This was posted 1 year 1 month 20 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

  • expired

[Preorder] Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life by Jordan Peterson - $23.00 + $5.90 Shipping @ MightyApe


Ooooh controversial deal. Do you love equality, diversity, and inclusion? Hate the patriarchy? Think the gender pay gap is unfair and not a product of natural differences between men and women? Agree with new atheism (like Sam Harris) on the foundation of morals? Then you should probably look for another book- here, try this one instead -

If the above doesn't describe you, read on- thanks for making it this far! Love him or hate him JBP has certainly made a huge impact on our culture and the lives of many individuals. This book- "Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life" is a follow-up to his best seller, "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos". This is pretty good for preorder price, comes to $28.90 after shipping so if you've been keeping your eye on any toys/games for Christmas, it's a good idea to bundle for the shipping price.

For reference Dymocks and QBD have a pre-order price (for the paperback version) of $35 and Booktopia has it listed for $31.75 all not including shipping. Book Depository has it for $31.33 including shipping but it's still $2.43 more expensive than this unless you wait for the next great Book Depository cashback deal. Current cashback at CR is 1.4% for existing customers, 8% for new customers - so even if you're a new customer you'll end up 17.4c ahead going via mighty ape and paying for shipping.

Hope this helps someone, maybe more than just financially.

Related Stores

Mighty Ape Australia
Mighty Ape Australia

closed Comments

        • +9

          These are economic issues. No self help book can fix this, and it's nothing to do with feminism.

        • +8

          In other words, the role of Jordan Peterson is to misdirect the outrage of white working-class males from genuine economic concerns to culture wars nonsense.

          • @the urbanite: the right identity

          • +2

            @the urbanite: What? How did you come to that conclusion? That's actually the ludicrous level of jumping to conclusions that South Park does ironically. Legit, what is your logic/reasoning there?
            And I just noticed 'in other words' is the whole 'So what you're saying is…" nonsense too lol.

            …and btw how did it get so many votes?? hahaha

            No. That is not what is happening. Jordan Peterson addresses some of the issues that some working-class males (as well as lots of other kinds of people) encounter, and ANOTHER SEPARATE issue that some/many(?) working-class males (and, again, many other people too) encounter is the apparent stagnation of real wages in Australia. People can have multiple unrelated issues lol.

            edit: Typos

    • -7

      Why is this book for white people only…?

      • +6

        This isn't a reason to neg the deal. It's it a deal or not?

        • +11

          There are plenty of negs in this post. What is so particularly upsetting about my comment? Am I the only one who thinks it's ridiculous to say this book is specifically for white people?

          • +3

            @Autonomic: No, but neg quantity <> validity. Read the voting guidelines before negging.

          • -1

            @Autonomic: If it was presented as being specifically for white dudes, it would be retail suicide.

            The reality is that the vast majority of Petersen acolytes are white men. It's who he writes for.

        • +3

          Its barely a deal. Its $5 off, but has 100x more upvotes than the next book.

      • +4

        OzB is the same audience as Reddit - extreme leftists. They'll dislike anything that's in opposition.
        I'm a POC and I learnt something in the first book, so I look forward to the second.

        • +4

          Why would an "extreme" leftist be interested in a site that effectively celebrate the free market?

    • +16

      I'll hold out for the 36 rules of life of bundle when it comes out.

      • This comment, in this forum:

        In a war of ideology, only those cheap enough remain untainted!

    • +4

      Yikes. Someone has a chip in their shoulder about men. I'm sorry my existence offends you

    • +4

      What if I'm a working class male who is tall and was held enough as a child?

    • +1

      What about male lawyers, and female truck drivers?

    • +5

      This is Australia, not America. Lawyers here don't make $400,000/year. We don't do million-dollar payouts. Let alone for gender-discrimination cases, so we don't have "feminist lawyers".

    • What about working class brown guy. Would you recommend it too?

  • +40

    Here for some mature and constructive comments

    • +10

      100% sure that this thread will attract comments, 0% sure that they'll generally be mature and constructive

    • -6

      You know what's constructive?

      Not using benzos and then getting addicted to them, because the withdrawal can kill you.

      You'd think Peterson should have known this basic fact as a clinical psychologist.

      Then again, most psychology students I've met in uni were (profanity) idiots who severely overestimate their own intelligence. Petersen is just a grown up psychology student.

      • +6

        He was prescribed them.

