s closest approximation to “virtue” is “tolerance.”Only tolerance will provide social cohesion between different groups, and save us from harming each other. On Facebook and other forms of social media, therefore, you signal your so-called virtue, telling everyone how tolerant, open and compassionate you are, and wait for likes to accumulate. (Leave aside that telling people you’re virtuous isn’t a virtue, it’s self-promotion. Virtue signalling is not virtue. Virtue signalling is, quite possibly, our commonest vice.) Intolerance of others’ views (no matter how ignorant or incoherent they may be) is not simply wrong; in a world where there is no right or wrong, it is worse: it is a sign you are embarrassingly unsophisticated or, possibly, dangerous.
Comment: Relativism should ask why social cohesion matters if all is relative! Relativists are full of pride. If people who claim to know what is moral are bad they are worse. Relativists think they make things bad by thinking them bad. That is magic not morality.
Why is telling people you are virtuous not a virtue? Why is it self-promotion? If it is self-promotion disguised as virtue then it becomes deception as well.
Also tolerance if it is your only virtue is not really a virtue then. It is not virtuous to abandon and reject virtues in favour of one. It is vice.
Decide: morality is either really true (objective morality) or you can make it really true (relativism). Relativism trades objective morality for another objective morality that you make up. Pure relativists do not exist - they just are relativists when it suits them.
Quote: An idea has an aim. It wants something. It posits a value structure. An idea believes that what it is aiming for is better than what it has now.
An idea is a personality, not a fact. When it manifests itself within a person, it has a strong proclivity to make of that person its avatar: to impel that person to act it out.
Comment: Ideas reflect the human tendency to think that all things are just getting that bit better. That is religion's selling point but it remains a non-religious matter. It is psychology - or human nature. Religion hijacks human nature. Religion is fundamentally a lie.
Peterson is right that we should not see an idea as a thing. It is a personality - it is what a personality gives birth to and makes part of itself. The warning is that we must be careful to be truthful and servants of truth for if your ideas are you then it follows that human nature will be unable to truthfully separate hating you from hating your ideas. It becomes another refutation of love the sinner but hate the sin. If hating sin and sinner is inevitable then you blame the sinner for being hated as well. You blame them not you.
If you are a channel for ideas you want to be a channel not a slave. You won't want your bad ideas to harm you or put you at risk. So investigation and revision of belief would be essential.
Quote: Each human being has an immense capacity for evil. Each human being understands, a priori, perhaps not what is good, but certainly what is not. And if there is something that is not good, then there is something that is good. If the worst sin is the torment of others, merely for the sake of the suffering produced— then the good is whatever is diametrically opposed to that. The good is whatever stops such things from happening.
Comment: Some feel that as our potential for evil is so big that is why even a small sin is no trivial matter. Protestantism says that all sin is an abomination before God. St Paul wrote that sin is in him even though he can find no trace of it when he examines himself but he knows it is there hiding itself. Jesus said that nobody is good only God.
According to our quote, our morality detectors are better for saying what is not good not what is good. That means that non-judgemental people are liars. They are at their core judgers who think they know enough about everybody else's life to form a negative opinion of them or what they do. In reality judging somebody's deeds when you do not and cannot know the whole story is using their misdeeds or perceived misdeeds as a grounds for attacking them and sending "bad energy" to them.
Trying to be non-judgemental when it is not your nature or even possible is an act of violence and violence leads to violence. It may explain why accepting people turn on you fast when they find a bandwagon to get on. That is why religions of peace often surprise you when the climate is right for them to show their true colours.
Quote: Psychotherapy is not advice. Advice is what you get when the person you’re talking with about something horrible and complicated wishes you would just shut up and go away. Advice is what you get when the person you are talking to wants to revel in the superiority of his or her own intelligence. If you weren’t so stupid, after all, you wouldn’t have your stupid problems.
Comment: Praying to God for guidance is an even bigger way of implying that suffering people have only themselves to blame.
OVERALL I find the book insightful and interesting. It just gives us ideas that need teasing out and deeper reflection. That is what I have tried to do and highly recommend the book.
