12 Rules for Life An Antidote to Chaos

why

World's longest commencement speech.

1. Stand with your shoulders back 2. Treat yourself responsibly 3. Make friends with those who want the best for you 4. Compare yourself with who you were yesterday and not others. 5. Do not let your children do anything that would make you dislike them 6. Set your house in perfect order, before you criticize the world. 7. Pursue what is meaningful,not expedient. 8. Tell the truth, not lies. 9. Assume the person you're listening to knows something you don't. 10. Be precise in your speech. 11. Do not bother children when they are skateboarding. 12. Pet a cat when you see it on the street.

I decided to listen to this audiobook to see what all the fuss was about. Sadly, I was underwhelmed. Firstly, 12 Rules is far too long. I wish JP could make his point clearly and simply, without the roundabout writing. To be absolutely clear: this is a self-help book pimped up with pseudo-science and religion. One of his core assumptions is that the stories of the Bible represent our true, innate selves. That it's moral and practical lessons are taught to us because it's in our nature to learn them - that we're created in pain, and it's our role in life to overcome it, "to create order out of chaos". This has a few concerning implications, perhaps the worst of all is that the differences between sexes and races is down to competence, not temporary power imbalances. You don't need to be a professor to understand why Peterson is wrong here. Peterson uses similar, roundabout thinking elsewhere, and his long, winding religious rambles holds the book back and makes it unbearable. Shady rationale and sanctimony aside, this tome isn't without value. Many of the principles JP believes in are solid ideas to build a life upon: self-belief, growth mentality, surrounding yourself with the people who believe in you, short-term sacrifice and discipline for long-term gain, and developing empathy with others to lead an effective life. So even when I disagreed on the reasoning and didn't enjoy the writing style, there was just enough juice in the lemon to keep me interested. Overall, most of the value in this book can be found in life itself, or better "self help" books (The Last Lecture comes to mind). This isn't worth a read!

Life changing

Life changing

I think some of the critiques of this book might be a little harsh (I don’t know if I’d ever finish a one star book). That being said, I think this book could be more impactful if it was half or a third the length. A lot of the stories seem to be fluff. Perhaps the original Quora post would suffice. None of the rules are really mind blowing out anything you wouldn’t expect. There are some ideas that are challenging to think about but mostly just got me interested in exploring the other side of the argument. Not bad but it probably won’t change your life.

Enjoyable read with some useful principles, may read again at some point down the line.

Like, I get Canada is a different country from the USA, but what world is this dude living in to say this vitriolic, anecdotal, unsupported by research, and anthropomorphizing bullshit?

Perhaps the "most influential public intellectual of our time", Jordan Peterson writes like he talks - with pacy precision and intentionality. This book is written with the clear intent to help people become the best they can be. This makes sense as he is a clinical psychologist who specialises in depth psychology and assertiveness training. The atmosphere of the book is honest, humble and eclectic. It drew me in, and there were many times, while reading, where I sat and pondered the profound insights and truths in this book. Ranging from politics, culture, and group ideologies to psychology, philosophy, and biology, this book touches on many different subjects to achieve its goal: to help the individual create order out of chaos and permeate that to the world.

Following one of the rules in the books, which is to tell the truth I decided to be as honest as possible whilst reviewing. A lot of the content within the book resonated with me and has given me a lot of food for thought about my life and how I'm living it. Around half way through the book I decided to read some reviews to get a general feel from other people who have read it and I found that much of my concerns and opinions were shared. The book has a lot of good inside of it but also has a lot misinterpretation and skewing of stories and quotes to fit an argument. That being said I feel I'm a more compassionate, understanding and thoughtful person through reading it which is why I would recommend it to anybody looking for a little guidance through this journey we call life.

