Two ways to view Jordan Peterson

My nephew (a corporate banker) took some work colleagues to listen to Jordan Peterson when he was recently in Sydney. He describes the evening as the best conversation starter about the purpose of life and faith he has ever taken non-Christians to.

At the same event was Dani Treweek (PhD Sydney Anglican), who concludes that “for Peterson, the human story is indeed the human story. Or, to be more precise, it’s the story about the “optimisation” of each individual human in this life. [Peterson] argues that the foundational human task is the consistent moving of our lives—of our very selves—upward. Not upward towards God; upward towards self-improvement and betterment.”[1]

One view sees Peterson as human-centred, whereas the gospel begins and ends with God. I am sympathetic to this view. It aligns with Romans 1:1-5. From here, a conclusion is drawn. If Peterson's gospel is man-centred, not God-centred, it is no gospel at all, and we should not listen.

Another view would see things differently. Peterson assumes that we are here to grow. And that not all growth is equal – we cannot simply choose to remain static or grow in whatever direction takes our fancy. We must all grow toward maturity, rise through and above our suffering, and away from selfishness and shallow pleasure. Our optimum self is not something we get to choose. There is something objective about what constitutes an optimised human being.

For me, Peterson is a clear example of a type of post-Christendom thinker. He advocates for a person who matures or is being sanctified more and more into the image of Christ. Christian thought heavily influences his views about growth towards optimum (and Peterson acknowledges this).

Peterson can and does present another gospel. But his gospel can be a window through which we point people to Jesus – the optimum human being of all time.