52
53

Andrew Potter resigns from McGill position after Quebec column flap (theglobeandmail.com)

TurtleStrangulation が 投稿

全 158 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]professeurbambam 40 ポイント41 ポイント  (7子コメント)

The man is a RESEARCHER and his entire career revolved on maintaining a high level of credibility.

He published an article where he presented as "facts" information that was disproved within minutes of publication.

He recognized himself that he did not research his so-called "facts" and that he wrote things that were patently false.

As a researcher, he torpedoed his own credibility and, because of it, he cast on himself a shadow of doubt that will put in question all of his past and future research results in the academic world.

As a researcher, one is expected to fact-check himself. he didn't.

[–]jfp51Québec 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

YES, the people saying people in QC are butt-hurt about the criticism, such whiners yada yada (same drivel I have heard from a small segment of the ROC for 40 years) are wrong.

My first reaction when I read it (I am a francophone) was that it was a shame that his many good points were buried under hyperbole, lies and poor research. As a PhD student, I would be expelled if I wrote something like that.

90% of people in QC discussing the article recognize our shortcomings and welcome the discussion about it. We just don`t like exagerations and falsehoods.

We are not perfect here, trust us, we know that.

[–]Gorrest-Fump [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Agreed. The social capital survey he cited has sound methodology and is worth discussing (incidentally, it was conducted by Martin Turcotte, who has his PhD from INRS in Quebec - and the study deals mostly with national data from all of Canada).

But when I read the Potter article, my jaw dropped at the obvious inaccuracies. I have never in my life been offered two separate cheques at a restaurant, nor have I ever heard of that happening to anyone else. And while I have received $50 bills at an ATM, it was only when I withdrew $300 or more - which I consider to be a convenience for the customer, not some shady scheme to bilk the system.

More to the point, I can't believe he pressed "send" on that article without realizing that there would be some serious blowback. It confirms to my mind that he really doesn't understand Quebec, except in the most superficial way.

[–]lemartineauQuébec [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

He will now be seeking a career in politics south of the border

[–]Pirate_Ben 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think its reasonable for him to resign as director of the Institute for the study of Canada but keep his professorship. His article was possibly one of the worst pieces of trash I have read in a long time. That said I am always against crucifying people over a single mistake.

[–]tupac_chopra [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

ya, that was my thought. it's becoming rarer these days to see people own up to their mistakes – and he's more or less done that.

[–]Typical_that_placeOutside Canada 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (12子コメント)

The guy used his position as director of a prestigious faculty to give credibility to his retarded views. it's understandable why McGill didn't like that.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

He didn't "use his position" in the slightest. He just wrote an article (one backed up by a myriad of surveys), and happened to have that position.

[–]9797Québec 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

As soon as I saw the article, I checked who he was, and McGill is the first thing I saw.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Okay? That doesn't mean he was using his position. Using his position would have been doing something in his official capacity. He didn't do that. He wrote an article, which listed his position (as they do with everyone).

[–]gbinasia [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

And most likely got the space to write this kind of garbage in the first place because of the position he holds.

[–]kownieow -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

How did he use his position to do that? I don't think there were any references to it in the article....

[–]Typical_that_placeOutside Canada 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The very last line of the article : Andrew Potter is the Director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada.

[–]kownieow 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Okay, I think that is not part of his article. Isn't that added by the editors? So, I would disagree that he used his position to support the credibility of his views. Maybe the magazine is guilty of that in this instance.

[–]kyara_no_kurayami 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

He only recently became a professor. He was a well-respected journalist before taking on that role. I'm sure that's the position that got him the space in Maclean's to write this article.

[–]PlaydoughMonsterQuébec 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (27子コメント)

It all boils down to: The legitimacy of the research institute would be compromised were he to stay at the helm. Thus, he has to leave.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (26子コメント)

Bullshit it would. Even if we, for the sake of argument, dismiss the article as complete drivel, that doesn't prove or even imply that he's incapable of performing his role adequately.

[–]TurtleStrangulation[S] 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (25子コメント)

that doesn't prove or even imply that he's incapable of performing his role adequately.

You need credibility to hold his position. His credibility took a severe blow after the article.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (24子コメント)

How so? Because he came to a conclusion that you don't like?