This has been a difficult book to get through. It is almost impossible to separate the book from the political views of Jordan Peterson, and I am not sure he intended to, it is after all his views of the world and humans. I didn't love this book, I am not sure I even liked it. However, I also measure a book by how much of an effect it has on me and how much I think about it when I am not directly engaging with it. This book has certainly has been on mind, and some of it has been positive and other times it has caused immense frustration. The book has some simple and useful "rules" and I think they are for the most part, genuinely intended for the betterment of the reader and those around them. These rules are not new or groundbreaking and I have read variants of them in other books. What is different for me at least, is the breakdown and rationalization of them. I wonder if the book is intended more for the conservative right, maybe even the ultra-right? He often uses the bible as source material, mixed with scientific empirical evidence (I am taking his word on the authenticity of the data he refers to) and his obvious extensive knowledge of philosophers and psychologists. I suspect he has tailored the explanations to sway the more extremists on the right and hoping to bring them to a more towards a moderate position, which is good I think. I definitely got to experience a different perspective, which is well articulated and thought through. I just don't agree with a lot of it. It is hard to rate this book. It is well written and I do believe his intentions with the book are honorable. I personally struggled with some of the explanations and detail, but also appreciated parts of it. Should you read it? Probably, even just to disagree with it.

I really enjoyed this book. I don’t agree with everything he writes, but I do think it’s a well written book, it has a very interesting point of view and a really intriguing interpretation of biblical writings. I recommend it. It’s a good reading.

Wouhf ! Almost 3 weeks with this one... I wasn't particularly enjoying it, some "truths/facts" are just hard to swallow. All in all, I think I closed this one feeling 'moins bête' (less of an idiot). Of all the rules *spoiler alert* the one that hit home for me is: Number 9: "Assume that the person you are listening to might know something you don't" Easier to say or for that matter read, but God how I am still wrestling with my inner voice to just chill and listen !! I might have made some progress, and with my tiny little experience I found that everyone knows something that you don't if you listen carefully... so 10 points for the Doctor (Doesn't he look like Peter Capaldi? aaaaaaaaaaaanyway...) "For the ancients, the discovery that different people have different ideas about how, practically, to live, did not paralyze them; it deepened their understanding of humanity and led to some of the most satisfying conversations human beings have ever had, about how life might be lived." The rules are not an absolute guide, in fact it seemed to me in general that they are too evasive, maybe "somewhere between chaos and order" in the author's words.. Like it's a harmless thing to read, maybe it's even beneficial, but absolutely can't swear by it ! I believe that in the bigger picture this book is a good initiation to analytical psychology and Jung specifically : I was astonished to find the same ideas that I read the last month in Women Who Run With the Wolves: Myths and Stories of the Wild Woman Archetype, but positively... (including folk tales with loads of archetypical symbols, I felt lucky to have already been initiated by the latter book) "Chaos is mater, origin, source, mother; materia, the substance from which all things are made. [...] In its positive guise, chaos is possibility itself, the source of ideas, the mysterious realm of gestation and birth..." And maybe my favourite bit, apart from the beautiful reminders from both my top Dostoevsky's books (The Brothers Karamazov + Notes from the Underground) and Goethe (Faust - which I haven't finished reading yet): "Dostoevsky expresses this idea very clearly in the voice of the protagonist of Notes from Underground: “So you see, you can say anything about world history—anything and everything that the most morbid imagination can think up. Except one thing, that is. It cannot be said that world history is reasonable. The word sticks in one’s throat.” This eulogy for telling the Truth: "To tell the truth is to bring the most habitable reality into Being. Truth builds edifices that can stand a thousand years. Truth feeds and clothes the poor, and makes nations wealthy and safe. Truth reduces the terrible complexity of a man to the simplicity of his word, so that he can become a partner, rather than an enemy. Truth makes the past truly past, and makes the best use of the future’s possibilities. Truth is the ultimate, inexhaustible natural resource. It’s the light in the darkness. See the truth. Tell the truth. Truth will not come in the guise of opinions shared by others, as the truth is neither a collection of slogans nor an ideology. It will instead be personal." Truth is a beautiful thing !

I initially rated this book five stars but have put it down to four because I don’t remember it as clearly. I can certainly see why many people don’t like this book as it could be condensed and many of the rules are obvious. I have read a few self help books so I can’t say that any of the rules were new to me or mind blowing. However, I went into this wanting a reminder of some good rules to live by. I think sometimes that the most obvious ways we should live our lives are often the hardest to do. I also appreciate that Peterson is trying to encourage the individual to better themselves. That’s not to say that big systems don’t need changing and that everything in your life is your fault. But if you can’t even look at what you can control how can you expect to change the world? All in all, I found this book a valuable read and one that I’ll be coming back to.

