The Professor of Polarization: Peterson's Role in Anti-Mormonism

[Everybody Wang Chung]

In light of the recent Michigan killings, which were reportedly motivated by the killer's anti-Mormon sentiment, it may be time for the Mopologists to engage in some much-needed introspection regarding how their methods have contributed to and fueled the spread of anti-Mormonism.

In my opinion, DCP's public writings and postings have particularly fueled anti-Mormon sentiment. DCP's public postings are very contentious, sarcastic, dismissive, and his demeaning rhetorical style often involves publicly attacking various faiths, including Calvinism, Evangelicalism, Judaism, and Scientology, just to name a few. DCP's approach frequently features ad hominem attacks and hit pieces instead of charitable intellectual debate. Such a combative stance not only alienates other religious groups but also solidifies their opposition and contributes to an atmosphere of hostility. Given the tragic real-world consequences, I would like to call on DCP to conduct a close examination of how his aggressive, dismissive and demeaning Mopologetic style impacts public perceptions of Mormonism.

DCP, you can do better. You can be better. There is still time.

[Res Ipsa]

I’m skeptical. I think the number of non-Mormons who even know Peterson’s name is vanishingly small. He’s an important figure here because this was a forum that hosted a battle between apologists and anti-apologists.

I find the Michigan thing shocking because, while I’m aware of folks with active hostility toward the organization, I’ve encountered very little hostility toward members as a group.

ETA: After reading this Pew survey, I have to admit that my experience is not representative. There are some findings in it that really surprised me.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/20 ... catholics/

[drumdude]

I find myself agreeing with Res here. DCP is a vanishingly insignificant player in a very minor world religion. If religions were sports, he would be coach of a little league team in rural Montana.

The anti-Mormon violence is also boggling my mind. From a professing Christian, no less. I'm really thinking mental illness is the main factor here, and the religious elements are either vastly overplayed or made up entirely. I wouldn't put it past some in that ward to make up or embellish their recounting of events for spiritual purposes. DCP says there was an account of a Mormon being asked if they follow Joseph or Jesus... which may have happened, but it is a very common trope in Christian circles. It's seen as the ultimate test of faith and is a ready-made faith promoting tale.

I'm not saying these things couldn't have happened, I'm just skeptical until more evidence is collected.

[Whiskey]

In light of the recent Michigan killings, which were reportedly motivated by the killer's anti-Mormon sentiment, it may be time for the Mopologists to engage in some much-needed introspection regarding how their methods have contributed to and fueled the spread of anti-Mormonism.

In my opinion, DCP's public writings and postings have particularly fueled anti-Mormon sentiment. DCP's public postings are very contentious, sarcastic, dismissive, and his demeaning rhetorical style often involves publicly attacking various faiths, including Calvinism, Evangelicalism, Judaism, and Scientology, just to name a few. DCP's approach frequently features ad hominem attacks and hit pieces instead of charitable intellectual debate. Such a combative stance not only alienates other religious groups but also solidifies their opposition and contributes to an atmosphere of hostility. Given the tragic real-world consequences, I would like to call on DCP to conduct a close examination of how his aggressive, dismissive and demeaning Mopologetic style impacts public perceptions of Mormonism.

DCP, you can do better. You can be better. There is still time.

In your opinion, do you think that this forum sways people, and if so, how? Do you think that DCP could ever actually convince anyone to believe or not believe anything?

My answer: the vitriol here and in other exmo communities outweighs the arguments. Shulem, who avoids the vitriolic stuff stands out as an exception. DCP is a shameless apologist, but he doesn't come across as a rabid snake. Sure, he controls the speech around him, like Dehlin and others, but not any more than any exmo forum.

[Kishkumen]

Shulem, who avoids the vitriolic stuff stands out as an exception.

We all love Shulem, but surely you can't be serious.

[Whiskey]

Shulem, who avoids the vitriolic stuff stands out as an exception.

We all love Shulem, but surely you can't be serious.

Very serious. He has original thoughts and content.

[Kishkumen]

Very serious. He has original thoughts and content.

He does have original thoughts and content, but he does not "avoid" vitriol.

[Whiskey]

Very serious. He has original thoughts and content.

He does have original thoughts and content, but he does not "avoid" vitriol.

Interesting take. Thanks man. I don't feel corrected. But I find it interesting.

[Equality]

He does have original thoughts and content, but he does not "avoid" vitriol.

Interesting take. Thanks man. I don't feel corrected. But I find it interesting.

Well, at least in this incarnation, you have found a keyboard with a Shift key. So, progress?

[Gadianton]

He does have original thoughts and content, but he does not "avoid" vitriol.

I think you have to look at the terminology from Whiskey's POV. Whiskey's protected class of far-right wingism is totally off the radar for Shulem. In other words, Shulem doesn't ever say anything that could be construed in some way as a criticism of Hound or the others, therefore he's not vitriolic.