To the extent that this is true, it is a tragic indictment of the extent to which parents have increasingly failed to raise their children properly. Peterson's rules are pedestrian and childish on their face, encouraging the reader to stand up straight, speak precisely, tell the truth, pet the neighborhood cat, and generally behave the way in which a 10-year-old boy from a good family was historically expected to behave for most of the 20th century in the West. This is all well and good, even if the fact that it is apparently necessary to explain these things to adult men and women tends to inspire one to weep for the state of modern Man.
However, the more sophisticated reader cannot help but notice that Peterson does not follow his own rules, particularly the three which relate to speaking precisely, telling the truth, and getting one's own house in order before trying to fix the world.
Peterson is an engaging and accessible writer when he is simply recounting events of the past or relating experiences from his own life. He is a sympathetic author, and he effectively communicates the way in which the tragedy and suffering he has experienced throughout his life have made a deep impression on his psyche. It is when he tries to wax profound and articulate his underlying philosophy that his writing invariably wades into a swamp of nonsensical name-dropping that is less Jungian than Joycean, a meandering waking stream of consciousness that not only fails to substantially support the nominal premise, but often bears no relationship to it whatsoever.
To call Peterson's writing imprecise really does not do it justice. His definitions of "life" and "evil", both predicated on "suffering", are so similar that the careless reader skimming over the text might well conclude that life is evil and the deepest truth requires one to inflict unnecessary suffering on others. His many references are seldom very pertinent to the subject at hand and are primarily displayed to dazzle and impress the unsophisticated reader, who little realizes that a reference to Neil deGrasse Tyson or Prince would have been just as relevant to the point being made as the scientific study cited or the Pareto Principle. One of the most entertaining aspects of the book is the way that Peterson never permits his failure to correctly grasp a concept to stand in the way of his brandishing it like a child flashing a fake F.B.I. badge.
Or, more ominously, like a woman's stalker flashing a fake police badge at her door. For there is a method to Peterson's textual madness. Every deeper concept is presented and discussed in the most nebulous, most vague, and most plausibly deniable manner. Peterson is slippery and evasive about his own beliefs throughout the book, and only the most well-informed, most careful reader who has a sufficient grasp of the various theologies and philosophies that Peterson references so freely can hope to discern what Peterson actually believes with any reasonable degree of confidence.
But the intellectual fog can be penetrated by an attentive reader. Jordan Peterson is not, in contrast to the incorrect assumptions of many of his readers and critics alike, a Christian or a man of the Right. Nor is he a courageous intellectual, to the contrary, he is a deeply terrified individual. More importantly, he is not a man dedicated to the truth, at least, not the truth in the conventional sense in which in the term is usually understood by the average English-speaking individual, which is why the 12 Rules of Life ultimately amounts to pseudo-intellectual sleight-of-hand meant to direct the reader down the false path of Peterson's post-Christian philosophy, which for lack of an existing term we might as well christen Jordanetics.
It is strange that the book's primary objective is so little recognized by its readers, considering that Peterson all but spells it out in both the title of the book as well as its coda. We are told that The 12 Rules are an antidote to chaos, but as Peterson fans are often quick to point out, they are not only practical rules for everyday living, but metaphors for larger concepts as well. And the metaphorical chaos to which Peterson refers in the title is not a messy room, but a messy world that terrifies him, and which he has come to save by creating order out of the chaos with his "newfound Pen of Light."
The best way to illustrate the never-ending stream of references that serve as Peterson's reasoning is to simply quote the book, in this case, a section of his chapter explaining the rule that you should treat yourself like someone you are responsible for helping. And if you find yourself wondering what in the world Anton Chekhov, snakes, Michaelangelo's Pietà, Oedipal nightmares, arboreal evolutionary adaptations, and the Garden of Eden actually have to do with the importance of taking your prescribed medications, the answer is absolutely nothing.