Is is not useless book for sure. It has a lot of value in it. It may be very helpful for people who are a bit lost in their lives or for those who encountered some depressing events recent past. However, the style and language Jordan Peterson uses is becoming more and more tiring every next page you read. Long, elaborate thoughts which impressed me in the first chapter, I found them very annoying in chapter 7 or 10. I really had to read last 3 chapters 10 pages a day because of the style and language. Worth reading when you are want to get your sh*t together but not the best rearing experience for sure.

This book was hard to keep reading. The main problem being the underlying stories of the rules. Firstly, most of the text didn’t have anything to do with the “rule” itself. Next, the book is chaotic with his personal, biological, philosophical, religious and psychological points. Finally, I cannot agree with some of his reinterpretations which he does just to make his point. Such as “Christian crucifix means life is suffering.”

If you're familiar with Peterson's youtube lectures, very little in this book will be new to you. 12 Rules for Life is more or less is a distillation of those lectures, but more accessible and organized. If you aren't familiar with his lectures, then I highly recommend this book, with one caveat: it is formatted as self-help. But Peterson's ideas are incredibly compelling. He has succeeded in doing what memorable authors always do: he has reformulated old ideas in a new way. His main thrust is this: all our mythology and religion (more or less synonymous things in his mind) has been developed over thousands of years and contains profound truths that progressive politics ignores at its own risk. His analysis of the ways we construct meaning, and the roles that religion, literature, and politics play in that is astute. He brings psychoanalysis, Dostoevsky, and Genesis together in seemingly air-tight ways. He really is (and this is why he is so popular on Youtube) an incredibly articulate and cohesive thinker. The only problem with Peterson is that his ideas are a little too airtight. He attempts to derive some approximation of traditional morality through a Darwinian lense (religion evolved as a mythological expression of truths that we only understand through story, etc) and though the attempt is noble, it ultimately forces him to ignore certain questions and twist certain definitions. For example, in Peterson's estimation God is a figure that symbolizes man's capacity to make order out of chaos, and to serve a higher authority than themselves. Whether or not God exists literally, this is an incomplete explanation for why people worship and what the idea of a deity has meant to humans over the course of history. But Peterson defines things so they will fit in his rubric. On the other hand, his rubric has a lot of good stuff in it. If you read this book and take his advice, your life will most certainly become better. Peterson is saying things that people in this country, and in this world, desperately need to hear. More power to him. In sum, his reformulation of classic ideas is brilliant and compelling, but imperfect. Readers should pay attention to the good stuff in this book, then put it in its place and not take his framework as comprehensive.

The beginning is pretty strong but it's only going down from there. Was really though to read. If you're the kind of person (like me) to always finish a book once you've started. Do yourself a favour and don't pick up this one. Only not giving just one star cause I liked the last chapter again.

2.5 stars It was a true struggle getting through this book - I ended up listening to the audio version (narrated by the author, plus points there). Although the rules were good, there was an inordinate amount of bible verses, references, etc. which made me feel like I was back in religion class in high-school (not in a good way).

Fantastic read. Don't pay attention to media hype - read and decide for yourself. This is a book to read over and over and over again, gleaning new information each time. Particularly great on audio as you get to hear Jordan read it himself and his inflections/tone.