[–]TurtleStrangulation[S] 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The tone and the rhetoric in his article is very unacademic.

Not to mention the whole premise of his article is flawed: the drivers who were stranded on highway 13 during the storm night told the media that there were lots of displays of solidarity by other drivers during that night: people inviting out-of-gas drivers to warm up in their cars, others distributing food, shoveling snow, letting others use their phones, etc. Also, it turns out the truck driver in front didn't really refuse to be towed.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The tone and the rhetoric in his article is very unacademic.

He wasn't writing it in his academic capacity, so why does that matter?

Insofar as the rest, it's clear that this traffic incident was just a platform for Mr. Potter to make a greater point. It was a point which was rather blunt, and probably could have used a healthy amount of polish, but regardless I fail to see how it at all impacts his academic credibility.

[–]jfp51Québec 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (10子コメント)

No, the salient points (and there are many) in his article are buried under lies, bad statistics and hyperbole. Unbecoming of an academic, especially at McGill.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -3 ポイント-2 ポイント  (9子コメント)

It has absolutely no bearing on his ability to do his job, nor on his credibility in general.

[–]AkesgerothQuébec 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The fact that he'll publish grotesque lies has no bearing on his credibility.

Just like stealing something doesn't make you a thief apparently.

[–]jfp51Québec 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (5子コメント)

So lying does not affect credibility in your world. Not a world I want to be a part of, but each their own.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Except he didn't lie. Well, he presented one false fact, but that was soon after amended.

[–]jfp51Québec 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Are you for real? He presented multiple false facts (lies is the word you have trouble with) and I don't know in which universe they were amended, they are all still on the Maclean's website. Let me guess, alternative facts are facts in your world?

[–]AkesgerothQuébec 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Because he lied.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (9子コメント)

What are his lies?

[–]AkesgerothQuébec [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

I wonder how many times you've asked this, got your answer and promptly forgot it? But here it is again:

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/how-a-snowstorm-exposed-quebecs-real-problem-social-malaise/

The article has been edited since it was published because it had two such outright blatant lies it might actually get them in legal trouble:

We also wish to correct two errors of fact. Due to an editing error, a reference in an earlier version of this piece noted that “every restaurant” offered two bills. We have clarified this to say “some restaurants will offer you two bills.”

Not only was this complete bullshit, but it remains complete bullshit. "Some restaurants." Right. Let's be vague, maybe it can slip under the radar. Yet even then, these idiots don't realize that the second "bill" they get isn't a bill, it's a sales registry module, which is a tool to fight against fraud.

We have also removed a reference in an earlier version noting that “bank machines routinely dispense fifties by default.”

The second part which was such bullshit that they had to remove it because it might lead to legal action. But as you saw from before (changing "every" to "some" for plausible deniability), that doesn't mean the rest was true. It just means the rest was worded in a way which allows them to pretend they didn't actually say that or that it was just an opinion.

Compared to the rest of the country, Quebec is an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital that other Canadians take for granted.

There's another lie.

But you don’t have to live in a place like Montreal very long to experience the tension between that self-image and the facts on the ground. The absence of solidarity manifests itself in so many different ways that it becomes part of the background hiss of the city.

Oops, another lie. Funny this one, considering that the stranded people were helping each other out so much.

To start with one glaring example, the police here don’t wear proper uniforms. Since 2014, municipal police across the province have worn pink, yellow, and red clownish camo pants as a protest against provincial pension reforms. They have also plastered their cruisers with stickers demanding “libre nego”—”free negotiations”—and in many cases the stickers actually cover up the police service logo. The EMS workers have now joined in; nothing says you’re in good hands like being driven to the hospital in an ambulance covered in stickers that read “On Strike.” While this might speak to the limited virtues of collective bargaining, the broader impact on social cohesion and trust in institutions remains corrosive

So now protesting is proof that the people of Quebec are a hateful, divided, intolerant people.

And it’s not just restaurants and the various housing contractors or garage owners who insist on cash—it’s also the family doctor, or the ultrasound clinic.

Hahaha, as a healthcare worker, what a fucking load of shit. If you think people pay "under the table" for regular transactions, you're a fucking moron. The "under the table" portion of the economy mostly concerns income and contractor work. You don't go to the fucking convenience store and pay cash to avoid taxes.

