User Controls
Public intellectuals annoy me
-
2017-10-11 at 4:22 PM UTC
-
2017-10-11 at 4:28 PM UTC
-
2017-10-11 at 4:32 PM UTCPAKI WITH NO NAME
-
2017-10-11 at 4:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Or rather the position they have begun to hold in public discourse.
People like Jordan B Peterson, Sam Harris, Gad Saad, Niel Degrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, and so on.
For one thing, it's obvious that these people believe that their specialist knowledge translates into general intelligence, which is absolutely not true.
For example Gad Saad is an evolutionary psychologist (a field which itself borders on pseudoscience) and commentates on immigration issues (he is blatantly biased on the issue of Muslim immigration and barely hides it), and absolutely fails to grasp or acknowledge the difference in the situations between the refugee and immigration situation in Europe Vs in America, and refuses to address the literal logic shortfalls in his view.
Jordan Peterson is a different kind of weirdo, he unironically uses words like "kekistani" and very specifically has both acknowledged that he cannot rationally justify his religious beliefs, and yet cannot acknowledge that his religious beliefs are irrational. Additionally he's so entrenched in his ideological warfare that he has made any concession towards the left into a matter of pride, and denied it as such, even though he has acknowledged the need for things like affirmative action and gender quotas in certain capacities.
And so on.
My problem isn't with them existing, because they have a right to exist and voice their opinions (although I wish they critically evaluated their own opinions, which are obviously coloured with the bias of their agenda), but the fact that these figures have turned into new world God figures, where dummies will listen to them and take them at their word without ever critically evaluating their views. None of them are an authority on 99% of the shit they talk about. It's always disheartening when I see someone like Sean Carrol (who is an excellent science popularizer in his own right) taking on an actual philosopher in philosophical debate, get rekt and refuse to concede but instead choose to insist upon an already defeated science-jacketed philosophical refrain. It's dumb. You're a scientist. You're losing this debate. Give something up to the philosopher.
dont listen to him, hes a saracen. -
2017-10-11 at 4:51 PM UTC
-
2017-10-11 at 7:27 PM UTC
-
2017-10-12 at 10:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Not true at all. It's not a matter of finding someone you agree with 100% because that's you. Don't take anyone's words at face valuable. If they make a claim or express an opinion, before you internalize it and put yourself on their bandwagon, you should pick that apart critically. And you're wrong, because Sam thinks that his subjective premises are the only rational opinion, and has said as much. He's not willing to challenge his own foundational views.
So again, you are entirely missing the point here and I feel like you're just regurgitating the same reasons you don't like Sam Harris v.s. the reasons you stated for not liking the nigas in yo OP. -
2017-10-12 at 10:21 PM UTC
Originally posted by 霍比特人说中文不好 So again, you are entirely missing the point here and I feel like you're just regurgitating the same reasons you don't like Sam Harris v.s. the reasons you stated for not liking the nigas in yo OP.
That's a great way to not address anything I said.
As stated previously, I actually don't dislike all the niggas in my post. In fact I respect most of them. But within reason, and not the way they have come to be respected. -
2017-10-14 at 5:01 AM UTCBecause you are not defending your original point.
Original point-My problem isn't with them existing, because they have a right to exist and voice their opinions (although I wish they critically evaluated their own opinions, which are obviously coloured with the bias of their agenda), but the fact that these figures have turned into new world God figures, where dummies will listen to them and take them at their word without ever critically evaluating their views. None of them are an authority on 99% of the shit they talk about. It's always disheartening when I see someone like Sean Carrol (who is an excellent science popularizer in his own right) taking on an actual philosopher in philosophical debate, get rekt and refuse to concede but instead choose to insist upon an already defeated science-jacketed philosophical refrain. It's dumb. You're a scientist. You're losing this debate. Give something up to the philosopher.
New point-Not true at all. It's not a matter of finding someone you agree with 100% because that's you. Don't take anyone's words at face valuable. If they make a claim or express an opinion, before you internalize it and put yourself on their bandwagon, you should pick that apart critically. And you're wrong, because Sam thinks that his subjective premises are the only rational opinion, and has said as much. He's not willing to challenge his own foundational views.
So let's get this straight, Sam Harris repeatedly tells you to question what he says. He then voices his opinion, which you said is fine and not the issue that you have. This issue you have is the stubborn buttheaded authority shit, which Sam Harris does not do and specifically goes out of his way to avoid it. It isn't putting on an air of authority just because you disagree with his opinion.
Saying that he spoke with authority is the only thing you said about Harris on your OP. I see a MASSIVE gap in the way people like Sam Harris and Bill Nye conduct themselves. Bill Nye never admits that he may be wrong, nor does he tell you to form your own opinion. I'm not disagreeing with anything else you said about Sam Harris, so there's really no need to discuss it. Just the authority thing, which it doesn't seem like you're arguing for anyway in your posts but for some reason still state that you are, or something.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-10-14 at 11:34 AM UTCPlease link me the video where Jordan Peterson openly supports gender quotas and affirmative action and i mean for niggers not for people with an IQ of 80. Also he talks about religion a lot but i don't seem to remember him ever saying outright that he is religious. He could have but i am not aware if he did. Also the only time i heard him talk about kekistan was on Rogan's podcast and what he did there was explain to Rogan what it was all about.
Also I wish you critically evaluated your own opinions, which are obviously coloured with the bias of your agenda.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
