This, it seems to me, is a significant source of Peterson’s success. Within this he provides common place ideas that presented as insights to justify his position as a contrarian. His surprising rise to fame was based on a completely arbitrary argument against the evolution of languages. Unless I am wrong and misunderstood, I’ve heard him say he didn’t really support his own position but it was too good an opportunity to give up.
He is a very articulate debater. This is not something that is taught or publicly valued now. As a result he has found it easy to fatally wound people who are less articulate and logical but struggle to define bullshit that they recognize without simply calling it bullshit.
In debates with an equal opponent Peterson’s tendency to dodge and duck and misdirect is visible. Enough said.