I love Scott Adams. He's so out of the box. Not gonna say I agree with him on everything, because I probably disagree with him more than I agree. But he's got a way of framing some big ideas that nobody else does.
@@codediporpal he's not. He pushes back against people saying we proved it was not rigged. He himself thinks it likely was not. He does think that it's ridiculous we don't have a way to audit them though
I've been thinking the same thing. I have using economics, contract, finance law to prevent my untrained brothers and sister from bankrupting the living trust left to us by our parents. My friend is asking her college freshman daughter to take at least one class in accounting, finance, economics so she can make good decisions with when she becomes older.
So what you're saying is you don't value the Lesbian Dance Theory degree you racist misogynist(just kidding) but you just know that there are idiots out there thinking this.
The bottom line is that people lack the ability to be ambivalent and to compare and contrast ideas. Either it is not taught or it is not possible for the vast majority of the public to think like that. It is evident here in the comment section, where people either believe, Trump good, Obama bad, or Trump bad, Obama good. Once you see this is how they think, then you shouldn't waste anytime making arguments with them.
@@elcidS15 I am undecided what is the source of the problem, intelligence or education. The previous commentor believes this is a new phenomena, but I think this existed all along, but people now have the ability to share their thoughts readily. When people prepare to "debate" they are only concerned with defending the position in which they think is true, whereas people who can be ambivalent, such as lawyers, they must have the ability to argue many sides of the argument. What passes for debate, is debating someone else's reality and therefore a waste of time. They are in no way, prepared to change their minds.
apextroll Education will trump intelligence. You can definitely train an intelligent person to be stupid and vice versa. Our current system of education brings more people down in intelligence than it raises them up. At least that’s what I believe. In grade school there were always the people who managed to make bad grades and failure look “cool” and the system doesn’t combat that mentality in any way other than to wag its finger at you, which when you’re a teenager is about the same as saying “don’t push the red button.”
@@elcidS15 Perhaps, ambivalence requires nuance, analogy and abstraction, all of which cannot be known without education, whereas differentiation is essentially priori and does not require any education nor experience to achieve, so being taught not to see is possible. However, I think people with IQs below 125 as highly unlikely to have the ability to be ambivalent or nuanced. Those with IQs above 125 who are not ambivalent are simply being disingenuous.
@@apextroll this is a great comment thread. the fact that it's buried in "but oh-bah-maaaaa" and weird alt-right BS is why I like running a podcast and interacting with show fans more than I care about RUclips. This place is a refuge for the lowest-common denominator, present company excluded.
I was an electrical engineer designing power supplies and battery chargers for 30 years. I met many guys with engineering degrees that could not think....and they did not design anything that worked.
I was an aircraft electronics technician for forty years. I have been surprised at the ignorance of many of my coworkers and leaders about many basic principles of electronics and systems which hurt their ability do their job. They had graduated from similar schools as I had. I have wondered for years if there are similar people in other fields. My conclusion is yes there are many.
feel sorry for those guys, they were in the wrong place, not enjoying their life probably.. Probably there was no adult to properly guid him/her or help them nourish their unique talents.
@@JordanHarbingerShow I just subscribed based on knowing how you prepare for your interviews. This is the first time I've watched you and it's nice to see someone who knows how to listen.
I was born in California 1955 and I never heard any Racist remarks, it is isolated mostly by Class, the lowest Classes are always Resentful and Aggressive, and there is usually a quantifiable Reason people are in that class. The most Racism I see today is Passive, the "Soft bigotry of low expectation" and conflating Failure To Thrive with being a Victim.
Anthony, I mean this kindly, that 'sounds' racist. To get the idea, consider how the the arrogant classes have now relabelled working class people as 'non-college educated.' I am on the same team as you, not having a pop, just holding up the mirror :-)
@@davewarwicker2512 There are some very intelligent working class people, they tend to rise above and do better in life. It's not Racist, I'm not Racist, stupid people make stupid choices and they come in every color, it is the "Culture" they choose to embrace, not their color. Everybody alive today is descended from African ancestors with different mutations from adaptation to different climates and challenges.
@@davewarwicker2512 There is one unique quality about America, most Americans are descended from the World's Best, Bravest and Brightest, we are a bigger Brain Drain that Rome was. Our "Working Class" includes some of the most Skilled Craftsmen and Tradesmen in the world, the down side is that makes it easier for some to fall behind.
Regarding the use of “articulate,” I guess now we have to police our use of compliments, but they’ll just make fun of us for using the latest woke adjective. The truth is they want to stifle any opinion by anybody they don’t like.
I stopped following this guy after I pointed out that his "men should have no say in abortion debates" is flawed because of the indentured servitude a man is forced into based on solely the woman's decision. He claimed I was not "seeing the whole picture" without explaining why, and implied heavily that I was stupid for even thinking like that. Basically breaking his own rules in a debate just to win an argument when his views where no longer tenable. Now I'm fairly certain that I'm not an idiot and have a valid point because year later, Dave Chappelle had a similar thought to abortion rights in his latest Netflix special. So sure he can talk but just like most with a following, he's just a bully
Sunk cost fallacy is a problem, but sometimes, there are things that look like sunk cost fallacy but are not. For instance, if someone has just obtained a B.S. degree in Physics and decides that he has put in all this work in Physics and should go to graduate school immediately, while there is an element of sunk cost, there is the reality that his knowledge of Physics is volatile, and if he should decide to wait too long before going to graduate school, he would lose his knowledge, and be less likely to keep up in graduate level courses, pass the qualifying exams, etc. All of the time he put in is gone, but the benefits of the work derived from the time he put in still exists and holds future value, which he could lose if he waits too long.
@@JordanHarbingerShow It's probably not something you'd hear about in econ class because they have limited time to delve deep into all possible cases and exceptions, but if you speak to students who have heard of and understand the concept of sunk cost and opportunity cost, and have to make real life decisions on what to do post degree, that would be what they might say. Or someone who has gone through graduate school and started a business and beem there done that might reflect on their life and provide advice to younger folks with this reasoning.
Wow, this has to be among the best talks I have listening to in the past few months and I listen to ALOT of talks! This was incredibly informative. Great Job guys, I love your model Scott! I ironically started early this year on a little mini project (for my own use and desires) with a similar mindset that Scott has employed much earlier this year and I feel so very lucky that this talk happened to find me at a perfect time for me to pick up a few more “ High Grade Tools.” Both you have a new subscriber😉now. Thanks so much!!!
I'm so guilty of this basically. If I like Trump, then I dismiss ALL negative info about him...and same with Biden. If I dislike him, then I dismiss ALL positive info about him. Very guilty here: put me away.
I just discovered Jordan Harbinger • He’s great • I subscribed • Scott Adams is one of my faves • Have James Lindsay or Peter Boghossian on • Great Show !
Right, because if we have already established that human life is to be protected under law then the question of when that life begins is quite pertinent to the debate. I thought that was a pretty stupid mistake for him to make.