        • +10

          He's a clinical psychologist. He knows about the drug addiction and over prescription issue in America, because he's talked about it.

          He should have known better.

      • grown up

        Come on now. Let's not go overboard

    • why don't you add your own

    • +6
      • you're wrong
      • your mom
      • go ____ yourself
      • eneloops
  • +19

    Wonder if there's anything about his all beef diet in there

    • I imagine that people's bodies will respond better to some diets over others.

      • +33

        An all beef diet is not good for literally anyone lmao

        • +6

          To be fair, the reason he did it was based on the fact that his daughter did it, and it was the only thing that helped her as she had some kind of immune disorder. Not sure it’s a good idea for the majority of people though.

        • Not true

        • +2

          except for ubereem

        • There doesn't seem to be any serious issues with all meat diets. I wouldn't do it just because of the cost alone but it seems to have helped some people. Its essentially an elimination diet because there's nothing that could cause a reaction during digestion, as people rarely have any intolerance to meat.

          There's also the ethical issues of only eating meat but part of that is resolved by eating uncommon parts like the organs.

        • +1

          he's been on record, more than once, saying that he does not recommend the all-beef diet. It was something that worked for his daughter who (iirc) had severe allergy issues and he tried it and went along with it when she had success.

        • Please do your research before commenting stuff like this. There exists healthy body of research in support of this diet and it was also revealed how red meat = heart disease research was manipulated to look that way. Start with Dr. Shawn Baker as a gateway. Also 'What I've Learned' on YT did a great video on this compiling all the research evidence on and against this diet.

        • +1

          An all "insert whatever here" diet is never good for anyone.

    • +16

      beef and benzos makes a person you should take advice from

    • +1

      An all-beef diet is a great pathway to constipation. Although, benzo abuse does that too.

      • It shows you haven't looked into the diet because constipation is the exact opposite of what happens on this diet.

  • +81

    For all the talk about this giving meaning to people's lives, it feels Peterson and his evangelists are most concerned about defining what they're in opposition to than what they stand for.

    What you're likely getting here, if his previous book is any judge, is a tribal identity to belong to, and one you definitely don't, in addition to some not particularly original self-help tropes.

    If that's what rocks your boat, all the best to you, you do you bro.

    • +12

      I think this is a fair criticism, Peterson has been very motivated by trying to put boundaries on when the political left goes "too far", because these boundaries have not been well defined though they have been on the right (e.g. as soon as someone starts talking about a particular racial group being superior to others we can agree that's bad). By definition this tasks involves specifying what one is opposed to. That being said he clearly makes lots of "positive" statements in his last book, e.g. clean your room, tell the truth, etc.- these are things he stands FOR, not against.

      • +1

        Peterson can't admit it's bad. His main tenet is that certain races get better jobs because they have higher average IQs due to being members of that racial group.

      • +15

        I guess I'm just not clear he's saying anything new here. These aren't particularly original philosophical ideas. I'm not aware that he's doing any original research in this area. I guess he's making it more easily digestible than reading Tolstoy or Dostoevsky?

        There is no shortage of self-help gurus (or frankly cults) out there that teach the same kind of principles. The hook into Scientology, after all, is self-help. I'm not suggesting that Peterson is out to defraud his readers, he seems to genuinely believe what he believes. But at the same time I think he is complicit in not doing more to repudiate the backward ideas in his movement.

        After all, why exactly does he stand out and garner so much appeal? Why is he so popular? I can't see anything unique here other than the anti-identity that he's nurtured. And in the same way that Facebook, Youtube have figured out that controversy and outrage drive engagement more than rational argument, I am sure that he is well aware that his anti-identity is core to his popularity.

        I guess if I was searching for meaning in life, I would either suggest reading the classics or modern interpretations. For example Ryan Holiday has a number of good books exploring the stoics. If I was searching for an identity, I would steer clear of groups that seem to be accepting of some pretty regressive alt-right views.

        • It's social "sciences", not physics. Why are you looking for original research? Research is not the point of this book at all.

          • +2

            @jalwa: I'm looking for a reason to care about what he has to say.

            As an example of original research, look an Angela Duckworth's Grit, showing how grit is a predictor of Navy SEALs making it through training. This book made my appreciate how raw tenacity is going to matter more in the long run for me than whether I won the biological lottery of intelligence.

            Or maybe a perspective from experience from someone who's overcome real adversity. Meditations by Marcus Aurelius gives you real life insight from a Roman general with unimaginable responsibilities and pressures and how he navigates them.

