Haven't reread recently, but it was interesting at the time, and sort of helpful for keeping me motivated to get myself out of a bit of a rut. What parts of his writing did you find to be indicative of abandoning intelligent debate?
As much as I love metaphors ("Metaphors of Movement" concept and therapy by Andrew Austin or in general metaphors explained by Lakoff in "Metaphors We Live by") - Peterson is simply fantasizing. It might seem to be deeply thought out, but it's not. Would love to share with you great article about his book, but it's unfortunately in Polish. If you care to know then google translator might help https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=pl&tl=en&u=https:/...
It’s a set of truisms glossed up with some long words?
It definitely is common among people who want to advocate for far right beliefs but run into the slight issue of the most famous of those groups being culturally synonymous with evil. Simply defining the Nazis to the other side of the spectrum is a very convenient solution to that, and probably pretty convincing to most people who are usually not familiar enough with the history and politics of Weimar Germany to point out how utterly ridiculous of a statement that is. (The NSDAP was helped into power by the royalty-aligned conservatives to prevent a left victory, while the left fought the forces that would become the SS in the streets to try to stop them, before they were put into the first concentration camps. Coincidentally, they also sat on the furthest right side of parliament, opposite of the communists.)
That feeling when you’re so het up about the Modern World you conflate communism and “liberal democratic cosmopolitanism” as “tHE lEFt”.
The true travesty in intellectual diversity is the American right wing abandoning any semblance of intelligent debate. Cue Shapiro calling Andrew Neil a leftist, or almost anything written by Jordan Peterson.