@Douglas Sirk They usually don't stop. What usually happens is they just exchange straw man arguments and attack them back and forth until either or both sides get tired of replying back. One thing I've learned about any interaction, especially over politically, ideological or religiously charged topics is that the thread of comments almost always deviates off in many different directions and away from the actual topic being discussed. Oftentimes it's nothing but a futile pursuit over whose the bigger nitpicker.
Equivocation is a logical fallacy where a term is used in 2 contexts which give it different definitions. Semantics matter. It like saying "meat is murder". Murder is defined as killing a human.
Great book I propose that Scott should call the “lack of imagination” problem the “Forrest Gump Principal” “Are you running for world peace? “Are you running to save the whales?” “Is this a political statement?” Gump: “I just like running”
Possible, but often it goes the other way. Say in economics, if someone opposes the minimum wage. The Gump principle would say "he just doesn't want workers to earn more". Which is exactly the loserthink there. Lack of imagination, depends on "I can't think of any other reason". The answer to which, bluntly, is "your inability to think is noted". (in case anyone wonders: the answer usually is that your earnings are based on what you produce. If you produce $10 worth of goods, and you now make $9, that works. If the wage must be raised to $15, you don't get 6 dollars extra, you probably get sacked... and replaced either by a machine, or by a factory worker in China)
It's all greed and selfishness, and Scott isn't no angel there. He just found a way to make money through obfuscation. Too many people ignore what is going on in the world. Yes, because they're emotionally immature and can't handle reality. Adams' is just trying to "snake oil" sell them a cure for emotions, in which no one can ever overcome in decision making. All our decisions are made based our our emotions.
What most US citizens lack is critical thinking skills. Not some magic trick that has convinced people they make logical decisions when they really haven't.
Few month ago on a whim I picked up one of his books, thinking, what a cartoonist really can teach me, an Engineer, a mathematician, a computer scientist, a guy who reads a lot, plays guitar, all around smart aleck. Guess what? , this guy kicks ass. Read him.
5:30 I'd say lack of certainty about complex issues, humility and constant mandatory appeasement of others (through the "virtue" of acknowleged ignorance), guilt and political correctness are currently ruining society.
The bit on labeling people is one I see a lot, and what hits me particularly is the "smart" label used as a backhanded insult. I don't see it often, but I've seen people say, "It's so sad that a smart person like you doesn't get it." One I saw recently was, "It's sad that someone who comes across as an academic doesn't understand this concept." It's appealing to your sense of yourself as a smart person, but says, "You're really messing up because you don't agree with me." It sounds like, "You went off the road there. Get back on." However, to do so, I have to give up my position, and it doesn't give me a reason to, except to win their approval (supposedly). This sort of thing used to drive me up the wall, because I really felt like how dare they assume they're a good judge of what's smart! Besides this, their argument fit into a few of the other fallacies you're discussing. So, it felt particularly insulting that they'd put themselves on a pedestal like that. What Adams said put it in a nice box, "winning by labeling."
Nice! I feel like I've received the message of the book without having read it. Of course everything he covered here he's also covered in his periscopes. Definitely a good job of bringing intuition into words.
The reason so many Chinese people came to Serbia was that China was willing to sell air defense artillery and radars to Serbia, and China wanted to expand its influence and the reach of its export products. The number of Chinese people in Serbia isn't really that significant compared to say, Queens, New York. It's also the reason NATO bombed the Chinese embassy during the war. And Milosevic is still popular in Serbia, he won his elections fair and square. We can't just call every democratically elected leader who we view as an impediment to our interests a "dictator."
Great comment, however, he actually he did not "win his elections fair and square" -there were LOADS of "irregularities" in that process, and he had a TON of domestic opposition. He may have won the first time around as a reaction to socialism, but became a despot soon after. Thanks for the info re chinese immigrants though. I always wondered about that when I lived there.
@@JordanHarbingerShow Good question, not at this time. I follow Scott Adams and encountered this video. I'll take a look at your offerings after I get through Tim Ferriss's podcast offerings.
Scott's technique of debunking the "strongest point" may be persuasive, but it's not logical. My strongest point may be dependent on another point. My strongest point may be false under certain narrow circumstances, but otherwise true. I may be wrong when I identify my strongest point. People may disagree about some evidence supporting my strongest point but agree on evidence supporting all of the others. Thus, the first point may be unconvincing, but the others would remain valid. So I think this persuasive technique is really a sneaky parlor trick designed to foreclose discussion.
Yup. Plus, there are plenty of arguments that can be attacked using spurious reasoning. There are times when you have a strong point, but the other side will just dig in it's heels and claim scientists are lying or some nonsense. I remember some creationists arguing that ALL dinosaur fossils are fake. How would you go about proving fossils are real? Also, as a side note: I posted a comment critical of Scott Adam's ideas on this video, and Jordan (or someone controlling this RUclips channel) deleted my comment and blocked me from leaving any other comment. I think people should know that critical comments are being deleted.
Yup. Plus, there are plenty of arguments that can be attacked using spurious reasoning. There are times when you have a strong point, but the other side will just dig in it's heels and claim scientists are lying or some nonsense. I remember some creationists arguing that ALL dinosaur fossils are fake. How would you go about proving fossils are real?
I am a fairly new but HUGE fan of Scott. I have made major changes this year along what Scott does and it’s very revealing but wow so time consuming. But towards the presenters “importing voters” , thats interesting and wouldn’t surprise me. On that topic, I have thought for upteen amount of years that “we” are already taking in and have for decades illegal immigrants from a fairly concentrated region of the world and they tend to eventually vote and vote towards a certain party? The ratio split may not be huge but regardless could have had impacts in the past and maybe more in the future? Is that perception close to reality in your opinions? Thanks a lot guys!
You shouldn't never consider "sunk" cost, rather, you should never value them more than the odds of possible profit vs cost. If all you're missing in a $1 million project is a screw, that's obviously an investment worth the value, assuming it's not a government project where it would probably never be. It's all about the pot odds.
Similar actions here. Whenever I find out I was wrong I try to correct it by finding out what would have been a better way to do or handle something. What gets to me is how many people say I am making thing worse for finding out where I and everyone I was dealing with were wrong too. I think its that fact that I will callout being wrong when I can even if I have to do it to myself sometimes and in doing so it means they will be more likely to be called out in the future for something I once did but changed may approach to and they didn't.
Same experience... my grown daughters went to grad school (Math & CS) and have very high tech jobs... so it’s surprising to me that this is an issue... maybe it’s generational.
THE JORDAN HARBINGER SHOW So cool! kinda weird that I know his home so well in spite of having never met in any way whatsoever, but Scott is one of those rare, relatable geniuses in my opinion
“If I put out a Dilbert book tomorrow, a third of people would say ‘Nah, I don’t like something that guy said about politics, I won’t buy it’. Maybe call the book ‘Bertdil’. People aren’t really very bright, most of them would fall for it. Which would make a great Dilbert strip right there.
Neither of these two economists stroking each other’s egos mentioned that Obama doubled the National Debt during his administration with minimal economic growth to show for it....but I’m just a guitarist...so....
