Hi Grahame, thanks for your message! So, I can understand a lot of the appeal of Peterson — he is this full-throated firebrand in a way that is really refreshing and appealing to a wide array of folks. But as a psychologist, I have to say he is considered a laughing stock by nearly everyone in my field due to the fact that he doesn’t use empirical or scientific approaches in his work. In terms of his methods of gathering data and supporting his positions, he is not a scientist, an academic, or a psychologist at all. He seems to make bold claims based on ideology and then seek confirmatory, narrative evidence in as unsystematic and biased a manner as possible. He’s a great storyteller but he has zero rigor whatsoever.