“I actually don’t think he’s sincere”.
Given what I’ve heard of Peterson in the past, I don’t think he could be more sincere.
But what I couldn’t help thinking when I’d finished the posted article was this: How do we know what was written in that article actually was from Jordan Peterson? Not that I don’t think it was him, but if you can fake video and you can fake audio you can certainly fake written, and you can fake web addresses and damn near anything.
So ultimately it seems to me responsibility comes back to whoever *promulgates* a video or an article or whatever. If Peterson had *not* written the article that was posted, and someone had just submitted (with whatever technical embellishments) as his, how would he prove to the site he was Jordan Peterson? And how would he make it known that he, Jordan Peterson, wanted that article removed because it wasn’t him?
Given what I’ve heard of Peterson in the past, I don’t think he could be more sincere.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes. I have heard that from others in response to my post as well so I (likely) stand corrected. But my opinion of the article remains - it seems odd to me. I think you are correct in that we don’t know if he wrote it. Or perhaps, it’s as another posted on this thread, he’s smart in other realms? So perhaps he’s shrieking to sound the alarm and awaken the sleepers.
I’ve no doubt the real Jordan Peterson would sue anyone who wrote an article, pretending to be him. There are already laws that cover that. There ARE no laws that cover the fake videos, though, and there should be. The potential for misuse and damage is, arguably, limitless.