Because you borrow to restart a depressed economy. You pay down debt when the economy is flourishing. Economics 101. Easy, like a G chord in the open position.
I also had never heard that using the word articulate was racist until I started listening to Scott Adams podcast. So you are not in the minority Jordan. I'm from Southern Ohio originally.. and lived in NYC area for 10 years after graduating Uni. Anyways.. really enjoyed this podcast.
He gives more credit to Obama than I would have for positive economy stability. The debt bubble must be managed by reducing spending and stopping bank industry bailouts. Economy wealth distribution is better for America when US has job creation vs shipping jobs outside borders to people living in Cardboard housing.
I am intrigued by Adams's point that a catchy buzzword like "loserthink" to attract attention to a concept you want to promulgate. My hesitation is that we are surrounded by buzzwords and persuasive campaigns to influence the public.
@@JordanHarbingerShowgreed, no matter how bad they are, everyone has something useful to say. E.g. mein kampf really opened my eyes to the inefficiencies of the communist system. So what if scott adams has been an obvious white supremacist for a very long time and blames people's skin colour for his personal failures. I learned some persuasion skills from him and that's all that matters 👍
The part about the other side leaving out context reminds me perfectly of the very old Simpsons treehouse episode that was based off the Twilight Zone. Where the aliens have a cookbook and both the sides are constantly blowing dust off the cover title that reveals a new word that changes the cookbook from cooking humans to cooking for humans. They keep reversing it over and over and I think they eventually just drop it and move on to something else.
You're misremembering it slightly. The book title was How to cook for forty humans. What happened afterwards is Kang and Kodos were offended at The Simpsons' untrusting nature and sent them back to Earth. "Frankly, you people made pigs of yourselves." ruclips.net/video/SxI7B758XBQ/видео.html
New sub, might want to put your microphone on you, your volume changes as you move around, gives it a college project type feel. Good interview, watching Mike Rowe one next. :)
Very compelling discussion, and really great interview questions. The exchange and reframing of the things each other said really helped enhance understanding of various points in a way that simply question and answer wouldn't have. For the end part about what you identified as bias (implicit biases), it sounded a bit like you were trying to define yourself what constitutes racial discrimination or not based on the amount of direct negative impact, or the intention behind a statement. However, even if the intention behind the comment is unconscious, or the harm was next to nonexistent for someone... if there is a pattern of sports reporters that ascribe mental acuity or strategic prowess disproportionately to white athletes, while not doing the same for black athletes, and focusing instead on physicality, that could indeed be revealing of implicit biases with historic, racist undertones. Even if we can agree that there was zero malicious intent. In isolation, one use of a word is not easily proved to be biased, nor is it necessarily incorrect. But on a larger scale, this can have a subtle and cumulative effect of perpetuating what the whole discussion seems to be about: creating incorrect mental models: such as disproportionately associating white athletes being smarter players, while non-white athletes are not as capable at strategy etc. The mental models we have are of course influenced by history, society and media at large. And yet, just because it's next to impossible to prove that someone got turned down for a job or apartment because of an "ethnic" name, can we make the mental shortcut to conclude that racism hasn't an effect on the potential implicit biases at work in those situations? Journalists have done some experiments on these things--essentially A B testing, to callback to one of the points Adams brought up. They sent pairs of white and non-white people separately to apply for the same units. They did end up seeing some subtle differences in quoted prices. Now, the biases in question may be assumptions about reliability, or be more simply motivated by greed--but could still operating based on perhaps a bias that the white tenants would be earning more money or be 'better' tenants. Or informed by a few (but not truly representative) negative past experiences by the landlord. I recall hearing about an interesting case where orchestra auditions ended up testing for gender bias. Apparently orchestras had only about 5% women before the 70s. They ended up physically screening the auditioning player from the jury, and surprise: the number of approved female musicians went up dramatically. Even if the jury members swore they were of course choosing exclusively based on merit, prior to these "blind auditions". A brilliant thing you said about trying to ensure questioning what we think is that "being right or wrong feel exactly the same to everyone". So when people who do not belong to a minority group that is impacted downplay the existence or harm of discrimination--or what we might better label implicit biases--is their confidence that this is "no big deal" based on any expertise? Is their not a potential for us to have an unconscious or wilful blindness to the advocacy of the other perspective? To not question one's sureness is practicing loserthink. And so is the whole bit about not personally hearing or witnessing the 'dog whistles', IF we were to then conclude that discrimination must only exist in overt and blatant forms, or only cause harm when you or I can measure the negative impact in a concrete manner. Thanks again for the thought provoking and lively talk, and for anyone who makes it through this comment-turned-essay. ;)
@@chukwurahsomadina2897 Chukwurah Somadina You know you're both correct. Babies don't know which things which make them cry are important or not. My baby cried when I changed his nappy and left the room for a few minutes. Adults have to make decisions for them.
Mocking is effective in civilized circles, yes. I wouldn't try that shit in the hood though. Most people swing first ask questions after. Although if your mockery is well constructed it can go over most heads, but then you would be defeating the purpose.
@Eh_Whatev I disagree. In my experience, mockery is more effective "in the hood". Sure, there might be harsher ramifications, but I've seen really effective mocking turn a group leader and bunch of followers into a lone target with a total loss of pride and confidence, with all his former followers laughing their asses off at him just like the other spectators. This applies whether you're dealing with street gangs in Oakland, the population of a favela outside of São Paolo, Brazil, or members of an organized crime syndicate in Grozny in the Chechen Republic. In "civilized circles" (more subdued/mediated environments) you'll rarely see mockery effective at triggering a nearly immediate loss of confidence in a leader.
@@lucasthompson1650 I wouldn't disagree that mockery is not effective. You can definitely win the crowd if you can confidently knock down your target (if you can stump someone in the hood the right way it will get laughs, but you need to be like-able to an extent or very funny with the roast.) I would read the "room", sort to speak, before slinging out mocking at random people.
If "articulate" is a backhanded racist insult Is "Elequant" also?? Its seems like selective word association which can be used as thought stopping key words. Like racist or climate denier or the word "indisputable". Seems as though the Cancel culture can select any word for interpretation as micro aggression. The world should not be this complicated unless one is playing the victim card.
Sorry Scott but the American economy was not solid during the Obama years -not even somewhat solid during the end of the Obama years. Over a third of the nation was on food stamps welfare and some kind of government assistance the black unemployment rate was never hire we had the worst economic performance since the great depression of the 1930s.
I protest! Is your guest saying that we don't have enough lawyers and economists in this culture? It is true that grade schools do not explain the rules of evidence, the techniques of advertisement and most importantly, critical thinking.. Colleges have all but eliminated literature, history and languages as if this does not broaden and sharpen our perspective. Even music that has made the corporations billions thinks that the arts are a waist of time... Social networks and our media compounds this deplorable situation. Real education is bad for business... What do you expect?
I honestly dont understand why people bother with social media beyond trying to make themselves look good or intetesting. Keepkng up the show in other words. They are piss poor tools for debate and discussion. Even old sxhool bulletin boards are better tools for that.