Maybe all this isn’t a huge deal. Sure, Quebec does have the largest underground economy as a proportion of GDP in Canada, but it’s only slightly bigger than that of British Columbia.

Oh my, let's look at that link of his! Must have some impressive data to back that up, right?

...oh. 0.7% higher than the national average. Oops. Looks like the data was presented in a skewed manner. Looks like someone is driving a narrative. Looks like someone is lying.

Then he links to a massive fucking study by Statistics Canada to justify a bunch of claims, failing to link specifically to the portions of the study. "Just look in there, it's there somewhere." I don't play that game. But I'll take just one of his statements backed up by that study:

The proportion of people who report having zero close friends is highest in Quebec, and quadruple that of people living in top-rated Prince Edward Island.

First of all, comparing a massive fucking province to a tiny island province. Yes, in a small village, people will be less isolated from each other than in a huge city. What a fucking surprise. But hell, guess what? I tried to find out where he got that, and as usual,

We are sorry! This web page is currently unavailable. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Right. How inconvenient. But let's keep going:

But the numbers show that it is close to inconceivable that this could happen anywhere else in the country. For most of these figures, Quebec isn’t just at the lower end of a relatively narrow spectrum: rather, most of the country is bunched up, with Quebec as a significant outlier.

A fucking lie, as exposed by how he interpreted a 0.7% higher rate of "underground GDP" as being immense.

And then a serious winter storm hits, and there is social breakdown at every stage.

The social breakdown was at the middle management level, as is usual in Quebec. As in that's another lie. Never mind that he skips the reason for this, which is that some people keep voting for the liberals no matter what.

This article is lies, lies, lies and more lies. And for the record, everyone knows that it's not "Quebec" which was targeted, it was "french canadians". The people making such delightful claims are always the first to praise the anglophone and multicultural portions of the population of Quebec. When they want to have their bigotry boner, they go for Quebec as a whole because, you know, again, plausible deniability.

[–]OttoVonGosu [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

hey look he didnt respond

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

The article has been edited since it was published because it had two such outright blatant lies

So... you're saying that they addressed the problem...

"Some restaurants." Right. Let's be vague, maybe it can slip under the radar.

You don't think some restaurants do that?

..social capital that other Canadians take for granted.

There's another lie.

Not if the statistics he mentions are even slightly correct.

...background hiss of the city.

Oops, another lie. Funny this one, considering that the stranded people were helping each other out so much.

That wasn't in direct reference to the traffic incident, it was a general statement. While I agree that it wasn't necessarily accurate for the traffic incident, and that in general the traffic incident was a poor vehicle for his article, that doesn't necessarily make it an untrue statement.

...in institutions remains corrosive

So now protesting is proof that the people of Quebec are a hateful, divided, intolerant people.

You may not agree with his conclusion, but that doesn't make it a lie. Also, he makes no mention of hatefulness, intolerance, or even necessarily division.

...or the ultrasound clinic.

Hahaha, as a healthcare worker, what a fucking load of shit. If you think people pay "under the table" for regular transactions, you're a fucking moron. The "under the table" portion of the economy mostly concerns income and contractor work. You don't go to the fucking convenience store and pay cash to avoid taxes.

You may be right, and it's on him to substantiate his assertion. But even so, it's premature to dismiss this as an absolute falsehood.

...but it’s only slightly bigger than that of British Columbia.

Oh my, let's look at that link of his! Must have some impressive data to back that up, right?

...oh. 0.7% higher than the national average. Oops. Looks like the data was presented in a skewed manner. Looks like someone is driving a narrative. Looks like someone is lying.

I don't think you understand what a "lie" is. It was misleading perhaps, but that doesn't make it false.

...top-rated Prince Edward Island.

First of all, comparing a massive fucking province to a tiny island province. Yes, in a small village, people will be less isolated from each other than in a huge city. What a fucking surprise. But hell, guess what? I tried to find out where he got that, and as usual,

We are sorry! This web page is currently unavailable. We apologize for any inconvenience.

You likely have a point about the PEI comparison, but that doesn't change the fact that Quebec is still last, and that in any case that isn't a lie. Insofar as the missing link, I'd be interested in seeing you substantiate your implication that he intentionally used it and is making the statistic up.

