What I've Observed Trolling Sic et Non
Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2021 6:10 am
I have been a troll in the comments section of Sic et Non since the days that "Dear Dan's Diary" was a thing. In that time I have learned a few things about Dr. Peterson and his associates. Nothing I say here will be a revelation as I think it confirms what others have long-observed in Dr. Peterson's behavior, intellectual capacity, and character.
As a troll I've played the part of heartland believer, TBM, atheist, Canadian Mountie and purveyor of fine hats. In some cases I've been able to play the long game and stay in character over a period of months. At other times, I've worn out my welcome quickly and have been banned by Dr Peterson for one reason or another.
It always surprises me how Dan always falls for the troll. Always. Every Dr. Scratch post here produces 10 passive-aggressive responses on Sic et Non. How can Dr. Peterson not understand that he's being toyed with? That his reactions are such predictable trainwrecks? That he is is the lolcow of Mopologetics. As Kiwi Farms is to Chris-chan, DiscussMormonism is to Dan Peterson.
So here are a few observations:
1) Dr. Peterson is highly skilled with words but lacks genuine intellectual curiosity. It seems that he reads just enough to sound like he is acquainted with a subject. When in fact, it is apparent he ususally reads the first 20-30 pages of any given book and calls it good. Dr. Peterson reads just enough to "win" arguments. He shows no real interest in exploring truth. One thing you will notice in the comments section is that Dr. Peterson is more interested in debating the discussion, more than he is about debating the actual topic at hand. So when he is presented with compelling counter arguments, he will focus on the identity and motives of the person making the argument. By so doing, Dr. Peterson is able to maintain the illusion that he is a learned scholar without engaging any criticism of his ideas. And, let's be honest. Dr. Peterson rarely has an original idea and generally parrots others. Often, incorrectly. Camus anyone? He comes close to intelligence with this lips, but his heart is far from it.
2) Dan also has questionable ethics. He will gladly attack or ban any "critic" who is rude or aggressive. But when Woody or Pahoran behave even more aggressively, Dan gives them a high five and atta-boys. In fact, all Woody and Pahoran seem to do in the comments section is stalk and dox other posters. This goes back to having arguments about the argument, rather than on the subject at hand. Dan, Woody, and Pahoran will do anything to obsfucate that they really have a very very lose grasp on the subject matter.
3) Woody makes me particularly sad. He will make the occasional post about his faith or family that is quite touching. He speaks of the Love of God. But his behavior and comments show his nasty un-Christian side. And of course, for a man educated at Brown University to waste his entire career in Mopologetics is depressing. Lou is obsessed with doxing people. Both Dan and Lou seem to have a problem with anonymous posting and thus feel justified in naming names. Lou is even obsessed with people in real life. Poor Gina Colvin has been stalked by Lou -- both online and in real life -- for years now.
4) Perhaps the most important thing Sic et Non shows about that Mopologists fundamentally mistake a rhetorical "dunk" with truth.
But now it is time to move on from both Daniel C. Peterson and Mormonism. I am called to return to the great north.
ETA:
JK Rowling did nothing wrong.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
As a troll I've played the part of heartland believer, TBM, atheist, Canadian Mountie and purveyor of fine hats. In some cases I've been able to play the long game and stay in character over a period of months. At other times, I've worn out my welcome quickly and have been banned by Dr Peterson for one reason or another.
It always surprises me how Dan always falls for the troll. Always. Every Dr. Scratch post here produces 10 passive-aggressive responses on Sic et Non. How can Dr. Peterson not understand that he's being toyed with? That his reactions are such predictable trainwrecks? That he is is the lolcow of Mopologetics. As Kiwi Farms is to Chris-chan, DiscussMormonism is to Dan Peterson.
So here are a few observations:
1) Dr. Peterson is highly skilled with words but lacks genuine intellectual curiosity. It seems that he reads just enough to sound like he is acquainted with a subject. When in fact, it is apparent he ususally reads the first 20-30 pages of any given book and calls it good. Dr. Peterson reads just enough to "win" arguments. He shows no real interest in exploring truth. One thing you will notice in the comments section is that Dr. Peterson is more interested in debating the discussion, more than he is about debating the actual topic at hand. So when he is presented with compelling counter arguments, he will focus on the identity and motives of the person making the argument. By so doing, Dr. Peterson is able to maintain the illusion that he is a learned scholar without engaging any criticism of his ideas. And, let's be honest. Dr. Peterson rarely has an original idea and generally parrots others. Often, incorrectly. Camus anyone? He comes close to intelligence with this lips, but his heart is far from it.
2) Dan also has questionable ethics. He will gladly attack or ban any "critic" who is rude or aggressive. But when Woody or Pahoran behave even more aggressively, Dan gives them a high five and atta-boys. In fact, all Woody and Pahoran seem to do in the comments section is stalk and dox other posters. This goes back to having arguments about the argument, rather than on the subject at hand. Dan, Woody, and Pahoran will do anything to obsfucate that they really have a very very lose grasp on the subject matter.
3) Woody makes me particularly sad. He will make the occasional post about his faith or family that is quite touching. He speaks of the Love of God. But his behavior and comments show his nasty un-Christian side. And of course, for a man educated at Brown University to waste his entire career in Mopologetics is depressing. Lou is obsessed with doxing people. Both Dan and Lou seem to have a problem with anonymous posting and thus feel justified in naming names. Lou is even obsessed with people in real life. Poor Gina Colvin has been stalked by Lou -- both online and in real life -- for years now.
4) Perhaps the most important thing Sic et Non shows about that Mopologists fundamentally mistake a rhetorical "dunk" with truth.
But now it is time to move on from both Daniel C. Peterson and Mormonism. I am called to return to the great north.
ETA:
JK Rowling did nothing wrong.
Epstein didn't kill himself.