The Jordan Peterson Controversy, Political Correctness and Revitalizing Universities | Neil McLaughlin
Host Sean Rasmussen speaks with Sociologist Neil McLaughlin about the challenge of political polarization on campus and the wider society — and how we might move to a better place. We cover a lot of ground: The Jordan Peterson controversy, the Heterodox Academy, public intellectuals, Chris Rufo’s activism, Erich Fromm, elitism, the crisis of meaning, leftist authoritarianism, the CBC, Canadian politics, and much more.
About the guest

Dr. Neil McLaughlin is Full Professor in the Department of Sociology at McMaster University. His research focuses on the sociology of public intellectuals, the sociology of reputations, the international spreading of conspiracy theories and the sociological dynamics of disciplines, universities and ideas. He is currently working on the political correctness debates and the Jordan Peterson controversy.
He has studied the rise and goal of the reputation of critical theorist Erich Fromm, the radical writings of Noam Chomsky, the philanthropy of George Soros, the public intellectual debate in Canada, the missing women, Canadian public intellectuals, the crisis and renewal of Canadian sociology, the writings of Edward Said, David Riesman and George Orwell.
Ways to listen:
Spotify | Apple Podcasts | Youtube | (and more)
Really interesting guest and I look forward to his book on public intellectuals and influencers.
Jordan Peterson is a very interesting case. The 8 hats he wears is why I stopped listening to him. He speaks with equal authority inside and outside his expertise. A very interesting figure no doubt, theologian, expert on mythology as well as clinical psychologist . I agree that not enough people are speaking directly to men who are craving direction and to be valued or just heard.
I really moved away from listening to him when I heard his views on the in-utility of child free adults. I find it deeply disturbing and misogynistic, dismissive of the contributions of gay and lesbians who until recently were often forced to be child free. I am a child free by choice, deeply secular person- while we are all the product of successful mothers- that is not the totality of women in a society and never ever was. Often child free women were more impactful because they could live outside societal norms. So many of Petersons arguments are based of alleged clinical cases he refers to where women were bereft not being a parent- the happy productive child free women are not yapping in his office.
Also a clinical psychologist to claim to not know the dangers and potency of benzodiazepines is highly suspect. I won’t elaborate on his bizarre diet advocacy. What does he know through science and reason and what does he guess at ? I don’t think he even knows.
Lory, great points. I love your observation that he “speaks with equal authority inside and outside his expertise”.