...Quebec as a significant outlier.

A fucking lie, as exposed by how he interpreted a 0.7% higher rate of "underground GDP" as being immense.

Not a lie, because there are still other statistics in there upon which to make that conclusion (e.g. trust).

And then a serious winter storm hits, and there is social breakdown at every stage.

The social breakdown was at the middle management level, as is usual in Quebec. As in that's another lie. Never mind that he skips the reason for this, which is that some people keep voting for the liberals no matter what.

It's obviously just hyperbole for rhetorical effect, but for the sake of argument I'll give you that one.

This article is lies, lies, lies and more lies.

If you fundamentally misunderstand the definition of "lie", perhaps.

Look, I can see that you're very upset about this, and that you're quite sensitive about criticisms of your nation. I get that- you have historically oft gotten the short end of the stick. But you are massively overblowing Mr. Potter's actions.

[–]AkesgerothQuébec [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

So... you're saying that they addressed the problem...

Not reading or replying to the rest. You start with dishonest bullshit like that, you're not worth my time.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

In other words,

I'm too lazy to read what you wrote/I know you're right and I don't want to admit it.

[–]elhombrerojo 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm so sick of hearing "The views of X doesn't represent the views of X organization".

[–]ffwiffo 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Apparently it's implicit they do, lest you be fired.

[–]OttoVonGosu 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Hopefully it doesnt do too much damage to McGill's prestige. There have been many weird things coming out of that remarkable institution this year.

[–]Nemo_of_the_People 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Oh? Like what, if you don't mind? Legitimately curious lol

[–]OttoVonGosu 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (2子コメント)

well there was that weird racist pamphlet running around campus a few months back, not things you usually see from that establishment.

strange articles about the unniversity losing its ''english'' character because too many francophone kids are enrolling.

[–]AkesgerothQuébec 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

There's a big difference between a prominent member of the university publishing an article in a widely circulated magazine and some guys printing a bunch of flyers and distributing them in the university.

[–]OttoVonGosu [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

No doubt, but I was just explaining my opinion that McGill isn't acting like a world class university lately.

[–]gbinasia [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Anyone familiar with the McGill population wouldn't be weirded out by these views. It's pretty common place.

[–]OttoVonGosu [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

yeah, I am not familiar. From my perspective it doesn't seem like that sort of thing should happen in a place with such renown.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (37子コメント)

What? Why? For making some bad commentary?

Article in question.

High(low)lights:

Compared to the rest of the country, Quebec is an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital that other Canadians take for granted.

Stupid sentiment. Whatever.

This is at odds with the standard narrative; a big part of Quebec’s self-image—and one of the frequently-cited excuses for why the province ought to separate—is that it is a more communitarian place than the rest of Canada, more committed to the common good and the pursuit of collectivist goals.

Alright, now the rest of Canada should be annoyed too, but whatever, it's just one opinion.

But you don’t have to live in a place like Montreal very long to experience the tension between that self-image and the facts on the ground. The absence of solidarity manifests itself in so many different ways that it becomes part of the background hiss of the city. To start with one glaring example, the police here don’t wear proper uniforms.

Oh, fuck me. Shut up.

We’re talking here about a place where some restaurants offer you two bills: one for if you’re paying cash, and another if you’re paying by a more traceable mechanism.

Da fuck? This some petty shit here to be writing about.

Sure, Quebec does have the largest underground economy as a proportion of GDP in Canada, but it’s only slightly bigger than that of British Columbia.

Where are you even going with this? This article was about how 300 motorists were stranded, and now it's talking about underground GDP?

The proportion of people who report having zero close friends is highest in Quebec, and quadruple that of people living in top-rated Prince Edward Island.

lol. It kinda sounds like Potter needs a friend now.

Sure, some restaurants will offer you two bills. Don’t be so uptight! It’s part of the place’s charm, along with the love of prog rock and the mandatory jaywalking.

What a douche.

At some point, charm and uniqueness betrays itself as serious dysfunction—and the famous joie de vivre starts to look like nihilism.

Um, wut?

Alright, while the article was horrendous, the commentary inflammatory, by no means should he be forced to resign for it. It's just some douchebag's commentary. So what?

