Evangelicals can be curiously sympathetic to Peterson and I've already suggested this is because Peterson can serve as a cat's paw for some of the interests and aims of Anglo-American social conservatives with an evangelical set of convictions (not the blue-state types of evangelicals, obviously, but it's just as obvious to me that the difference is of what "kind" of transformational Social Gospel is meant to be implemented rather than a difference about whether or not a transformational and ultimately triumphalist Social Gospel is the guiding "worldview").
So, over at Slate ...
as to the question of quite literally who is buying what Peterson is selling the answer has become somewhat clear, just as it has become clear who isn't buying it what Peterson is selling. I've picked up the PDF of Maps of Meaning and I only started into it and it might take a while to finish. Since my interests are more in the arts and arts criticism and theory angle than variations of self-help Peterson's on the backest of the back burners. I'm going to try to jump into Joseph Campbell more thoroughly in a bit, I think. And ...
I finished Aesthetic Theory and Philosophy of New Music in the last month so I admit that for my interests Adorno is far more germane than Peterson. At this point my belief is that any kid in college who thinks he or she wants to get into critical theory needs to go and actually read Adorno to understand that if they plan to embrace critical theory as a healthy and honest alternative to white cisgender heteropatriarchal chauvinistic racist authoritarianism that reading even one book by Adorno should disabuse them of such an illusion, however appealing that illusion might seem to be. If an arch Marxist-Leninist of the old left like Adorno could write the racist and elitist screed "On jazz" there's no reason to think that to be on the left is to not traffic in elitism or racism, even if in Adorno's case I would say my impression has been that he was virulently anti-Slav more than he was particularly against African or African American musicians. Still, the point about the problem of the white left and right scapegoating each other for a shared legacy of racism would be most easily underlined if you cross reference someone like Adorno with someone like Dabney.
All that is to say that for those who are buying what Peterson is selling it's clear they want to buy in. After so many years at Mars Hill the reasons people buy in as they understand them should not be confused with the reason you think they are buying in. That's the kind of mistake that's made so habitually and systemically by contributors to Slate I'd write about that but I don't feel like it.