If you dont realize all the truth bombs exposing the elite and theit gameplan then you dont understand social media, watch politcal avenger channel videos, amazing polly videos, project veritas and more and more and more, such as david harris jr, black conservative patriot channel etc. Twitter is extremely useful when you know how to use it. Its the digital square.
Nah, you need to follow the right people who have a presense online and in the real world. Effective relevant people. Not vapid boring blue checkmarked people or non important accounts.
@UCVJJ7JFnGDg03akvX7CoEdg have a look at the genetic basis for maths and music. The research is interesting. I'm not saying a music student would understand statistics. Tbh, if I was going to dump on a group, it would be economists and psychologists. Neither group is remotely scientific. Google 'replication crisis'.
@Douglas Sirk hey we both agree on science. I can't stand it when people say "science doesn't have all the answers". As if there is a better solution to answering to questions.
No, Loserthink is a noun with a built-in adjective. One may 'jump to a conclusion' as to what it means - precisely because it has no built-in definition - but the wise person inquires as to it's intended definition. Assuming a title has communicated its definition is faulty thinking.
Untrained brains. I didn't''t listen to this, but, I agree with you. The intellect is not the most important function of mind. It's good for making shopping lists or going to the moon, but it can't answer the big questions. The mind ITSELF has to be trained in order to realize the full of human potential. We were closer to this with the notion of the Renaissance Man (oops, Person) whose body/mind was trained not only through academics, but also through equitation, archery, the use of arms, art, ect.. The idea of a Liberal education comes from that principle, and was still in effect, (effectively), when I went to college in the late sixties. The title of this piece says it all for me.
One other thing...the best I got out of college was not what I learned, but that I learned how to learn. It sounds to me that many colleges these days aren't doing that. It's not so much learning as indoctrination of the intellect to think a certain way. Extreemely dangerous.
yeah I had a mic problem but mostly fixed. the audio has been FULLY fixed in the audio podcast feed version of The Jordan Harbinger Show. thanks for listening.
doesnt just account for america, but i suspect quite some - lets politely assume unconscious - effort is put into the amount of ignorance taking place - that isnt just doing nothing, but a full time job, not catching opinions that potentially make you change position.
Editor's Note: commentors please add IMO (In My Opinion) to comments which merely state an opinion. (ie: most of them) To demonstrate #LoserThink so clearly on a video talking about #LoserThink is a bit ironic. IMO
@@jordanharbinger3557 I'm only a few chapters into it right now. So I guess I missed the ending that you mentioned. You must be a fast reader then haha
Ryan Burnham if you haven’t read the book then you wouldn’t have a way to know if what I spoke about later was from a later part of the book. Facepalm.
46:40. Described was effectively "intern to senior vice president", sounds bad. "Tryout for Senior Vice President" was what it was. Hay, can you help me do my job, turns into, hey you can do my job. The president wants to retire, everyone needs to shift 1 chair to the right. I need someone I can trust to take my spot, so I can be president.
Guys I think you are splitting hair. As a counterexample, Trump seems to completely lack all those intricacies you discuss and he won the presidency. Just putting another spin on your discussion, sometimes you should leave your humbleness behind and go ahead in the direction your first reaction told you to go
They are "better", not "good", for the environment. This could still change depending on how Tesla handles their ramped up battery production and lifecycle (from resource sourcing to manufacturing to recycling) on the "gigascale".
I love Scott Adams. He's so out of the box. Not gonna say I agree with him on everything, because I probably disagree with him more than I agree. But he's got a way of framing some big ideas that nobody else does.
Watch Scott most ever day but he has blind spots like everyone….
@@webstercat A year on and he full on election fraud truther. That man is insane.
You’re referring to Scott Adams? I haven’t paid attention to political nonsense in ages now for sanity reasons.
@@codediporpal he's not. He pushes back against people saying we proved it was not rigged. He himself thinks it likely was not. He does think that it's ridiculous we don't have a way to audit them though
@@codediporpal
Labeleing + mind reading
You are experiencing cognitive dissonance
« Little less certainty, little more humility » This is the quote of our century.
I've been thinking the same thing. I have using economics, contract, finance law to prevent my untrained brothers and sister from bankrupting the living trust left to us by our parents. My friend is asking her college freshman daughter to take at least one class in accounting, finance, economics so she can make good decisions with when she becomes older.
So what you're saying is you don't value the Lesbian Dance Theory degree you racist misogynist(just kidding) but you just know that there are idiots out there thinking this.
The bottom line is that people lack the ability to be ambivalent and to compare and contrast ideas. Either it is not taught or it is not possible for the vast majority of the public to think like that. It is evident here in the comment section, where people either believe, Trump good, Obama bad, or Trump bad, Obama good. Once you see this is how they think, then you shouldn't waste anytime making arguments with them.
Comparing and contrasting is an IQ thing.
@@elcidS15 I am undecided what is the source of the problem, intelligence or education. The previous commentor believes this is a new phenomena, but I think this existed all along, but people now have the ability to share their thoughts readily. When people prepare to "debate" they are only concerned with defending the position in which they think is true, whereas people who can be ambivalent, such as lawyers, they must have the ability to argue many sides of the argument. What passes for debate, is debating someone else's reality and therefore a waste of time. They are in no way, prepared to change their minds.
apextroll
Education will trump intelligence. You can definitely train an intelligent person to be stupid and vice versa. Our current system of education brings more people down in intelligence than it raises them up. At least that’s what I believe. In grade school there were always the people who managed to make bad grades and failure look “cool” and the system doesn’t combat that mentality in any way other than to wag its finger at you, which when you’re a teenager is about the same as saying “don’t push the red button.”
@@elcidS15 Perhaps, ambivalence requires nuance, analogy and abstraction, all of which cannot be known without education, whereas differentiation is essentially priori and does not require any education nor experience to achieve, so being taught not to see is possible. However, I think people with IQs below 125 as highly unlikely to have the ability to be ambivalent or nuanced. Those with IQs above 125 who are not ambivalent are simply being disingenuous.
@@apextroll this is a great comment thread. the fact that it's buried in "but oh-bah-maaaaa" and weird alt-right BS is why I like running a podcast and interacting with show fans more than I care about RUclips. This place is a refuge for the lowest-common denominator, present company excluded.
Adam's is a hypnotist. It doesn't mean he hypnotizedises you... it means he understands how your mind functions.
I was an electrical engineer designing power supplies and battery chargers for 30 years.
I met many guys with engineering degrees that could not think....and they did not design anything that worked.
I was an aircraft electronics technician for forty years. I have been surprised at the ignorance of many of my coworkers and leaders about many basic principles of electronics and systems which hurt their ability do their job. They had graduated from similar schools as I had. I have wondered for years if there are similar people in other fields. My conclusion is yes there are many.
feel sorry for those guys, they were in the wrong place, not enjoying their life probably.. Probably there was no adult to properly guid him/her or help them nourish their unique talents.
I like this interviewer. You can see that there’s an effort on his part to understand and re-contextualize the concepts if necessary.
