One thing I’ve noticed, is that his supporters are quick to point Dr. Peterson’s academic credentials as a way to deflect criticism of him. It’s like we aren’t allowed to find fault with him unless we also happen to be a professor of psychology. In academia, however, the opposite is true. All work is subject to rigorous inspection and criticism from all levels of a discipline.

The arguments in support of Dr. Peterson extend to those comments that he makes outside of his field of expertise though. That is, if you dare counter his opinion (in either context), you will once again be challenged based on your lack of a PhD in psychology. It doesn’t seem to matter what the argument is about.

It is these uncritical followers of Dr. Peterson that have stained his image. To be fair, Dr. Peterson doesn’t overtly support these efforts to deflect criticism. He is well capable of developing his own arguments.