Text Sample: There is simply no way to wall off some isolated portion of the greater surrounding reality and make everything permanently predictable and safe within it. Some of what has been no-matter-how-carefully excluded will always sneak back in. A serpent, metaphorically speaking, will inevitably appear. Even the most assiduous of parents cannot fully protect their children, even if they lock them in the basement, safely away from drugs, alcohol and internet porn. In that extreme case, the too-cautious, too-caring parent merely substitutes him or herself for the other terrible problems of life. This is the great Freudian Oedipal nightmare. It is far better to render Beings in your care competent than to protect them.
And even if it were possible to permanently banish everything threatening—everything dangerous (and, therefore, everything challenging and interesting), that would mean only that another danger would emerge: that of permanent human infantilism and absolute uselessness. How could the nature of man ever reach its full potential without challenge and danger? How dull and contemptible would we become if there was no longer reason to pay attention? Maybe God thought His new creation would be able to handle the serpent, and considered its presence the lesser of two evils.Question for parents: do you want to make your children safe, or strong?
In any case, there’s a serpent in the Garden, and he’s a “subtil” beast, according to the ancient story (difficult to see, vaporous, cunning, deceitful and treacherous). It therefore comes as no surprise when he decides to play a trick on Eve. Why Eve, instead of Adam? It could just be chance. It was fifty-fifty for Eve, statistically speaking, and those are pretty high odds. But I have learned that these old stories contain nothing superfluous. Anything accidental—anything that does not serve the plot—has long been forgotten in the telling. As the Russian playwright Anton Chekhov advised, “If there is a rifle hanging on the wall in act one, it must be fired in the next act. Otherwise it has no business being there.” Perhaps primordial Eve had more reason to attend to serpents than Adam. Maybe they were more likely, for example, to prey on her tree-dwelling infants. Perhaps it is for this reason that Eve’s daughters are more protective, self-conscious, fearful and nervous, to this day (even, and especially, in the most egalitarian of modern human societies). In any case, the serpent tells Eve that if she eats the forbidden fruit, she won’t die. Instead, her eyes will be opened. She will become like God, knowing good from evil. Of course, the serpent doesn’t let her know she will be like God in only that one way. But he is a serpent, after all. Being human, and wanting to know more, Eve decides to eat the fruit. Poof! She wakes up: she’s conscious, or perhaps self-conscious, for the first time.
Now, no clear-seeing, conscious woman is going to tolerate an unawakened man. So, Eve immediately shares the fruit with Adam. That makes him self-conscious. Little has changed. Women have been making men self-conscious since the beginning of time. They do this primarily by rejecting them—but they also do it by shaming them, if men do not take responsibility. Since women bear the primary burden of reproduction, it’s no wonder. It is very hard to see how it could be otherwise. But the capacity of women to shame men and render them self-conscious is still a primal force of nature.
Now, you may ask: what in the world have snakes got to do with vision? Well, first, it’s clearly of some importance to see them, because they might prey on you (particularly when you’re little and live in trees, like our arboreal ancestors). Dr. Lynn Isbell, professor of anthropology and animal behaviour at the University of California, has suggested that the stunningly acute vision almost uniquely possessed by human beings was an adaptation forced on us tens of millions of years ago by the necessity of detecting and avoiding the terrible danger of snakes, with whom our ancestors co-evolved. This is perhaps one of the reasons the snake features in the garden of Paradise as the creature who gave us the vision of God (in addition to serving as the primordial and eternal enemy of mankind). This is perhaps one of the reasons why Mary, the eternal, archetypal mother—Eve perfected—is so commonly shown in medieval and Renaissance iconography holding the Christ Child in the air, as far away as possible from a predatory reptile, which she has firmly pinned under her foot. And there’s more. It’s fruit that the snake offers, and fruit is also associated with a transformation of vision, in that our ability to see color is an adaptation that allows us to rapidly detect the ripe and therefore edible bounty of trees.
Our primordial parents hearkened to the snake. They ate the fruit. Their eyes opened. They both awoke. You might think, as Eve did initially, that this would be a good thing. Sometimes, however, half a gift is worse than none. Adam and Eve wake up, all right, but only enough to discover some terrible things. First, they notice that they’re naked.