Hey, maybe Andrew Potter just saw an opportunity to go full public RWSJW like Jordan Peterson and be another 'free speech' advocate. So he wrote one of the worst articles ever written, flamed the right people, and now is a potential douchebag messiah.

MacLean's should be pretty ashamed to get that troll article published btw. But they've gone off the deep end awhile ago.

This all is another example of how the for profit motive utterly fails media.

[–]NikitaScherbak 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Dont you think his views are in conflict of interest with his role in the «canadian studies» institute?

[–]TOMapleLaughs 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Definitely. It definitely makes one to draw the conclusion that he deliberately set himself on fire here.

[–]Archeob 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Because it's absolutely bigoted, and not just merely bad, commentary. He goes out of his way to pick at what he likes to validate what is obviously his idea of Québec. And it is absolutely at odds with his mandate at the head of the so-called "canadian studies" institute. He got what he deserved.

Now let's imagine a francophone scholar doing something similar.

Compared to the rest of the province, Quebec muslims are an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital that other Québécois take for granted.

Compared to the rest of the province, Quebec jews are an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital that other Québécois take for granted.

Compared to the rest of the province, Quebec gays are an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital that other Québécois take for granted.

Boom. Front-page news in every Canadian media, lawsuits, public shaming, etc. What he wrote was awful, the fact it was published is awful and the fact that some are defending it is awful.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I hear you, but your argument is mostly hyperbole.

[–]u152 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Can you disprove anything he said?

[–]TOMapleLaughs 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yes, let's subject this masterpiece to some peer review, and wait and see what happens.

[–]AkesgerothQuébec 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

For making some bad commentary?

If he'd said things like these about any other people, you would immediately condemn what he said.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Calm down. I've had a lengthly convo with someone today utterly trashing this article.

But should he have been canned for it? I doubt it. The conflict of interest is a concern, but one that could've been overlooked. He's still employed by McGill, after all.

[–]AkesgerothQuébec [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I think that if the man who makes such claims about Quebec remains director of the Institute for the Study of Canada that their reputation would take a serious blow. Or worse, it wouldn't. Look at many of the comments in here. He resigns, and people are upset because they're convinced he was telling the truth. They don't need further validation by having the university keep him in his position.

[–]Catch_22_Pac 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It's so typically Canadian not to consider the accuracy or truth of something uncomfortable but rather to be offended that someone said it. Rudeness is the unforgivable sin in Canada.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's also typically Canadian to ignore douchebags.

Now that he's resigned, and media has caught wind of it, we can no longer ignore him, or the issue.

I feel that this was the plan.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (24子コメント)

Compared to the rest of the country, Quebec is an almost pathologically alienated and low-trust society, deficient in many of the most basic forms of social capital that other Canadians take for granted.

Stupid sentiment. Whatever.

He goes on to substantiate that with multiple statistics.

I agree that the article wasn't great, and that he was more or less just using this traffic incident to air some dirty laundry, but it's funny how you just completely ignore the substance of the article in your critique.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (23子コメント)

There's lies, damn lies, and statistics.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (22子コメント)

What an absolutely lazy cop-out.

[–]Archeob 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Those are surveys based on landline phone calls and self-reported subjective subjects conducted in different languages with people from different cultures. Absolutely no scientific value whatsoever. Only someone in bad faith would try to use this to prove a point.

[–]Toodledootootoo 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are people who speak different languages, from different cultures within Quebec society. It seems, from the reaction I've seen here and on social media that people understood this as a critique of "francophone" Quebec culture.

That's problematic in and of itself. It implies an article about Quebec is an article about French people in Quebec, which in my mind shows that a whole lot of people don't think non francophone people are included in the "nous" they feel was attacked. I've seen the word "francophobie" tossed around a lot in the past few days in comments about this article. I didn't see any mention of language in the actual article though.

I mean, sure the two bills at restos comment may have been off. Corruption and crooked dealings in the restaurant business is not a completely alien accusation in Quebec though. There is a reason a new system was put in place to avoid this not too long ago. Having been involved in the industry, most accusations I heard were directed at non francophone, ethnic restaurant owners. Where does that fit into the "francophobie" accusation?

