Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Peterson appears to be a Jungian psychiatrist, an adherent to the idea that the reason myths and legends from around the world is so alike is that they express underlying psychological processes that are equal to all humans. While a quaint idea, Peterson takes this a step further, claiming that this is the result of evolution. When Eve eats a fruit in the Garden of Eden, for instance, this is because human beings evolved vision to single out ripe fruit (page 47), and the Biblical Wisdom is a metaphor for vision, seemingly passed down through hereditary memory. To be very clear: This is not how evolution works. At all. And I am not quoting that example to ridicule him, it's actually his most sensible idea. The majority of that chapter is dedicated to explaining how women embody chaos and men embody order, something which is apparently the result of evolution and expressed in the Bible. Simply put, evolution proves that the Bible (and every other Holy Book) is actually talking about Petersons ideas. It would take an entire essay to list everything Peterson has gotten wrong in this book, but a short selection follows: He believes human evolution is done within the framework of lobsters (page 33), he believes Christianity led to science through alchemy (ignoring that many other cultures developed alchemy), he believes that science has disproven Feminism, that Tolstoy and Goethe expressed the same ideas as the Columbine shooter, and of course, insists that every thinker he dislikes is an open or secret Marxist (page 300 and onwards). Rather than explain that viewpoint, he goes on a rant about the evils of communism- a Red version of Godwin's Law, if you will. A lot of it seems to be taken from visions he’s had in dreams, or through automatic writing (his Pen of Light, (Coda)).There is at least one point where he pretty much openly claims that he, personally, prevented mass murder through telepathy (page 288). People who agree with him is referred to as «awake», and rather than proof he occasionally just refers to the fact that people will know in their hearts that it is true (most openly stated on page 40). Everyone who disagrees with him is a left-wing extremist, comparable to the Chinese Communists during the Great Leap Forward. No one can so consistently misunderstand so many concepts and weave them into a coherent, misleading text. He is either actively lying in order to woo Wiki-walking internet intellectuals, or he’s trying to start a new religion. Or both. Take your pick. Read the book if you must, but please remember: none of the things to which he refers is actually the way he presents them.