(Taken from Vox Popoli)
I struggled with the individualist focus until I grasped it would be the natural approach of a psychologist i.e. set your own house in order before you criticise the world (another of Peterson’s rules) and the book’s being marketed as self-help. As the author opened up how social activism can be fuelled by grievance more than generosity I recalled spiritual counsel on holiness as key to fruitful activism, how much you do mattering less than how much love’s in the action. Another thing that grated with me was his ‘realism’ about winner-takes-all human achievement and new take on Matthew 25:29, ‘the Matthew Principle … the harshest statement ever attributed to Christ: “to those who have everything, more will be given; from those who have nothing, everything will be taken.” Peterson defends hierarchy in business and elsewhere as something forged by achievement. ‘The order that is most real is the order that is most unchanging - and that is not necessarily the order that is most easily seen. The leaf, when perceived, might blind the observer to the tree. The tree can blind him to the forest. And some things that are most real (such as the ever-present dominance hierarchy) cannot be “seen” at all’’.
Seeing, opening eyes to what’s real, however unpalatable, is a refrain flowing through this hard hitting, controversial book. I found the heavily illustrated section on parenting insightful. ‘You can discipline your children, or you can turn that responsibility over to the harsh, uncaring judgmental world - and the motivation for the latter decision should never be confused with love… Infants are like blind people, searching for a wall. They have to push forward, and test, to see where the actual boundaries lie (and those are too-seldom where they are said to be)... What no means, in the final analysis, is always “If you continue to do that, something you do not like will happen to you.” Otherwise it means nothing. Or, worse, it means “another nonsensical nothing muttered by ignorable adults.” Or, worse still, it means, “all adults are ineffectual and weak.”’
As softee churchman I’m embarrassed by the Sermon on the Mount and few writers have so winsomely used it to invite I pull my socks up as Peterson does. ‘Aim high’ is his frequent rejoinder true to Christ. ‘Start to stop doing what you know to be wrong. Start stopping today. Don’t waste time questioning how you know what you’re doing is wrong, if you are certain that it is’. The book starts with the rule to ‘stand up straight with your shoulders back’ and goes on to encourage ‘metaphysical standing up’ based on positive self-regard linked to the meaning of life. The central section of the book is on pursuing what’s meaningful rather than what’s expedient. It contains Dostoyevsky’s story of Christ brought before a cynical, ruthless Inquisitor representing the worst aspect of the church’s legalistic dogmatism. Christ endures him, kisses and confounds him in a pointer to his divinity triumphing historically over sinful human failings in his church. Religion is important to Peterson - Christianity especially - but this as the pursuit of goodness more than obedience, though that unfashionable quality is addressed throughout ‘12 Rules for Life’.
The book’s sub-heading is ‘antidote to chaos’. ‘We require routine and tradition. That’s order. Order can become excessive, and that’s not good, but chaos can swamp us, so we drown - and that is also not good. We need to stay on the straight and narrow path. Each of the twelve rules of this book - and their accompanying essays - therefore provide a guide to being there. “There” is the dividing line between order and chaos. That’s where we are simultaneously stable enough, exploring enough, transforming enough, repairing enough, and cooperating enough. It’s there we find the meaning that justifies life and its inevitable suffering.’ One of the richest theological themes is on how meaning can be brought to suffering among, for example, those who place faith in God’s kingdom and the triumph of truth. The author is burdened by the intense evil of Soviet communism - he quotes Solzhenitsyn - Hitler and the Holocaust seeing the biblical narrative illuminating the source of this evil in human refusal to walk with God. ‘If we wish to take care of ourselves properly, we would have to respect ourselves - but we don’t, because we are - not least in our own eyes - fallen creatures. If we lived in Truth; if we spoke the Truth - then we could walk with God once again, and respect ourselves, and others, and the world. Then we might treat ourselves like people we cared for. We might strive to set the world straight. We might orient it toward Heaven, where we would want people we cared for to dwell, instead of Hell, where our resentment and hatred would eternally sentence everyone.’ Jordan Peterson has some intriguing thoughts on creation. Maybe God, who is without limitation, acted to form limited beings so as to increase his glory through choices by human beings made in his image to grow into his likeness. The power of the book is in its wake-up call to such transformation, the gaining of character through suffering and refusal to hide from what’s true.
