I heartily agree, ideas should not be judged by the character of their originators, or by the quirks of the people who embrace them. At least in fields like maths, pure science, engineering, art, and music.

In fields adjacent to the sociopolitical arena, however, I think it makes sense to take a broader view, as one's unvoiced (or unconscious) assumptions cannot be separated from their public speech. Nietzsche comes to mind--can we judge ideas like his übermensh without awareness of how that concept drove eugenics and the Third Reich?

I haven't read any of Peterson's work for myself, but other writers I respect regard his views as patriarchal and simplistic.

Geniuses and polymaths exist, and many of them are worth paying attention to. But the more attention one gets as a writer, IMO, the more one needs to be careful about publishing in new areas where one lacks expertise.