            Why should I care about Peterson's opinion? What is he adding when he liberally adapts the ideas of others without attribution? Go to any bookstore and look in the motivational section. You will find plenty of self help books offering the same kind of rigmarole.

            • +1

              @RedSky: You worry that Peterson's work is not original enough…but grit? is ok? I'm not sure if you misspoke, but you think the concept of 'grit' or 'tenacity' is original? It's not.

              Also, Jordan Peterson regularly points out that very little of what he is saying is new or original - and in fact that he is surprised and disheartened that so many people are hearing this stuff from him for the first time.
              If you don't need these books, you don't need them. That is legit great. But of course everyone is different with different life experiences growing up etc etc. Some of these people do get a lot out of these books.
              And these aren't 'other people's ideas' he's dealing with. Other people have had them because they are fairly universal.
              Marcus Aurelius had a lot of similar great ideas, but he lived in a world that is not relatable to most people today fkn 2000 years ago, he didn't have the access to huge amounts of research and experiences able to be studied today, and he was just writing notes for his own life/benefit - not as a digestible treatsie on the human condition, and with no intention to share it with others to improve their lives.
              Yes, there are pros to reading Marcus Aurellius' diary, or Tolstoy, or Dostoevsky or a million other famous philosophers and authors yourself. But it also takes shitloads of time and energy that most people don't have. Because they have jobs and lives to live. You know who does have time and energy? University professors because they're inherently more interested than most people AND they're paid to do it.

              I don't know why people attack him with all these ridiculous things. You can tell immediately that he strives for balance (though he's HUMAN and sometimes he doesn't know everything and sometimes he gets angry or frustrated or distracted) - really the only people who could be pissy at that are radically left or right people, or people who are jealous of his success/have a high opinion of themselves.

        • +4

          So would I steer clear of such groups.

          Lucky JP is a man, not a group or a movement hey?

          And he is famous for declaring Canadian Law went too far when it made it a crime to use a pronoun not of a persons choosing.

          And he became internet famous++ for winning an argument by a huge margin versus a fem left journo.
          JP has nothing to do with Scientology - best not to go there. Your references to "cults" are weak and misplaced.

          But yeah, the core of his beliefs are founded on taking responsibility so not much new at all if you've read the bible or popular psychology.

          His nuanced claims, especially around gender, have gained popularity. You might categorise them as a backlash against a changing society he claims is spewing forth false beliefs that become widely accepted and even turned into policy and sometimes laws.

          He has yet to be refuted in a "JP was shot down" sense that the vast majority of commenters of the YT video seen by 23M people claim he did to Cathy Newman.

          • +9

            @GC1: I feel like you've kind of reiterated my point.

            His appeal is his opposition to left wing excesses and being a firebrand who makes debate and interview appearances with clipable own the libs soundbites that affirm your identity in opposition to something.

            If that's the core of his appeal then he's more of a media personality or pundit than someone who should be giving life advice. Like you said, the core of his beliefs is nothing new.

            The reason this deal has so many upvotes is not because his rules are uniquely profound. It is because of the tribal identity and following he has built by being opposed to something.

            • @RedSky: Unfortunately, this is how to use the media to sell books.

              Nonetheless, my opinion is that we have replaced a bad system with no system and have promoted mass consumerism and un-checked self absorption in it's place which has lead to a decay in what we expect and how we treat others.

              To that end, @RedSky as you say below, abandoning organised religion in large numbers has left many without a roadmap for life. An organised and easy set of rules to follow.

              As a Clinical Psych, JP is in a pretty good position to see the fall out. His prescription is take responsibility, a core tenet of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy and nothing you can't find in the Bible if you were inclined to look. But that IS his expertise and why he is qualified to write Self-Help books.

              His commentary on gender and other social issues is where he is NOT qualified to draw conclusions but it is where he has gained his popularity.

          • @GC1:

            And he became internet famous++ for winning an argument by a huge margin versus a fem left journo

            lol. That wasn't a win. That was him talking over the journalist and not letting her get a word in edgewise if it would contradict him.

            Also, you don't "win" interviews.

        • +2

          why exactly does he stand out and garner so much appeal? Why is he so popular?

          You're overthinking it.

          JBP's core message, which he goes back to time and time again, is simply, "Take some responsibility for your life and start getting your act together."

          That's where the "clean your room" meme comes from. It's a good place to start getting your shet together.