That being said, I have on more than one occasion paid for a doctors note in cash without receiving an invoice in Quebec so let's not pretend that this idea of paying with cash, off any record is completely made up.

I'm a product of my upbringing within Quebec culture. Do I think this has made me more untrusting and suspicious? Yes I do. I has led me to think that corruption is rampant everywhere and I find myself surprised sometimes when it isn't the case. I certainly did not feel attacked reading that. Did I feel proud about the fact that Quebecois people are more likely to want to pay more in taxes for social services compared to other Canadians? You bet!!

I wasn't offended by the article, even though I didn't think it was particularly well written. I definitely didn't think it was hate speech or an attack on Quebecois people. The reaction to it just proved to me though that for a large part of the Quebecois population, if you aren't part of the "nous", you are not allowed to voice any critical opinion about Quebec. If it is coming from outside the "nous", a "nous" that does NOT include all members of Quebec society, it's considered Quebec bashing.

I find it really sad and frustrating that I don't feel I can be critical of my own province, which I love and I'm proud to be from, without being accused of hating it and bashing it. If we can't be critical of our home without fear of these accusations, how on earth can we ever possibly improve it? And I think most people would agree there are some major improvements needed.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

You're welcome to introduce some evidence that these surveys are of no representative value.

[–]Archeob 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Fifteen years of research experience. Common sense.

CQFD

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Ah, well, some guy on Reddit said it, so it must be true!

[–]Archeob 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Right back at you!

And you realize that by having this enlightening exchange we've probably put more thought in these statistics than Potter put in his "editorial". The only defense I've read here is about free speech, which is by itself an indictment of his work.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Right back at you!

Difference is I'm not making assertions to which the only proof I have is myself ;)

The only defense I've read here is about free speech, which is by itself an indictment of his work.

The important defense of him is that of academic freedom.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (13子コメント)

Further, I can take any set of statistics and twist them into suiting any narrative I desire. They're essentially useless, and all that matters here anyway is the level of ridiculousness in the article. Insanely high.

MacLeans should be very embarrassed to have it published, but money. And now attention.

Another profit motive media failure.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (12子コメント)

You continue to present no actual argument.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (11子コメント)

Actually, I did. I've declared yours to be irrelevant.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Well, sir, I declare yours to be irrelevant! H-ha!

But in all seriousness, you're just dismissing his comments without actually presenting any intelligible responses. You imply that his use of surveys is somehow invalid, but ignore the fact that those surveys exist and that they say what he says they do. You can dispute his greater point, but nothing you've done so far has achieved that.

[–]TOMapleLaughs 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Comments are just comments, bud.

If people knew that, then this thread wouldn't even exist.

Fuck, it's not like his shitty article was peer reviewed.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (8子コメント)

If you're going to totally denounce the guy, one would hope you'd at least had some logical base, bud.

[–]capitolcritter 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (12子コメント)

Amazed at the commenters here saying the incorrect facts in his editorial compromised his position as a researcher and are fine with politicans calling a public university to get him fired.

Meanwhile, Jordan Peterson also presents plenty of demonstrably false facts and misrepresentations (alongside his perfectly valid opinions mind you), but this sub is ready to rally to his defence for any slight from activists with no real political power.

[–]Haynous 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

"No real political power" are you fucking serious?

[–]capitolcritter 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Jordan Peterson continues to teach. Despite some more extreme activists calling for him to be fired, that hasn't happened even when he resumed teaching. He continues to make lots of public appearances, appearing in media, etc., with no repercussions from the government or his employer.

The McMaster withdrawal of his speech was a bad move by McMaster, IMO, but it's not the same as Peterson being canned from any of his positions for his views.

[–]BruteEpaise 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Out of curiosity what are the false facts (Yay an oxymoron) Jordan Peterson is telling?

[–]capitolcritter 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

The big one is that he's wrong about what Bill C-16 proposes and how our hate crime laws function. He's entitled to an opinion on those items, but his criticisms of them have no basis in how those laws have or will function.

A lot of his claims on how gender works are also at odds with most other researchers. And he's not a biologist or someone who specializes in these areas. He's fine to have his opinion in those areas, but he keeps presenting them as incontrovertible fact. For example, this quote:

“I don’t know what ‘neither’ means because I don’t know what the options are if you’re not a man or a woman,” Peterson states in his YouTube lecture. “It’s not obvious to me how you can be both because those are by definition binary categories.”