In defence of free speech Jordan Peterson recently challenged a Canadian human rights law forcing professors to address trans students by their preferred pronouns which has brought him mixed fame. This book digs deep into what helps individual flourishing. It is a positive yet challenging thesis and some of the challenge is to current rethinking of gender and male-female relations. ‘Our society faces the increasing call to deconstruct its stabilizing traditions to include smaller and smaller numbers of people who do not or will not fit into the categories upon which even our perceptions are based. This is not a good thing. Each person’s private trouble cannot be solved by a social revolution, because revolutions are destabilizing and dangerous... the so-called oppression of patriarchy was instead an imperfect collective attempt by men and women, stretching over millennia, to free each other from privation, disease and drudgery’.
If Peterson pays a price for standing against the tide this is not evident in the book where the main autobiographical detail concerns the health crisis of his daughter and another price paid: that of prolonged suffering and its impact on his family. They look for what’s meaningful and sustaining and find wisdom to shrink their time frame and live day by day rather than looking months and years ahead. This tactical approach complements the strategic thrust of a book rich with insights and illustrations about seeking a vision of transformation and following lines to accomplish that end. It is powerful in its realism about human waywardness and the problem of evil as well as in its applause of ancient wisdom including Christianity. ‘Life is short, and you don’t have time to figure everything out on your own. The wisdom of the past was hard-earned and your dead ancestors may have something useful to tell you’. That’s a pragmatic quotation to conclude this appreciation of a book about adopting life-changing principles that will get people talking and hopefully get some of them changing for the better.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on June 7, 2018
I struggled with the individualist focus until I grasped it would be the natural approach of a psychologist i.e. set your own house in order before you criticise the world (another of Peterson’s rules) and the book’s being marketed as self-help. As the author opened up how social activism can be fuelled by grievance more than generosity I recalled spiritual counsel on holiness as key to fruitful activism, how much you do mattering less than how much love’s in the action. Another thing that grated with me was his ‘realism’ about winner-takes-all human achievement and new take on Matthew 25:29, ‘the Matthew Principle … the harshest statement ever attributed to Christ: “to those who have everything, more will be given; from those who have nothing, everything will be taken.” Peterson defends hierarchy in business and elsewhere as something forged by achievement. ‘The order that is most real is the order that is most unchanging - and that is not necessarily the order that is most easily seen. The leaf, when perceived, might blind the observer to the tree. The tree can blind him to the forest. And some things that are most real (such as the ever-present dominance hierarchy) cannot be “seen” at all’’.
Seeing, opening eyes to what’s real, however unpalatable, is a refrain flowing through this hard hitting, controversial book. I found the heavily illustrated section on parenting insightful. ‘You can discipline your children, or you can turn that responsibility over to the harsh, uncaring judgmental world - and the motivation for the latter decision should never be confused with love… Infants are like blind people, searching for a wall. They have to push forward, and test, to see where the actual boundaries lie (and those are too-seldom where they are said to be)... What no means, in the final analysis, is always “If you continue to do that, something you do not like will happen to you.” Otherwise it means nothing. Or, worse, it means “another nonsensical nothing muttered by ignorable adults.” Or, worse still, it means, “all adults are ineffectual and weak.”’
As softee churchman I’m embarrassed by the Sermon on the Mount and few writers have so winsomely used it to invite I pull my socks up as Peterson does. ‘Aim high’ is his frequent rejoinder true to Christ. ‘Start to stop doing what you know to be wrong. Start stopping today. Don’t waste time questioning how you know what you’re doing is wrong, if you are certain that it is’. The book starts with the rule to ‘stand up straight with your shoulders back’ and goes on to encourage ‘metaphysical standing up’ based on positive self-regard linked to the meaning of life. The central section of the book is on pursuing what’s meaningful rather than what’s expedient. It contains Dostoyevsky’s story of Christ brought before a cynical, ruthless Inquisitor representing the worst aspect of the church’s legalistic dogmatism. Christ endures him, kisses and confounds him in a pointer to his divinity triumphing historically over sinful human failings in his church. Religion is important to Peterson - Christianity especially - but this as the pursuit of goodness more than obedience, though that unfashionable quality is addressed throughout ‘12 Rules for Life’.
