Re-Education or Ideological Conformity? The Case of Jordan Peterson

Jordan Peterson will undergo social media training as mandated by Ontario’s regulatory body of psychologists after the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear his appeal. The College of Psychologists of Ontario mandated the training, arguing some of Peterson’s posts were degrading and risked harming the profession’s reputation. Peterson and his lawyer criticize the decision, claiming it threatens free speech and could have a chilling effect on regulated professionals. The case has sparked debate over the role of professional bodies in policing public speech unrelated to clinical practice.

Editor’s Note: Particularly troubling is the notion of “re-education” for scientists and professionals. This term suggests images of ideological conformity rather than professional development. In a democratic society, professionals should be free to express their views, even if controversial, without fear of coercion or corrective measures. This case sets a dangerous precedent, suggesting that regulatory bodies could use their power to enforce ideological alignment, suppressing diversity of thought in fields that should thrive on it. There has always been a dissenting opinion to a claim, and it should be heard, even if controversial, to count as discourse. Innovation, critical thinking, and open debate should not be suppressed in favor of safe, politically-conforming, and palatable views. [See also: US Adds ICD Codes To Monitor Vaccination Status, Refer Unvaccinated to “Re-Education” Camps]

Read Original Article