51–60 of 179 posts
Sounded pretty good until "Joe Rogan is also fantastic" at the end there...
Joe Rogan sits squarely at the intersection of "intelligent and curious people who don't vet their sources particularly well" and "batshit-insane folks looking for confirmation of their abhorrent views".
People need to learn to start forming their own opinions and not being so easily influenced by who said what and thinking about the what itself. Lately I've been wondering if maybe people evolved to be sensitive to the who to make it easier for us to be controlled. Said control can be useful at times.
People need to learn to start forming their own opinions and not being so easily influenced by who said what and thinking about the what itself. Lately I've been wondering if maybe people evolved to be sensitive to the who to make it easier for us to be controlled. Said control can be useful at times.
Pretty sure we evolved to be both. A society cannot function without a lot of people who mostly just follow a leader, but any society which doesn't constantly question its beliefs and ideals is guaranteed to fall sooner or later so we also need a lot of contrarians who do ask all those questions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intelligence implies vetting one’s sources well.
Intelligence just means spotting patterns faster. If you're intelligent but "detail oriented", that just means you'll end up coming up with a brilliant solution to the wrong problem. In a Dungeons and Dragons character, knowing to vet one's sources would be an example of "Wisdom". And I think that's probably the right word for it in conventional speech as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? Does Rogan run a shop selling trinkets and snake oil? He's a comedian chatting with people and sharing the discussion that you can choose to watch or not. The controversy around him is largely manufactured by a dying corporate media and ruling class threatened by unsanctioned voices. Speaking of being trolled by billionaires...
Doesn't Rogan get more views than most cable news anchors?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joe Rogan sits squarely at the intersection of "intelligent and curious people who don't vet their sources particularly well" and "batshit-insane folks looking for confirmation of their abhorrent views".
Terrible! I want any podcast host to carefully vet any information on their show so I only hear ApproveIdeas(tm) as it’s clear I might get DangerousIdeas(tm) should I hear information not officially approved.
Wanting things to be vetted is not the same thing as saying "everyone has to agree with me."
There's a difference between taking a differing opinion and just spouting outright bullshit and lies.
Maybe there was some implied sarcasm I missed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joe Rogan's views are very... normal, almost surely closer to those of the typical person than yours or mine. I'm not gonna go around telling people what they can and can't abhor, but I do think it's important to acknowledge that you're in a strong cultural bubble if you're shocked by the things he says.
I'm not personally shocked by things he says, I just think he's not particularly smart and I think he tends to have the same thought processes happening over and over again, which weren't particularly more than sophomoric insightful to begin with. At best I think he might be useful to discover interviewees that actually have interesting things to say and go from there. What I am shocked by (and I suspect this is the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, all the noise around him is so strange, when you listen to him he is just a regular and pretty nice guy
My definition of regular and pretty nice guy is not someone who spouts off against men who take parental leave to help their newborn and spouse during her recovery. https://www.mediaite.com/podcasts/joe-rogan-goes-after-pete-... Or speaks to someone like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UbXV4WtfMtA
I really like the core idea here: media used to be a push model, social media turned it into a pull model but they're trying to wrest it back. I always hated the push model of social media, which is why most of the online content I consume is via rss, including Twitter [0]. But I never thought of traditional news media media as being a push model. It makes so much intuitive sense when you say it: the reason I read ne…
This makes a lot of sense for blogs and sources that are specifically focused on one subject (e.g. programming).
But I'm not convinced it's as big of a difference for something like the Joe Rogan podcast (the author specifically recommends this at the end of the article). On a site like Twitter the users are still collecting a broad range of content from a broad range of people they choose. With something like the Joe Rogan podcast they're listening to shaped opinions from people that the host chooses, influenced by the topics the host allows to be discussed. Rogan is particularly famous for spreading anti-vaccine messaging right now and downplaying any pro-vaccine arguments from actual experts in the field. This seems like the epitome of biased "push" information sources.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Joe Rogan's views are very... normal, almost surely closer to those of the typical person than yours or mine. I'm not gonna go around telling people what they can and can't abhor, but I do think it's important to acknowledge that you're in a strong cultural bubble if you're shocked by the things he says.
I'm not personally shocked by things he says, I just think he's not particularly smart and I think he tends to have the same thought processes happening over and over again, which weren't particularly more than sophomoric insightful to begin with. At best I think he might be useful to discover interviewees that actually have interesting things to say and go from there. What I am shocked by (and I suspect this is the…
Why does this shock you? It’s pretty clear from what you wrote that you’re much smarter than the rest of us. It shouldn’t be shocking that us dumb ppl are fans of a dumb person?