Thank you Spencer! I spent about 8-12 hours preparing for interviews, and I'm glad it shows! :)
Also, looks like his parents have a pretty nice basement. 😉 (Just kidding, Jordan!)
THE JORDAN HARBINGER SHOW spent? So you think you're experienced enough to cut back on preparation now? SLACKER! 😜
@@JordanHarbingerShow I just subscribed based on knowing how you prepare for your interviews. This is the first time I've watched you and it's nice to see someone who knows how to listen.
Great, great interview. As Jordan says:"there has never been a better time to live (be alive)." Scott Adams is the bomb!
Adams: the funniest, most incisive guy out there and the worst dresser.
it's corona time :)
"I'm trying not to believe everything I think, but it's really hard because it's already in my brain." 🤔
meditate on this, grasshopper
@Jordan Great interview!
Its is in your brain because you accepted it!
@learntoswim I agree 100%. It's a difficult spot when you realize this but worthwhile.
Do not believe your brain. It just likes to come up with suggestions for you to think about.
These two have great chemistry. Looking forward to this
I was born in California 1955 and I never heard any Racist remarks, it is isolated mostly by Class, the lowest Classes are always Resentful and Aggressive, and there is usually a quantifiable Reason people are in that class. The most Racism I see today is Passive, the "Soft bigotry of low expectation" and conflating Failure To Thrive with being a Victim.
Spot On... too many victims... See Thomas Sowell
Anthony, I mean this kindly, that 'sounds' racist. To get the idea, consider how the the arrogant classes have now relabelled working class people as 'non-college educated.' I am on the same team as you, not having a pop, just holding up the mirror :-)
@@davewarwicker2512 There are some very intelligent working class people, they tend to rise above and do better in life. It's not Racist, I'm not Racist, stupid people make stupid choices and they come in every color, it is the "Culture" they choose to embrace, not their color. Everybody alive today is descended from African ancestors with different mutations from adaptation to different climates and challenges.
@@davewarwicker2512 There is one unique quality about America, most Americans are descended from the World's Best, Bravest and Brightest, we are a bigger Brain Drain that Rome was. Our "Working Class" includes some of the most Skilled Craftsmen and Tradesmen in the world, the down side is that makes it easier for some to fall behind.
@AffiliatePro Peer reviewed Source?
Regarding the use of “articulate,” I guess now we have to police our use of compliments, but they’ll just make fun of us for using the latest woke adjective. The truth is they want to stifle any opinion by anybody they don’t like.
I stopped following this guy after I pointed out that his "men should have no say in abortion debates" is flawed because of the indentured servitude a man is forced into based on solely the woman's decision. He claimed I was not "seeing the whole picture" without explaining why, and implied heavily that I was stupid for even thinking like that. Basically breaking his own rules in a debate just to win an argument when his views where no longer tenable. Now I'm fairly certain that I'm not an idiot and have a valid point because year later, Dave Chappelle had a similar thought to abortion rights in his latest Netflix special.
So sure he can talk but just like most with a following, he's just a bully
Sunk cost fallacy is a problem, but sometimes, there are things that look like sunk cost fallacy but are not.
For instance, if someone has just obtained a B.S. degree in Physics and decides that he has put in all this work in Physics and should go to graduate school immediately, while there is an element of sunk cost, there is the reality that his knowledge of Physics is volatile, and if he should decide to wait too long before going to graduate school, he would lose his knowledge, and be less likely to keep up in graduate level courses, pass the qualifying exams, etc. All of the time he put in is gone, but the benefits of the work derived from the time he put in still exists and holds future value, which he could lose if he waits too long.
interesting. haven't heard this since econ in college but it's a good reminder.
@@JordanHarbingerShow It's probably not something you'd hear about in econ class because they have limited time to delve deep into all possible cases and exceptions, but if you speak to students who have heard of and understand the concept of sunk cost and opportunity cost, and have to make real life decisions on what to do post degree, that would be what they might say. Or someone who has gone through graduate school and started a business and beem there done that might reflect on their life and provide advice to younger folks with this reasoning.
Wow, this has to be among the best talks I have listening to in the past few months and I listen to ALOT of talks! This was incredibly informative. Great Job guys, I love your model Scott! I ironically started early this year on a little mini project (for my own use and desires) with a similar mindset that Scott has employed much earlier this year and I feel so very lucky that this talk happened to find me at a perfect time for me to pick up a few more “ High Grade Tools.” Both you have a new subscriber😉now. Thanks so much!!!
Things you know that just ain't so - Milton Friedman
47:00 Mad respect for realizing this mistake.
I'm so guilty of this basically. If I like Trump, then I dismiss ALL negative info about him...and same with Biden. If I dislike him, then I dismiss ALL positive info about him. Very guilty here: put me away.
I just discovered Jordan Harbinger • He’s great • I subscribed • Scott Adams is one of my faves • Have James Lindsay or Peter Boghossian on • Great Show !
oliver warmflash thanks for subscribing! how did you find the show initially?
33:00 Bad example. Trying to establish the axioms of the debate is not "arguing by defining what the terms mean".
Right, because if we have already established that human life is to be protected under law then the question of when that life begins is quite pertinent to the debate. I thought that was a pretty stupid mistake for him to make.
@Douglas Sirk They usually don't stop. What usually happens is they just exchange straw man arguments and attack them back and forth until either or both sides get tired of replying back. One thing I've learned about any interaction, especially over politically, ideological or religiously charged topics is that the thread of comments almost always deviates off in many different directions and away from the actual topic being discussed. Oftentimes it's nothing but a futile pursuit over whose the bigger nitpicker.
Equivocation is a logical fallacy where a term is used in 2 contexts which give it different definitions. Semantics matter. It like saying "meat is murder". Murder is defined as killing a human.
Good to see Scott back
:)
Great book I propose that Scott should call the “lack of imagination” problem the “Forrest Gump Principal”
“Are you running for world peace?
“Are you running to save the whales?”
“Is this a political statement?”
Gump: “I just like running”
Possible, but often it goes the other way. Say in economics, if someone opposes the minimum wage. The Gump principle would say "he just doesn't want workers to earn more". Which is exactly the loserthink there.
Lack of imagination, depends on "I can't think of any other reason". The answer to which, bluntly, is "your inability to think is noted".
(in case anyone wonders: the answer usually is that your earnings are based on what you produce. If you produce $10 worth of goods, and you now make $9, that works. If the wage must be raised to $15, you don't get 6 dollars extra, you probably get sacked... and replaced either by a machine, or by a factory worker in China)
It's all greed and selfishness, and Scott isn't no angel there. He just found a way to make money through obfuscation. Too many people ignore what is going on in the world. Yes, because they're emotionally immature and can't handle reality. Adams' is just trying to "snake oil" sell them a cure for emotions, in which no one can ever overcome in decision making. All our decisions are made based our our emotions.
What most US citizens lack is critical thinking skills. Not some magic trick that has convinced people they make logical decisions when they really haven't.
@Pete Greed and selfishness leads to dire consequences. Emotions rule us all.
Ayn Rand philosophy is the end of human evolution.