Keletą metų jau manęs vis paklausia, ką manau apie Jordan Peterson. Ir aš visa sakydavau, kad nieko apie jį nemanau, nes nei skaičiau jo knygų, nei žiūrėjau jo paskaitų, nes jo pažiūrios kardinaliai skiriasi nuo manųjų. Bet kartas nuo karto mane vis kas sunervina vėl paklausdami nuomonės apie jį, tai va. Teko perskaityti tą* knygą. Dvylika taisyklių. Ką galima iš šios knygos sužinoti apie Jordan Peterson: 1. Jis yra aršus kapitalistas, bet niekad to nepripažins. 2. Žiauriai protingas žmogus, mano akimis genijus. Puikiai suvokia filosofiją ir psichologiją. Bet mano, kad niekas kitas šito nesuvokia. 3. Jis yra a cat person. 4. Visai kaip Eckhart Tolle, mano, kad viską žino apie vaikų auginimą, nes pats užaugino vaikų. Kitaip nei Tolle, jis išties apie vaikų auginimą žino gerų dalykų. 5. Nekenčia Marxo. 6. Nekenčia postmodernizmo. 7. Ir mano, kad jie yra vienas ir tas pats. Nors šiaip abi sąvokos - marksizmas ir postmodernizmas - viena kitai prieštarauja. 8. Yra šiek tiek seksistas, bet galima ir nepastebėti tos ribos, kurią peržengia jo mizoginizmas. 9. Jis parašė knygą baltiesiems hetero vyrams. Todėl man, kaip bi moteriai, skaityti tam tikras vietas buvo ypač nemalonu. Pavyzdžiui, dėl to, kad moterys neša chaosą, o vyrai atstovauja tvarką, na, o šioje knygoje Peterson vis teigia, kad chaosas blogai, o tvarka gerai. Išvados? 10. Dar vienas seksizmo pavyzdys. Jei moterį klube išprievartauja, tai moteriai nereikėtų kaltinti vyro, kuris ją išprievartavo. Gal tiesiog daugiau klubuose nebesilankyti. 11. Jordan prijaučia konservatoriams respublikonams, bet irgi šito niekad nepripažins. 12. Oi kaip Peterson nekenčia nihilizmo. Tiesiog oi. Šiaip yra ir gerų patarimų. Tik tada, kai jie pradeda sietis su filosofija ir sociologija. Nes tada tampa kažkokiu keistu iškreiptu vaizdiniu. Tai tiek.

Walking around B&N I noticed this book and thought I'd check it out from the library and give it a read. The "12 Rules" have a much different tone than books I usually read which got me interested. Things like "Don't bother kids when they're skateboarding" and "pet a cat when you encounter one". What I didn't realize was just how religious it was! In every chapter somehow the story is turned back to The Bible. It was during this book that I realized that using Libby I could skip chapters. That worked great for this book where skipping would just fast forward to the next rule.

Jordan Peterson excels when he manages to weave his experience and expertise as a clinical psychologist with stories and metaphors of much grander character, namely ones of biblical nature. This is best exemplified by Rule 9 which I believe is the best part of this book (perhaps apart from the introduction, which I also found to be well-written, albeit a bit of a reach in terms his interpretation of the science presented). Where he falls short, however, and embarrassingly so, is as an jack-of-all-trades academic who extrapolates conclusions from papers well beyond his domain to support his own conclusions. It is simply dishonest. In Rule 11 he also dabbles in the right-wing conspiracy theory that is Cultural Marxism. I am kind of happy that he does it this late in the book as to avoid spoiling the rest of the book for me, but I am also immensely disappointed as it was the nail in the coffin, and solidified my view that Jordan Peterson does not know as much as he purports. The general structure dictating how the rules are explained is well thought out. Beginning the chapter with the rule in its simplest form, then moving onto various complicated metaphors and Peterson's personal experiences, and then returning to the rule, again in its simplest form, but this time with the reader convinced of its utility. The text itself, however, is riddled with redundant superlatives and oddly assembled sentences that could be distilled into a few, much more impactful words, making Rule 10: Be precise in your speech, seem ironic at best, and disingenuous at worst. Jordan Peterson behaves much the same as the socialists who he claims act with reserved disdain for the working class, as he will in the same breath go on a tirade against his childhood “friend”, Chris, the embodiment of the forgotten rural working-class white man (later commits suicide) whom he and his family treats with such utter disdain in a period where it is readily apparent that Chris is vulnerable. Further, the conflation of Marxism with Communism, Stalinism with Marxist-Leninism, just shows, once again, that Jordan Peterson is truly clueless with regards to leftist ideologies. Jordan Peterson could have written a fantastic book (but a much less popular one), had he narrowed the scope of the book to the domain of psychology. Instead, he disregards the post-recession economy which has reinstated normalcy for the rich but substantially reduced the quality of the lives of the working-class, increasingly oligarchical western democracies and corporate consolidation, chalking up all the growing discontent among the populace to a character flaw, an unwillingness to take responsibility for one's own life. The foreword, by Norman Doidge, is a hot steaming pile of garbage that should be removed. It has the arrogance of Anna Quindlen's introduction for Pride and Prejudice with nothing to show for it. That's the best way I can put it.