The book’s sub-heading is ‘antidote to chaos’. ‘We require routine and tradition. That’s order. Order can become excessive, and that’s not good, but chaos can swamp us, so we drown - and that is also not good. We need to stay on the straight and narrow path. Each of the twelve rules of this book - and their accompanying essays - therefore provide a guide to being there. “There” is the dividing line between order and chaos. That’s where we are simultaneously stable enough, exploring enough, transforming enough, repairing enough, and cooperating enough. It’s there we find the meaning that justifies life and its inevitable suffering.’ One of the richest theological themes is on how meaning can be brought to suffering among, for example, those who place faith in God’s kingdom and the triumph of truth. The author is burdened by the intense evil of Soviet communism - he quotes Solzhenitsyn - Hitler and the Holocaust seeing the biblical narrative illuminating the source of this evil in human refusal to walk with God. ‘If we wish to take care of ourselves properly, we would have to respect ourselves - but we don’t, because we are - not least in our own eyes - fallen creatures. If we lived in Truth; if we spoke the Truth - then we could walk with God once again, and respect ourselves, and others, and the world. Then we might treat ourselves like people we cared for. We might strive to set the world straight. We might orient it toward Heaven, where we would want people we cared for to dwell, instead of Hell, where our resentment and hatred would eternally sentence everyone.’ Jordan Peterson has some intriguing thoughts on creation. Maybe God, who is without limitation, acted to form limited beings so as to increase his glory through choices by human beings made in his image to grow into his likeness. The power of the book is in its wake-up call to such transformation, the gaining of character through suffering and refusal to hide from what’s true.
In defence of free speech Jordan Peterson recently challenged a Canadian human rights law forcing professors to address trans students by their preferred pronouns which has brought him mixed fame. This book digs deep into what helps individual flourishing. It is a positive yet challenging thesis and some of the challenge is to current rethinking of gender and male-female relations. ‘Our society faces the increasing call to deconstruct its stabilizing traditions to include smaller and smaller numbers of people who do not or will not fit into the categories upon which even our perceptions are based. This is not a good thing. Each person’s private trouble cannot be solved by a social revolution, because revolutions are destabilizing and dangerous... the so-called oppression of patriarchy was instead an imperfect collective attempt by men and women, stretching over millennia, to free each other from privation, disease and drudgery’.
If Peterson pays a price for standing against the tide this is not evident in the book where the main autobiographical detail concerns the health crisis of his daughter and another price paid: that of prolonged suffering and its impact on his family. They look for what’s meaningful and sustaining and find wisdom to shrink their time frame and live day by day rather than looking months and years ahead. This tactical approach complements the strategic thrust of a book rich with insights and illustrations about seeking a vision of transformation and following lines to accomplish that end. It is powerful in its realism about human waywardness and the problem of evil as well as in its applause of ancient wisdom including Christianity. ‘Life is short, and you don’t have time to figure everything out on your own. The wisdom of the past was hard-earned and your dead ancestors may have something useful to tell you’. That’s a pragmatic quotation to conclude this appreciation of a book about adopting life-changing principles that will get people talking and hopefully get some of them changing for the better.
-------------------------------
Grundsätzliches
-------------------------------
Dies ist die Originalfassung, d.h. das Buch ist vollständig in Englisch. Ich kann jedem nur empfehlen, diese Fassung zu lesen, denn mehr noch als in vielen anderen Werken, ist dieses nicht verlustfrei übersetzbar. Jordan Peterson hält sich das meiste Buch hinweg streng an seine eigene 10te Regel: "Be precise in your speech". Es ist schnell klar, dass er seine Worte mit großer Sorgfalt wählt; dies ist kein Roman. Zweitere leiden nicht derart unter Übersetzungen in andere Sprachen.
Das Buch hat 409 nummerierte Seiten, und das Hardcover ist attraktiv wie widerstandsfähig; die Schriftgröße ist angenehm groß und leicht lesbar. Ich fühle mich in meiner Entscheidung für diese Version bestätigt.