Few month ago on a whim I picked up one of his books, thinking, what a cartoonist really can teach me, an Engineer, a mathematician, a computer scientist, a guy who reads a lot, plays guitar, all around smart aleck. Guess what? , this guy kicks ass. Read him.
👍 Good interview : interesting man, topics & book 👍
thank you!
5:30 I'd say lack of certainty about complex issues, humility and constant mandatory appeasement of others (through the "virtue" of acknowleged ignorance), guilt and political correctness are currently ruining society.
The bit on labeling people is one I see a lot, and what hits me particularly is the "smart" label used as a backhanded insult. I don't see it often, but I've seen people say, "It's so sad that a smart person like you doesn't get it." One I saw recently was, "It's sad that someone who comes across as an academic doesn't understand this concept." It's appealing to your sense of yourself as a smart person, but says, "You're really messing up because you don't agree with me." It sounds like, "You went off the road there. Get back on." However, to do so, I have to give up my position, and it doesn't give me a reason to, except to win their approval (supposedly). This sort of thing used to drive me up the wall, because I really felt like how dare they assume they're a good judge of what's smart! Besides this, their argument fit into a few of the other fallacies you're discussing. So, it felt particularly insulting that they'd put themselves on a pedestal like that. What Adams said put it in a nice box, "winning by labeling."
You nailed that one. It works for all compliments, and it's important to let go of your ego when you are on the receiving end of praise.
"... one variable problem ... certainty about complicated issue ..." - Scott Adams
Great interview.
Nice! I feel like I've received the message of the book without having read it. Of course everything he covered here he's also covered in his periscopes. Definitely a good job of bringing intuition into words.
The reason so many Chinese people came to Serbia was that China was willing to sell air defense artillery and radars to Serbia, and China wanted to expand its influence and the reach of its export products. The number of Chinese people in Serbia isn't really that significant compared to say, Queens, New York. It's also the reason NATO bombed the Chinese embassy during the war. And Milosevic is still popular in Serbia, he won his elections fair and square. We can't just call every democratically elected leader who we view as an impediment to our interests a "dictator."
Great comment, however, he actually he did not "win his elections fair and square" -there were LOADS of "irregularities" in that process, and he had a TON of domestic opposition. He may have won the first time around as a reaction to socialism, but became a despot soon after. Thanks for the info re chinese immigrants though. I always wondered about that when I lived there.
I really enjoyed this, thank you.
you're welcome! Do you listen to The Jordan Harbinger Show (podcast) as well?
@@JordanHarbingerShow Good question, not at this time. I follow Scott Adams and encountered this video. I'll take a look at your offerings after I get through Tim Ferriss's podcast offerings.
@@ThePriyad you might find The Jordan Harbinger Show more practical (Tim is great too!)
Scott's technique of debunking the "strongest point" may be persuasive, but it's not logical.
My strongest point may be dependent on another point.
My strongest point may be false under certain narrow circumstances, but otherwise true.
I may be wrong when I identify my strongest point.
People may disagree about some evidence supporting my strongest point but agree on evidence supporting all of the others. Thus, the first point may be unconvincing, but the others would remain valid.
So I think this persuasive technique is really a sneaky parlor trick designed to foreclose discussion.
Yup. Plus, there are plenty of arguments that can be attacked using spurious reasoning. There are times when you have a strong point, but the other side will just dig in it's heels and claim scientists are lying or some nonsense. I remember some creationists arguing that ALL dinosaur fossils are fake. How would you go about proving fossils are real?
Also, as a side note: I posted a comment critical of Scott Adam's ideas on this video, and Jordan (or someone controlling this RUclips channel) deleted my comment and blocked me from leaving any other comment. I think people should know that critical comments are being deleted.
Robert White
If your strongest point relies on another point, then that’s all just one point.
@@elcidS15 That's one way of looking at it
Yup. Plus, there are plenty of arguments that can be attacked using spurious reasoning. There are times when you have a strong point, but the other side will just dig in it's heels and claim scientists are lying or some nonsense. I remember some creationists arguing that ALL dinosaur fossils are fake. How would you go about proving fossils are real?
I am a fairly new but HUGE fan of Scott. I have made major changes this year along what Scott does and it’s very revealing but wow so time consuming. But towards the presenters “importing voters” , thats interesting and wouldn’t surprise me. On that topic, I have thought for upteen amount of years that “we” are already taking in and have for decades illegal immigrants from a fairly concentrated region of the world and they tend to eventually vote and vote towards a certain party? The ratio split may not be huge but regardless could have had impacts in the past and maybe more in the future? Is that perception close to reality in your opinions? Thanks a lot guys!
You shouldn't never consider "sunk" cost, rather, you should never value them more than the odds of possible profit vs cost. If all you're missing in a $1 million project is a screw, that's obviously an investment worth the value, assuming it's not a government project where it would probably never be. It's all about the pot odds.
But it's worth it because you only need a screw, not because you already spent $1M.
@@lucasthompson1650 That's a really good point.
I'm a full grown ass man....I just threw my pen across the room. Nonetheless, refreshing content.
My grown kids don't like it when I am always pulling out books and giving sources for my opinions. But that doesn't stop me from doing it :)
Teach them. 👍
Similar actions here. Whenever I find out I was wrong I try to correct it by finding out what would have been a better way to do or handle something. What gets to me is how many people say I am making thing worse for finding out where I and everyone I was dealing with were wrong too.
I think its that fact that I will callout being wrong when I can even if I have to do it to myself sometimes and in doing so it means they will be more likely to be called out in the future for something I once did but changed may approach to and they didn't.
Same experience... my grown daughters went to grad school (Math & CS) and have very high tech jobs... so it’s surprising to me that this is an issue... maybe it’s generational.
@@scottcoston7832 Right on.
swissgunner
The future is now old man
Holy shit, it’s Scott’s home theatre... I LOVE IT!!!
haha yes, good eye. that is indeed where we filmed this.
THE JORDAN HARBINGER SHOW
So cool! kinda weird that I know his home so well in spite of having never met in any way whatsoever, but Scott is one of those rare, relatable geniuses in my opinion
Whenever I hear someone try to make a political argument and utter, " the fact of the matter is", the one-window-in-the-house analogy comes to mind.
and what about 'at the end of the day' lol
“If I put out a Dilbert book tomorrow, a third of people would say ‘Nah, I don’t like something that guy said about politics, I won’t buy it’.
Maybe call the book ‘Bertdil’. People aren’t really very bright, most of them would fall for it. Which would make a great Dilbert strip right there.
Neither of these two economists stroking each other’s egos mentioned that Obama doubled the National Debt during his administration with minimal economic growth to show for it....but I’m just a guitarist...so....
Because you borrow to restart a depressed economy. You pay down debt when the economy is flourishing. Economics 101. Easy, like a G chord in the open position.
I wish I had hair like Jordan Harbinger! Those of you young with hair like that, enjoy it!
That is Scott's home theatre - I recognise it from his house tour. Wow - how cool is this internet thing?