      • -1

        Actually it isn't a fair comparison as it casts a heuristic reliant on a personal viewpoint with no backing evidence as the foundation of the argument.

      • That being said he clearly makes lots of "positive" statements in his last book, e.g. clean your room, tell the truth, etc

        Honestly, how does he keep getting credit for this kind of bollocks. This is the stuff your mother (and fathers) teach you when you are a child. So all his acolytes have ignored their mothers, and then when some hack tells them to do it it's somehow profound?

        Also, him proselytizing about telling the truth is like Trump admonishing others not to grab women by the…..well you know

        • +2

          It's ironic that you probably think of yourself as morally far superior to Jordan Peterson. But how many people's lives have you improved recently? Are you a useful person? Are you even a good person on balance? It's not always so simple.

    • +16

      To be fair, I think the level of political thinking in the West these days is so simplistic and primitive, that what Peterson is doing is actually needed.

      He is going back to the basics, because we have lost the plot. Why would you want a complex book for a simple time?

      We are making a lot of mistakes in our thinking today. You make it sound as if people are already engaging in healthy political debate.

      Remember that the very reason why he rose to fame in the first instance was because of how far the west has fallen, when it comes to political thought processes.

      So no he doesn't have to do more than what he has done, because what we need right now, more than anything else, is a reality check.

      • +1

        I would agree that as societies become more secular they're losing an institution (the church) that gave people both some (not always ideal) moral instruction and gave them a sense of community.

        The average number of friends that people report having, has continued to drop throughout the decades as we move more online. This is more true in the US where Rust Belt / manufacturing towns are hollowing out and civil society is narrowing (see Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam) than in Australia, but it's happening here too.

        Anyway, what I don't see is why he feels qualified to fill that role. See my comment @jalwa for more credible advice givers. See my comment @tedzr for complex solutions in a simple time and cliff notes to finding your meaning in life.

    • -6

      Peterson is a paid pundit/hack. He will say whatever and poorly back it up to keep the money machine going brr.

      • +9

        sounds like you have never seen him in debate… he has always been able to back up everything he says with facts…

        • -6


        • +10

          @siresteelhell: No, this is what he appears to do. What he actually does is to carefully select only the parts of the evidence that align with the narratives he believes in, throws away the rest of the evidence, and interprets the sh#t out of those carefully selected fragments of evidence to make it look like they strongly support his arguments”. He does the same thing in his book. He should know better considering he’s scientifically literate (I think).

          • +3

            @ForkSnorter: Example please?

            • +3

              @nickp: One example: Climate change. He exaggerates the uncertainty (margin of error) in climate change models to discredit climate change campaigns/action, and neglects to mention that all models, regardless of the uncertainty level, predict future warming and crisis scenarios. He selectively cites the small number of scientists who think global warming is beneficial. He exaggerates our lack of understanding of the impact of current actions to address climate change. He frequently associates advocates of climate change action with "ideologies" like atheism, anti-capitalism, social justice, but neglects to provide any data linking them. He frequently exhibits the "appeal to authority" fallacy by claiming "I've read hundreds of books on this", rather than just citing real data.

    • +3

      Yeah, but you've said that without addressing any content of what he actually talks about. It's really easy to criticize the audience and simultaneously pass off the content as "not particularly original self-help tropes". But why not try to address the content?

      I'd hazard a guess and say you've probably never read the book. Forget "it feels", why don't you try sampling the content for yourself. If you have, why concern yourself with the 'evangelists' and 'identity seekers'? Why do you care so much about those who read Jordan Peterson? What are you worried about?

      Some people need to be told what to do and how to think. Many people. You find them everywhere across all political and cultural spectrums. Why concern yourself with them?

      • +2

        I've skimmed excerpts of his first book as I was curious if I was missing something. I'm open to an argument that he's contributing something new if you would like to make it?

        As for people needing to be told what to do and how to think, frankly this is kind of my issue. There's no cliff notes to the meaning of your life. There's no boilerplate that will work out well for you. If you accept (even well meaning advice, to give Peterson the benefit of the doubt) from someone as gospel without analysing whether this person has the credibility to give advice, you open yourself to a maliciously snake oil salesmen coming along to exploit you.

        And to add to that, movements like the one Peterson is a part of, which are driven by an opposition more than an affirmative belief don't end well. There is a reason that some of his supporters are neo-nazis. Neo-nazis recruit young people lacking direction, a support network or an identity and empower them by giving them community identity defined by the hate of another identity. There are some parallels.