Wichtig: Die in meinen Augen beste Art das Buch zu lesen, ist ein Kapitel, und danach eine Woche zu pausieren, bevor man zum nächsten geht. Das gibt einem Zeit über die Inhalte zu reflektieren, und den Inhalt in kleinen Arten in sein Leben zu integrieren. Außerdem läuft man andernfalls Gefahr, auszubrennen; und ich kann mir keinen schlimmeren Bärendienst vorstellen, als das Buch in einem Zug durchzulesen.
-------------------------------
Inhalt ("Spoilerfrei")
-------------------------------
Nicht, dass man den Inhalt spoilern könnte.
Eine Freundin fragte mich, worum es in dem Buch geht, und ob ich ihr den Inhalt zusammenfassen könnte; nachdem ich ihr von einigen Ideen aus einem Kapitel erzählte. Wieder gilt: Dies ist kein Roman. Es sind 12 Kapitel (Zuzüglich eines lesenswerten Vorwortes), die jeweils eine der titulären Regeln darstellen.
Manchmal beginnen die Kapitel mit einer Geschichte/einem Mythos (Dies kann aus einer Weltreligion, aber auch einem Disneyfilm gegriffen sein), manchmal sind es wissenschaftliche Statistiken/Fakten (Das erste Kapitel befasst sich rasch mit dem territorialen Verhalten von Hummern), manchmal sind es persönliche Erlebnisse des Autors. Sie alle haben den selben Zweck: Das Erklären der Wichtigkeit der Regel.
Manche Leser werden womöglich vor den Kopf gestoßen sein, 15 Seiten lang von Geschehnissen und philosophischen Ideen zu lesen, bevor sie "an den Kern" der Sache kommen; denn in der Tat kulminiert jedes Kapitel am Ende zu der titulären Regel. Doch jede Regel ist nur so sinnvoll, wie das Ziel, das sie hat; und es muss zunächst etabliert werden, welches dieses ist; oft, indem der Verlauf konsequenten Nichtbeachtens betrachtet wird. Eine Regel ohne "Warum" ist sinnlos, und dafür wird mitunter weit ausgeholt.
Sei es aufgrund dieser Abstraktionsebene, der messerscharfen aber dennoch bodenständigen Sprache, oder schlicht der vorliegenden Thematik: Mein Gehirn brummte nach jedem Kapitel, ich fühlte mich wie berauscht, und als würde ich die Welt ein wenig besser verstehen. Und tatsächlich ist es die Welt, die man besser versteht; und das war ein Anspruch, den ich beim Kauf nicht einmal hatte. Ich wollte mich besser verstehen. Doch wenn es "klickt", klickt es oft nicht nur lokal; und Peterson ist stets erpicht darauf, größere Zusammenhänge aufzuzeigen.
Als illustratives Beispiel nehme ich Regel 5 ("Do not let your children do anything that makes you dislike them"). Dieses Kapitel diskutiert die Beziehung zwischen Eltern und Kind, und kann auf 3 Arten gelesen werden:
1) Als (werdender) Elternteil.
2) Als "Kind", d.h. als die Dinge, die man in seiner Kindheit und Erziehung erfahren hat (Speziell wenn sie negativ war).
3) Als "unbeteiligter" Erwachsener, der in fremden Kindern oder Erwachsenen Defizite sieht und versteht.
Dabei schränkt sich Peterson nicht auf eine Perpektive ein, und ein aufmerksamer Leser nimmt alle 3 während des Lesens ein. Dies ist exemplarisch, und andere Kapitel sind ähnlich ergiebig; auch, wenn zweifellos manche Kapitel stärker in Erinnerung bleiben als andere.
Die 12 Kapitel versuchen jeweils für sich zu stehen; gekapselte Teile innerhalb des Buches (Auch wenn es unweigerlich Überlappungen gibt). Sollte jemand daher auf die Idee kommen, die Kapitel in anderer Reihenfolge zu lesen, möchte ich aber dennoch davon abraten.