I also had never heard that using the word articulate was racist until I started listening to Scott Adams podcast. So you are not in the minority Jordan. I'm from Southern Ohio originally.. and lived in NYC area for 10 years after graduating Uni. Anyways.. really enjoyed this podcast.
thanks! Yeah I guess we're out of the political sphere or something?
'Articulate' is racist? I had no idea. Note to self: blacks are not articulate.... blacks are NOT articulate. ... Right. Got it.
going qty 10 to 20 is a 100% increase. Going from qty 50 to 70 is only a 40% increase.
that's why it's so easy to use statistics in manipulative way
Lost me when he said "climate change". And yes, you can compare Presidents.
Dido
He gives more credit to Obama than I would have for positive economy stability. The debt bubble must be managed by reducing spending and stopping bank industry bailouts. Economy wealth distribution is better for America when US has job creation vs shipping jobs outside borders to people living in Cardboard housing.
A person suffering from fear of public introduction is what I would call a Paranoid Android.
I am intrigued by Adams's point that a catchy buzzword like "loserthink" to attract attention to a concept you want to promulgate. My hesitation is that we are surrounded by buzzwords and persuasive campaigns to influence the public.
This aged like warm milk 😂 dude fell for so much fake news he should have this scrubbed from the internet
I’ll go ahead and keep it all online. I think this stuff is important to preserve. Don’t you?
@@JordanHarbingerShowgreed, no matter how bad they are, everyone has something useful to say. E.g. mein kampf really opened my eyes to the inefficiencies of the communist system. So what if scott adams has been an obvious white supremacist for a very long time and blames people's skin colour for his personal failures. I learned some persuasion skills from him and that's all that matters 👍
The part about the other side leaving out context reminds me perfectly of the very old Simpsons treehouse episode that was based off the Twilight Zone. Where the aliens have a cookbook and both the sides are constantly blowing dust off the cover title that reveals a new word that changes the cookbook from cooking humans to cooking for humans. They keep reversing it over and over and I think they eventually just drop it and move on to something else.
You're misremembering it slightly. The book title was How to cook for forty humans. What happened afterwards is Kang and Kodos were offended at The Simpsons' untrusting nature and sent them back to Earth.
"Frankly, you people made pigs of yourselves."
ruclips.net/video/SxI7B758XBQ/видео.html
New sub, might want to put your microphone on you, your volume changes as you move around, gives it a college project type feel. Good interview, watching Mike Rowe one next. :)
2:35 parsing arguments
Very compelling discussion, and really great interview questions. The exchange and reframing of the things each other said really helped enhance understanding of various points in a way that simply question and answer wouldn't have.
For the end part about what you identified as bias (implicit biases), it sounded a bit like you were trying to define yourself what constitutes racial discrimination or not based on the amount of direct negative impact, or the intention behind a statement. However, even if the intention behind the comment is unconscious, or the harm was next to nonexistent for someone... if there is a pattern of sports reporters that ascribe mental acuity or strategic prowess disproportionately to white athletes, while not doing the same for black athletes, and focusing instead on physicality, that could indeed be revealing of implicit biases with historic, racist undertones. Even if we can agree that there was zero malicious intent.
In isolation, one use of a word is not easily proved to be biased, nor is it necessarily incorrect. But on a larger scale, this can have a subtle and cumulative effect of perpetuating what the whole discussion seems to be about: creating incorrect mental models: such as disproportionately associating white athletes being smarter players, while non-white athletes are not as capable at strategy etc. The mental models we have are of course influenced by history, society and media at large. And yet, just because it's next to impossible to prove that someone got turned down for a job or apartment because of an "ethnic" name, can we make the mental shortcut to conclude that racism hasn't an effect on the potential implicit biases at work in those situations?
Journalists have done some experiments on these things--essentially A B testing, to callback to one of the points Adams brought up. They sent pairs of white and non-white people separately to apply for the same units. They did end up seeing some subtle differences in quoted prices. Now, the biases in question may be assumptions about reliability, or be more simply motivated by greed--but could still operating based on perhaps a bias that the white tenants would be earning more money or be 'better' tenants. Or informed by a few (but not truly representative) negative past experiences by the landlord.
I recall hearing about an interesting case where orchestra auditions ended up testing for gender bias. Apparently orchestras had only about 5% women before the 70s. They ended up physically screening the auditioning player from the jury, and surprise: the number of approved female musicians went up dramatically. Even if the jury members swore they were of course choosing exclusively based on merit, prior to these "blind auditions".
A brilliant thing you said about trying to ensure questioning what we think is that "being right or wrong feel exactly the same to everyone". So when people who do not belong to a minority group that is impacted downplay the existence or harm of discrimination--or what we might better label implicit biases--is their confidence that this is "no big deal" based on any expertise? Is their not a potential for us to have an unconscious or wilful blindness to the advocacy of the other perspective? To not question one's sureness is practicing loserthink. And so is the whole bit about not personally hearing or witnessing the 'dog whistles', IF we were to then conclude that discrimination must only exist in overt and blatant forms, or only cause harm when you or I can measure the negative impact in a concrete manner.
Thanks again for the thought provoking and lively talk, and for anyone who makes it through this comment-turned-essay. ;)
Articulate means you speak well. it's most likely a compliment. People that don't know that are inarticulate. :)
Surely he could afford to have someone else take his car to the carwash.
Babies are not selfish... they are helpless because they are babies.
@@chukwurahsomadina2897 Chukwurah Somadina You know you're both correct. Babies don't know which things which make them cry are important or not. My baby cried when I changed his nappy and left the room for a few minutes. Adults have to make decisions for them.
"Knee-jerk reactions" are for jerks.
"Don't hire THAT guy. He's both athletic and articulate (if you know what I mean)."
LOL on the fear of public instructions, that must be a real pain
Ordered 5 copies. Cannot wait to read it!
enjoy!
56:57 exactly.
Mocking is effective in civilized circles, yes. I wouldn't try that shit in the hood though. Most people swing first ask questions after. Although if your mockery is well constructed it can go over most heads, but then you would be defeating the purpose.
Why would anyone care to be in the hood in the first place?
Besides for drugs or hookers
@@captainramius790 i'm simply pointing out that context is important. If not the hood than a different country (how about china or north korea).
@Eh_Whatev I disagree. In my experience, mockery is more effective "in the hood". Sure, there might be harsher ramifications, but I've seen really effective mocking turn a group leader and bunch of followers into a lone target with a total loss of pride and confidence, with all his former followers laughing their asses off at him just like the other spectators. This applies whether you're dealing with street gangs in Oakland, the population of a favela outside of São Paolo, Brazil, or members of an organized crime syndicate in Grozny in the Chechen Republic.
In "civilized circles" (more subdued/mediated environments) you'll rarely see mockery effective at triggering a nearly immediate loss of confidence in a leader.
@Captain ramius That's a pretty articulate point of view. 😎
@@lucasthompson1650 I wouldn't disagree that mockery is not effective. You can definitely win the crowd if you can confidently knock down your target (if you can stump someone in the hood the right way it will get laughs, but you need to be like-able to an extent or very funny with the roast.) I would read the "room", sort to speak, before slinging out mocking at random people.
