Metaphysics of Jordan Peterson

Discussion

Andrew Venezia :

"As I see them, the key starting points in Peterson’s metaphysics of individual and society are:

1) one is born into society, and

2) life entails suffering. Humans are social, and are born inescapably into a culture and society. Life entails suffering – it is our existential condition – and so

1) no society is (or could be) perfect;

2) societies (at any scope) will tend to decay and become corrupt; and

3) each individual will be confronted with this suffering and the brokenness of their society.

Our condition – suffering – is inescapable. Accepting our condition, contending with it, is voluntary, and shapes the process of maturation. It lies with each individual to embrace the condition of our being and to make a meaningful life despite it. Meaning must always be snatched from the jaws of suffering – life can and must be redeemed. This is voluntary, meaning one can simply acquiesce to suffering and the social status quo, and it comes at great potential risk. This risk is due both to unavoidable conflict with existing power structures defending themselves, and because one’s identity is always carved out of this suffering; to undertake the task is to invite psychological and social crucifixion. It also comes with vast potential reward. Those who are able to overcome the social order and their own selves to return to their ‘rightful place’ create the new social order – they earn power. Having won power, one may by definition do with it as one pleases. A just ‘king’ uses his power – that is, molds the social order – in the service of his society’s wellbeing. An unjust king uses power to defend his own position, and accrue greater wealth and power. Power itself is a-moral. One can assume power from within the more or less corrupt social structure. If one has earned it justly, however, power can also be used justly. No matter how just any one king is, the task of reckoning absolutely with life’s suffering is near impossible, and becomes harder and no longer worth the risk when one’s (and awareness of one’s subjects’) suffering is assuaged with the comforts of being in power. And so, even a just society will decay, become decadent and corrupt, and the cycle begins anew. In short: it is the individual’s duty and responsibility to regenerate the just social order, and this regeneration is the process of individuation. That this is possible even though difficult makes this vision hopeful.

..

Peterson explicitly avows a kind of participatory metaphysics: the relationship between society and individual is not given; it is a kind of activity, a process. I think he would affirm that our individuality is a construction, biologically, psychologically, and culturally. He does not seem open to the radical notion that precisely because of this there are other possibilities for human individuality and society. Individuality is not a ‘thing.’ It is what I am calling a skillful metaphysic. Any articulation of what individuality is and means that doesn’t recognize this is resting its account on an implicit reification. This is relevant because our metaphysics and our suffering mirror each other, each sprouting from implicit conceptual metaphysics. This is why emptiness is both the end of suffering, and the dissolution of reified concepts. How we hold and communicate our suffering and our story of reality will largely determine the possibilities of our individual and social liberation. All beings suffer; all humans suffer. This understanding can form the basis of compassion and compassionate action. In practice, our attachment to our own suffering, our own self-construction, and our own implicit metaphysics, creates barriers of resentment, disgust, and horror between our selves and between our communities. Peterson’s account of the process that creates individuality and thus re-creates society displays this kind of attachment, even if it’s not quite as simple as a preference for the individual over society. The ‘becoming aware’ of our metaphysical assumptions provides a contrasting trajectory to Peterson’s growth of individual awareness and richness of meaning. Emptiness does not provide meaning: it is meaning-less. Or, if you prefer, it allows for a kind of obvious and immanent meaning-full-ness, a meaning-full-ness that is not conditional, nor the result of the process of individuation.

...

I will take the time here to return to a step-by-step account of this argument for clarity’s sake. Peterson’s account of what is real, what matters, his account of metaphysical truth, meaning and morality, begins with two givens: 1) every human is born into a society, and develops within it, and 2) life entails suffering. The process of individuation, of moral and intellectual growth, entails accepting this, and taking responsibility for one’s suffering, and one’s society, in redeeming one’s suffering in the creation of meaning. Buddhism offers a different kind of ‘negative metaphysics’ in emptiness, which allows for the liberation from suffering, and reveals the final inadequacy of any metaphysics which are not what I am calling skillful: that is, provisional, situational, creative, relational/communicative, and skillful. While Peterson avows a kind of participatory metaphysics, where the relationship between ‘individual’ and ‘society’ is active, is an activity, the categories ‘individual’ and ‘society’ are themselves fixed and over-determine the possible shapes ‘individuality’ and ‘society’ can take in relationship, like jigsaw puzzle piece that must actively be put together, but which have only one possible fit. This implicit metaphysical foundation for his thought is an example of a particular kind of human suffering: that of being an ego. I think Peterson is right, actually – but his account is necessarily partial. I don’t think he sees its partiality, and that contributes to the polarity associated with him. Those who reject him reject what is partial. Those for whom he has become a prophetic voice affirm what is partial as whole. So what? "

(https://integral-review.org/issues/vol_15_no_1_special_issue_section_on_jordan_peterson.pdf)