He also pulls every ridiculous behaviour from the most activists (or "SJWs") and tries to claim it's being foisted on him. He keeps saying that he would be forced to have to learn dozens of different genders, despite the fact that nobody is saying that he would have to do that but him.

He's a brilliant psychologist and academic. Much smarter than I am. And I think he has made some very strong points about how U of T has handled this (which is being too scared to really take a position supporting anyone because they just want it to blow over). But he's presenting positions in areas he's not an expert in and the basis from which he's drawing much of his argument is demonstrably incorrect, or at least at odds with how people with expertise in those areas view it.

[–]darkerinos 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

He also pulls every ridiculous behaviour from the most activists (or "SJWs") and tries to claim it's being foisted on him. He keeps saying that he would be forced to have to learn dozens of different genders, despite the fact that nobody is saying that he would have to do that but him.

I think his point is that if you're okay with one non-binary gender, then you have to be okay with all of them. Facebook currently has 71 gender options. If they all wanted their own pronoun, it would become untenable for people who have to deal with a ton of strangers (like teachers) on a daily basis. I pretty sure he stated that he wouldn't mind a gender neutral pronoun, which is perfectly reasonable

Also, isn't the problem with the bill that it opens the door to abuse of free-speech by SJW and others like that?

[–]capitolcritter 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I pretty sure he stated that he wouldn't mind a gender neutral pronoun, which is perfectly reasonable

I agree with you that a gender neutral pronoun would be perfectly reasonable. But he's actually been adamant that he won't use the gender-neutral "they" or "them", because it's grammatical nonsense in his view. He said this quite forcefully on The Agenda panel he was part of.

Nobody is saying that he should remember 71 gender options, nor should anyone. The only people saying that are him and some of his supporters.

Also, isn't the problem with the bill that it opens the door to abuse of free-speech by SJW and others like that?

It is adding a handful of words to existing hate crime legislation, which has been in place for decades, and already protects race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, etc. If "SJWs" haven't been able to destroy our society over the past 30 years using those grounds, how is adding "gender identity and expression" going to? Getting a conviction under Canadian hate crime legislation is actually incredibly difficult, and Bill C-16 won't change that, it will just add an additional protected ground.

And we've already had gender identity and expression protected in provincial human rights legislation for years. There is nothing stopping someone bringing a provincial human rights complaint against Peterson as a University employee right now.... except for than the fact that nothing he's done or said to date would constitute a supportable complaint. Just because a handful of activists make pronouncements about Peterson doesn't mean they have a legal leg to stand on.

[–]Galbi11 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (4子コメント)

It's almost like people have an agenda and need to latch onto anything out there that could possibly aid them and care nothing else about the subject. Free Speech is a cover story for their hatred.

[–]Haynous 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

How about you actually watch one of his videos and then tell me he is motivated by hatred.

[–]capitolcritter 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I don't think he is motivated by hatred.

I do think a lot of the people glomming onto and supporting him are using it as cover for hatred though. Check out a lot of the responses on his Twitter feed. He himself isn't fanning it, but a lot of the people riding his coattails are.

[–]Casualkev -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

this is such a bullshit argument. It's the same one that has been used against Trump and many other free speech advocates. Just like how Trump disavowed the KKK, Peterson has even commented on his Youtube videos before disavowing anti-semetic sentiments being made in the comments section. So what's your suggestion to the issue? Fire him because a bunch of trolls are latching onto his social media? Where does it end?

I think if there is one purpose he serves, it is to shine light on the state of free speech and freedom of expression on Canadian campuses. Blowing airhorns and sirens because they are scared of being bruised by a few words is reality. Hurling vulgur insults at the man because that totally isn't the hate they're trying to fight at all.

[–]capitolcritter 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I never said Peterson should be fired. Quite the opposite, I was pointing out much of this sub's hypocrisy of saying Potter should be fired while defending Peterson's academic freedom. I think neither of them should be fired.

I never said Peterson was encouraging hate. I think he's inadvertently attracting a lot of people who are cloaking themselves in his free speech arguments for less noble ends. That doesn't invalidate his arguments, but I think it explains a fair number of the people who always jump to his defence.