        And hey, don't let me come off as hypocritical here - be as sceptical of what I say as much as Peterson. If you find he appeals to you all the same, as I said whatever floats your boat.

        • +3

          Thanks for taking the time to respond. Firstly, I'd like to say that I'm no expert on Peterson and I'm far from being across everything he's said and done. That said, I've read '12 Rules' and listened to him on a few podcasts.

          From my perspective, what he has delivered that is so compelling and insightful for many is a nuanced and digestible guide on what it means to live a life in a moral and strong way that puts primacy on care of the self as a means of improving your condition, social contribution and subsequently the lives of those around you. He has done this by drawing heavily on the broader Western canon and borrowing from Christian and philosophical traditions as well as literature and history. He's thrown some psychology and neuroscientific research into the mix as well as that's essentially his academic background. Nothing is all that new per-se, but what he has done is skillfully synthesize a broad array of dispirate information onto a cogent narrative that is both compelling and informative. To many it makes sense on an intuitive level.

          This narrative helps overwrite the pre-existing somewhat nihilistic and amorphous moral programming that many point to as a source of their malaise, especially after reading Peterson. You know what I mean, modern life is weird. It's crazy shit and not for the faint of heart and I can see why people are afraid of it. But it really isn't malicious. When I was reading 12 rules several years ago, I remember thinking 'how is this so controversial'? I think the controversy comes more from when he opens his mouth and talks about gender and identity issues. But really, why shouldn't he?

          I think what happened is that he got called out and was given all sorts of nasty labels very early on for criticizing the anti-scientific, anti-intellectualism that is rife amongst the modern left. He thinks there is a major crisis that has been unfolding for decades where misguided post-modernism is infecting modern academia and thought with potentially dire consequences. He doesn't believe that everybody is created equal, meanwhile he doesn't believe that this difference (or perceived lack-there-of) should define a person. He's terrified of suppression of freedom of speech and is clearly scarred by the horrors rampant throughout the collectivist history of the 20th century. AKA he loathes communism and fascism. He's entitled to his thoughts and opinions. If neo-nazis want to hitch their ropes to his wagon well that is a shame but nothing of what he says encourages their ideology.

          As for being exploited by those who want to tell you what to do, sadly it does happen and people do get hurt. But nothing we say will ever change it. Education is the key, but I believe people will always need religion etc. You've gotta have an open mind unless you want to fall into the same dogmatic trap of believing you're right about everything.

    • +4

      There was always going to be an enormous market for the first tenured academic to say to the SJWs, **** you, I won't do what you tell me. That much was overdue, and credit to him for doing it.

      I don't like to mock anyone who is trying to find meaning in their life. Mormons, for example. They seem happy, well adjusted, comfortable in their own skins even. Same with the Tony Robbins crowd. Same with this guy's fanbase.

      However, if you want a critique of the SJW ideology, you're probably better off reading Christopher Lasch (he died decades ago but his books are still the best). One of the best essay critiques is Mark Fisher's 'Exiting the Vampire Castle':-

      • +64

        2020 definition of Nazi - someone I don’t agree with

        • +12

          You are literally Hitler…

        • +9

          A bit like calling Avi Yemeni a Nazi because some people don’t like what he does, a Jewish man a Nazi…. I just can’t deal …

          • +6

            @Tal_Shiar: I guess people should stop saying "Avi Yemeni, the Nazi" and start saying "Avi Yemeni, the convicted wife basher" for accuracy.

            • @noodlesfordaddy: True facts.

              However, there's nothing that would stop a Jewish person from becoming a Nazi….

      • +8

        Someone down-voted my comment within one minute!?! Wow! The irony deepens!

  • +10

    Does anyone else think that 24 rules for life seems like someone is over thinking this a little. Even God only gave us 10!

    • +4

      There are 613 mitzvot (commandments) in Jewish tradition lol.

      • +7

        I guess that God assumed that the Jews were going to behave badly, so they needed to be given a bunch of extra rules?!?

        • +4

          Wait….is that anti-Semitic?

        • +5

          He gave us 613 rules, we didn't listen, he simplified it to 10 to make it easier to understand, we still didn't listen and God has gone on an extended holiday.

          • @FabMan: He's gonna be spewin when he sees how many house parties we've had in Earth…

Login or Join to leave a comment