Take an article from a reputable publisher, an article for a subject that you are expert in.
Read it and make note of facts they got right and got wrong.
This is what got me to shake free of some podcasters I placed far too much faith in at one point in the past. When I realized how slanted and fucked their opinion was on things I knew about, it put all their other opinions in a much different light.
Same here used to love Sam Harris and to some extent Joe Rogan, like 2016’ish. Then they got into that whole intellectual dark web nonsense and stayed political instead of trippy brain science and meditation stuff, they started talking about international politics and they are both fucking bigots. Really turned me off hearing Sam basically support the genocide of Palestine.
I listened to Sam for a little while, but then he got stuck on Genetics & IQ back in about 2017-18.
I was like - OK, but do you account for any other differences, like poverty and affluence rates? Nope, he could only fathom the two factors: “race in, IQ out - so people of African heritage are dumb”, because his expert said that, he thought it too.
I think it’s important to recognize when someone holds a different opinion/conclusion and when they are repeating misinformation or have facts wrong.
I can’t listen to Joe at all because he doesn’t bring anything intellectually to thr table and prompts pseudoscience. Sam on the other hand is brilliant and tries hard to bring facts to the table. However, no one is “perfect” or will share all of our opinions/conclusions.
I for one am not onboard with Sam in regards to the Isreal/Palestine conflict, some if his opinions on guns, etc. But I still enjoy listening because even when those opinions clash with mine he lays out why he has that opinion and I can see he gave it some thought but has a different conclusion than me.
The only reason I write all this is to say that we shouldn’t allow ourselves to blend misleading facts and differing opinions into one.
This is what got me to shake free of some podcasters I placed far too much faith in at one point in the past. When I realized how slanted and fucked their opinion was on things I knew about, it put all their other opinions in a much different light.
Same here used to love Sam Harris and to some extent Joe Rogan, like 2016’ish. Then they got into that whole intellectual dark web nonsense and stayed political instead of trippy brain science and meditation stuff, they started talking about international politics and they are both fucking bigots. Really turned me off hearing Sam basically support the genocide of Palestine.
I listened to Sam for a little while, but then he got stuck on Genetics & IQ back in about 2017-18.
I was like - OK, but do you account for any other differences, like poverty and affluence rates? Nope, he could only fathom the two factors: “race in, IQ out - so people of African heritage are dumb”, because his expert said that, he thought it too.
I forgot about the IQ thing! His opinions on deterministic behavior are also a little out there and kind of look at the decision process backwards.
I don’t even want admit who it was. (It wasn’t Rush or Hannity, more stealth than those guys but I should have known better anyway.) 😬
deleted by creator
I think it’s important to recognize when someone holds a different opinion/conclusion and when they are repeating misinformation or have facts wrong.
I can’t listen to Joe at all because he doesn’t bring anything intellectually to thr table and prompts pseudoscience. Sam on the other hand is brilliant and tries hard to bring facts to the table. However, no one is “perfect” or will share all of our opinions/conclusions.
I for one am not onboard with Sam in regards to the Isreal/Palestine conflict, some if his opinions on guns, etc. But I still enjoy listening because even when those opinions clash with mine he lays out why he has that opinion and I can see he gave it some thought but has a different conclusion than me.
The only reason I write all this is to say that we shouldn’t allow ourselves to blend misleading facts and differing opinions into one.