That's a lot different than Trump, who hires white supremacists and hatemongers as his actual advisors.

[–]grandwahs -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (33子コメント)

This is stupid. The negative reaction to the article only serves to substantiate his claims.

[–]pluc61Québec 25 ポイント26 ポイント  (22子コメント)

He was the head of a RESEARCH institute and he used facts that were disproved minutes after his articles was published.

Misinformation is hate best friends. McGill couldn't let franco-phobes use this article to justify their hate.

[–]grandwahs 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (12子コメント)

But it was published as an editorial.

[–]pluc61Québec 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (11子コメント)

If Bob McKenzie publish an editorial saying "Sydney Crosby has a terrible season, he only scored once.", does TSN remove the entire article or just the reference to his scoring?

Facts matter even in editorial.

[–]grandwahs -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (10子コメント)

TSN can do whatever it wants; the onus is on TSN for that, they published the article in the first place. Maybe Bob wrote a shitty article, and that's on him, but that doesn't mean he should lose his job, OR his position on the Hockey Hall of Fame committee.

[–]pluc61Québec 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (9子コメント)

But for the rest of his career people would question everything Bob is saying about Crosby. That would be a bad look for TSN and the Hall of Fame committee.

McGill needs to protect the integrity of the institute.

[–]grandwahs 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (7子コメント)

I personally feel that a university maintains its integrity a hell of a lot more by standing by an individual with an unpopular opinion rather than cowtowing to public pitchfork mentality.

[–]PlaydoughMonsterQuébec 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (4子コメント)

What you personally feel is irrelevant. If you were head of a company and a well-liked employee committed a serious public mis-step that endangered your business as long as he stayed, you would get rid of him, whatever your personal feelings on the guy were.

[–]grandwahs -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I would stand by my employee, state that his usual body of work speaks for itself, and he simply took a regrettable misstep that he will learn from.

Overreacting to these sorts of things has become far too commonplace.

[–]PlaydoughMonsterQuébec 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well, enjoy your business tanking then. You don't sound like you'd make a smart entrepreneur, or a smart anything.

[–]pluc61Québec 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Again, HEAD of a RESEARCH INSTITUTE used FACTS THAT WERE DISPROVED.

His opinion doesn't matter.

[–]grandwahs 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

His opinion doesn't matter.

In a McGill-published document, of course.

[–]capitolcritter 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

McGill isn't a private corporation like TSN. University professors have different roles than commentators. And government officials couldn't call up TSN to exert pressure on them to fire McKenzie. Which they shouldn't for McGill either, but here we are.

[–]lovelife905 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

different standards between a editorial for a magazine and actually peer reviewed research or journal.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (7子コメント)

he used facts that were disproved minutes after his articles was published.

Such as?

[–]pluc61Québec 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (6子コメント)

Why don't you take the time to look it up for yourself?

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (5子コメント)

So you can't name any?

[–]pluc61Québec 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Of course I can. Everyone who actually followed the story since the article was published can.

Getting you up to date is not my job.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (3子コメント)

You're making an assertion. The norms of discussion would put the burden to substantiate it on you. Otherwise, it becomes apparent that you have no actual argument.

Which seems to be the case here.

[–]pluc61Québec 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I don't need to substantiate anything when MacLeans redacted their story and the author acknowledged he used anecdotal evidence that were wrong.

[–]Statistical_InsanityOntario 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Aaaand you've still not proven a shred of what you've said. Why do you continue to reply to me if you're not willing to either substantiate your assertions or admit that they're lies?

[–]pluc61Québec 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ok, have a nice life.

[–]AkesgerothQuébec 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Blacks are inferior, and if they disagree it just proves me right!"

This is you. This is literally you, right now.

[–]PlaydoughMonsterQuébec 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Really? Please go on because right now I'm really curious about your reasoning.

[–]rimstorm 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Saw that coming, ah well

[–]TheDriestCanadian -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I wouldn't let him resign.

[–]PlaydoughMonsterQuébec 21 ポイント22 ポイント  (0子コメント)

He covered both himself and His employer in ridicule and put the legitimacy of his institute as a serious academic institution in jeopardy. It is entirely reasonable to make him resign.