-------------------------------
Fazit
-------------------------------
Dieses Buch verdient sämtliches Lob, das es bekommt. Es ist ein "Lebensratgeber", ohne ein Lebensratgeber zu sein. Es ist nicht esoterisch, vage, oder beschönigt Dinge. Es lies mich mehrmals laut auflachen, verlor aber nie an Seriösität. Es zeigt dem Leser auf, dass _er_ schuld an seinem Leid ist, und es erklärt warum; und zeigt konkrete Auswege. Auch wenn der Leser oft schlucken muss, denn die Wahrheit ist bekanntlich eine bittere Medizin, geht der Autor sorgsam mit dem Leser um, und bleibt bei aller Härte (Und unterschätzt nicht die Härte) fair.
Wenn Ihnen die Rezension gefallen hat, bitte ich um ein "Upvote", um sie für andere sichtbarer zu machen.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zielgruppe / Meine Person
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ich sagte eingangs, dass ich überzeugt bin, dass jeder Mensch etwas aus diesem Buch mitnehmen kann. Ich stehe dazu, aber möchte auch nicht verleugnen, dass einige Personen eher in die "Zielgruppe" fallen, als andere. Daher möchte ich kurz über mich persönlich sprechen:
Ich bin 27 Jahre alt, männlich, studiere Technische Physik, arbeite im weitesten Sinn als Programmierer, bin in Wien geboren und aufgewachsen. Ich habe seit meinem 13ten Lebensjahr wiederkehrende Selbstmordgedanken, habe schwere Verlustängste und Angst vor sozialer Ausgrenzung, kämpfe viele Jahre mit der empfundenen Sinnlosigkeit meines Lebens, gehe seit 2 Monaten (auf eigenen Wunsch) in Psychotherapie; und leide seit durchgehend 2 Jahren unter der Krebserkrankung meiner Mutter, die in den kommenden Monaten daran versterben wird.
Mancher Leser wird sich nun denken, dass das ein schweres "Packerl" ist; aber die offensichtliche Wahrheit ist, dass ein erheblicher Anteil der modernen Bevölkerung ähnliches (oder Schlimmeres) erzählen könnte. Auch wenn Frauen und Männer wohl zahlenmäßig ähnlich betroffen sind: Wenn Sie ein Mann sind, haben Sie vermutlich mit kaum jemanden jemals darüber gesprochen. Vielleicht wollen Sie stark sein, vielleicht wollen Sie andere nicht belasten; vielleicht wollen Sie sich auch einfach nur nicht damit auseinandersetzen, in der Hoffnung, die Probleme verschwinden von alleine. Womöglich sind Sie einsam (Auch hier sind Männer deutlich stärker betroffen), und haben gar nicht die Möglichkeit, sich Rat und Trost von anderer Stelle zu holen.
Ich kann und konnte nie etwas mit Esoterik anfangen. Ich glaube nicht an Hokuspokus, ich glaube nicht an einen Gott. Ich bin kopflastig, fühle mich in Tatsachen und Pragmatismus wohl, aber bin keine herzlose Maschine. Ich will nicht belogen werden, um mich in den Augen des Lügenden besser zu fühlen; ich will die Wahrheit - so hart sie auch sei - damit ich meine Fehler verringern, und als Persönlichkeit wachsen kann. Und ich fühle mich oft leer, fühle einen Hunger nach etwas, dass ich oft selbst nicht deuten kann.
Wenn Sie sich in dem obigen Text wiederfinden können, dann kann ich Ihnen das Buch ohne Vorbehalte empfehlen.
Wenn Sie lieber alle Dinge durch die Blume hören, wenn es Ihnen schwer fällt, zu differenzieren (Ich habe Rezensenten gesehen, die meinen, Peterson sei ein konservativer Christ. Selbige Leute würden wohl auch sagen, Schindler war ein Nazi), oder viele(!) festgefahrene Überzeugungen haben, die Sie auf keinen Fall aufgeben wollen, sind Sie bei diesem Buch wohl falsch.


















