Smart young fellow, standing on solid ground.
If "articulate" is a backhanded racist insult Is "Elequant" also?? Its seems like selective word association which can be used as thought stopping key words. Like racist or climate denier or the word "indisputable". Seems as though the Cancel culture can select any word for interpretation as micro aggression. The world should not be this complicated unless one is playing the victim card.
At 22:58, the word you were looking for was "cures." Concrete cures. But coagulate is a great word in it's place!
I was thinking of "sets", the semi-solid state that concrete takes between pouring and fully curing.
We also would have accepted "solidified".
The one thing that matters: the food you eat. Sick brains don't think so good 🤔
Dirty car blues? My car is undergoing a scientific dirt test.
Sorry Scott but the American economy was not solid during the Obama years -not even somewhat solid during the end of the Obama years. Over a third of the nation was on food stamps welfare and some kind of government assistance the black unemployment rate was never hire we had the worst economic performance since the great depression of the 1930s.
I protest!
Is your guest saying that we don't have enough lawyers and economists in this culture?
It is true that grade schools do not explain the rules of evidence, the techniques of advertisement and most importantly, critical thinking.. Colleges have all but eliminated literature, history and languages as if this does not broaden and sharpen our perspective. Even music that has made the corporations billions thinks that the arts are a waist of time...
Social networks and our media compounds this deplorable situation. Real education is bad for business... What do you expect?
I like Scot Adams "LoserThink" rules. I also like Carl Sagan's BS detection kit.
I honestly dont understand why people bother with social media beyond trying to make themselves look good or intetesting. Keepkng up the show in other words. They are piss poor tools for debate and discussion. Even old sxhool bulletin boards are better tools for that.
If you dont realize all the truth bombs exposing the elite and theit gameplan then you dont understand social media, watch politcal avenger channel videos, amazing polly videos, project veritas and more and more and more, such as david harris jr, black conservative patriot channel etc. Twitter is extremely useful when you know how to use it. Its the digital square.
Nah, you need to follow the right people who have a presense online and in the real world. Effective relevant people. Not vapid boring blue checkmarked people or non important accounts.
Really enjoy listening to Scott's views on things.
definitely a different way of thinking!
Thanks for this. Scott is the GOAT
glad you enjoyed it!
10:00 - trade war with China didn't go too well at the end...
Music has a close association with maths. I wouldn't knock the music majors!
@UCVJJ7JFnGDg03akvX7CoEdg have a look at the genetic basis for maths and music. The research is interesting. I'm not saying a music student would understand statistics. Tbh, if I was going to dump on a group, it would be economists and psychologists. Neither group is remotely scientific. Google 'replication crisis'.
@Douglas Sirk hey we both agree on science. I can't stand it when people say "science doesn't have all the answers". As if there is a better solution to answering to questions.
The one with the shirt that's too small talks too much.
Thanks - I just saved 1,25 hour ...
except his shirt isnt too small, its full of wrinkles and folds. its just at the arms that it looks fitted.
Loserthink is a definition with a built-in conclusion.
No, Loserthink is a noun with a built-in adjective. One may 'jump to a conclusion' as to what it means - precisely because it has no built-in definition - but the wise person inquires as to it's intended definition. Assuming a title has communicated its definition is faulty thinking.
David R. Darrow - drdarrow
Stop being so literal. It’s an oxymoron.
Sweet
try reading " j as in junk economics " my friends
Certainty about the universe is impossible….
Untrained brains. I didn't''t listen to this, but, I agree with you. The intellect is not the most important function of mind. It's good for making shopping lists or going to the moon, but it can't answer the big questions. The mind ITSELF has to be trained in order to realize the full of human potential. We were closer to this with the notion of the Renaissance Man (oops, Person) whose body/mind was trained not only through academics, but also through equitation, archery, the use of arms, art, ect.. The idea of a Liberal education comes from that principle, and was still in effect, (effectively), when I went to college in the late sixties. The title of this piece says it all for me.
One other thing...the best I got out of college was not what I learned, but that I learned how to learn. It sounds to me that many colleges these days aren't doing that. It's not so much learning as indoctrination of the intellect to think a certain way. Extreemely dangerous.
14:00 Gamblers say "Don't let good money chase after bad. Money in the pot is no longer yours." SmartestMan.Ca/gambler
What about possession?
basically don't be stupid
Fix your mic
Interesting that Adams maintains consistent mike level... Where host is in and out
yeah I had a mic problem but mostly fixed. the audio has been FULLY fixed in the audio podcast feed version of The Jordan Harbinger Show. thanks for listening.
Scott's analogy of disregarding a person's opinion because they boil something down to one point that matters, was itself a one variable solution.
His point was to complicated questions.. what he was referring to was not a complicated question.
Here's a way to look at uploading video.... Pin the volume....I'll turn it down!!!
I’ve been listening to Jordan for years interesting to put a face to the voice.
doesnt just account for america, but i suspect quite some - lets politely assume unconscious - effort is put into the amount of ignorance taking place - that isnt just doing nothing, but a full time job, not catching opinions that potentially make you change position.
Intelligence is refreshing. Especially today.
Editor's Note: commentors please add IMO (In My Opinion) to comments which merely state an opinion. (ie: most of them)
To demonstrate #LoserThink so clearly on a video talking about #LoserThink is a bit ironic. IMO
Everything without a source citation is an opinion, writing imo is kinda superfluous.
👍 Thank you!
Seems like the interviewer only read the first one or two chapters lol
Ryan Burnham What makes you say that?
@@JordanHarbingerShow It just seemed like the questions/ examples that were cited all came from the start of the book lol
Ryan Burnham ah nope. Not the case. I take it you’ve read the book? There’s a lot of practicals from the end of the book towards the end of the show.
@@jordanharbinger3557 I'm only a few chapters into it right now. So I guess I missed the ending that you mentioned. You must be a fast reader then haha
Ryan Burnham if you haven’t read the book then you wouldn’t have a way to know if what I spoke about later was from a later part of the book. Facepalm.
46:40. Described was effectively "intern to senior vice president", sounds bad. "Tryout for Senior Vice President" was what it was. Hay, can you help me do my job, turns into, hey you can do my job. The president wants to retire, everyone needs to shift 1 chair to the right. I need someone I can trust to take my spot, so I can be president.
Guys I think you are splitting hair. As a counterexample, Trump seems to completely lack all those intricacies you discuss and he won the presidency. Just putting another spin on your discussion, sometimes you should leave your humbleness behind and go ahead in the direction your first reaction told you to go
Don't give the Billionaires ways to beat the system. They have enough. 🙈
uma coisa e voce cometer erros outro e voce cometer crimes que tirou vidas de pessoas.
I think, that if you think that driving a Tesla is good for the environment then you are wrong.
false.
They are "better", not "good", for the environment. This could still change depending on how Tesla handles their ramped up battery production and lifecycle (from resource sourcing to manufacturing to recycling) on the "gigascale".