The Epidemic of Intellectual Arrogance

The Epidemic of Intellectual Arrogance

It’s great to be joined today by Michael Lynch,
who’s the director of the humanities institute, a professor philosophy at the University of Connecticut. Also author of the new book. No at all society, truth and arrogance in
political culture. Uh, Michael, so great to talk to you. Thanks so much for having me. This is such an interesting topic, a to me,
the idea of the sort of combination of a much longer period of pseudo and anti intellectual
realism, which has sort of combined with or crashed with this intellectual arrogance trend
that we’re seeing partially because of the Internet and social media. Can you first just talk a little bit about
what are some of the ways that Internet and social media have made people intellectually
arrogant? Well, when we talk about, first of all, just,
you know, when we talk about intellectual arrogance, what I mean is the idea of being
resistant to improving your worldview by appeal to evidence or to the experience of other
people. Uh, it’s the idea that, you know, you know,
it all and that your, your, your worldview is at least with some respects unimprovable
and I think there are pretty obvious ways that all of us are, are really intimately
familiar with, uh, in which the Internet and the ways in which we use the Internet can
reinforce and encourage this attitude. I mean, for one thing, you know, no matter
what your opinion you may have on, on any topic, you can Google and get some confirmation
for that opinion from some corner of the internet or not. Uh, and in a way, you know, right now, uh,
it used to be that scene was believing we’d say, but now googling is believing and therefore,
and you know, getting information, uh, in that way, the, the sort of weird, paradoxical
fact is that our ability to get information in the, in that way so easily, right at our
fingertips is also, uh, not, not just making us in a sense, feel more knowledgeable, but
feel that we, we are, uh, always right. Because of, uh, the ability to confirm my
biases. I mean, one add, one other element to that,
which is that the Internet is a personal personalized information seeking device. Uh, as it were, a set of devices and platforms. Uh, everything that we encounter on the Internet,
uh, from the news that comes down, uh, our Facebook feed to, uh, the ads that we see
on the pages we visit are all personalized. And of course that’s great when, uh, we’re
shopping for books or shoes or what have you. It’s not so great when we’re shopping for
facts because if you’re just getting the facts that confirm your preexisting prejudices,
that’s a, you know, short road to type of epistemic disaster. Yeah. There are some elements to the social media
platforms, the way you’re talking about algorithmically and otherwise, which sort of, um, encourage
or perpetuate a sort of reasoning from emotion and style rather than facts. But, but beyond that, is there something about
social media and the Internet that just beyond the algorithms does encourage people to be
arguing more from emotion rather than from fact? Yeah, I think there is. I think that one of the things that we, uh,
besides the sort of algorithms and the personalization, one of the things that I think is really motivating
this rise that we see in a type of arrogance and including what I would call as type of
tribal arrogance, is that we’re often unaware of how we’re communicating on social media. Um, we’re sort of in a sense a blind to, to
the real nature of our communicative acts. Here’s an example. When you share, when we all share something
online that’s a news story, whether it’s fake or otherwise, when we share some piece of
news content, uh, you know, from the Guardian or, or from this show or what have you, you
think of yourself, uh, as at least I do as like sharing some piece of, you know, factual
information or at least saying, you know, here’s some interesting opinion that you should
probably pay attention to. And I’m saying that to my, my friends or followers. Yeah. So it looks like I’m engaging in sort of the
game of, you know, giving reasons and so forth. But really it seems like we might be doing
something else. So one reason to think that is because a lot
of data’s coming out right now, uh, that show that something that we probably all intuitively
know, which is that almost no one that shares things online reads what they share and what,
you know, what that, that so just something, it’s just that we’re really not, we’re doing
something else. We’re communicating in some other way. And what I think we’re often doing is what,
what we’re doing is signaling that, well, we’re a member of a particular tribe or group. We’re saying we’re on this team and we’re
so we’re, and we’re communicating. In other words, I sort of emotional feeling
and, or perhaps we’re communicating in a sense of outrage. And of course the platforms are hardwired
to encourage this sort of thing. The sorts of, uh, you know, the treats, again,
things that most of the people listening here are going to know is that the more sort of
emotional language you include in your tweet or your post, uh, the more sort of at language
of outrage who include the higher the likelihood that that will be reposted, reshare, reshared
or retweet it. And that fact alone suggests that the whole
economy of social media is, uh, encouraging us to engage in this, uh, sort of expression
of sentiment. I was David Hume, the philosopher would call
it a door emotion. And the fact that we’re not aware that we’re
actually doing that makes us really easy marks. Yeah. Well, this, this starts being dovetail with,
um, findings from such, you know, varied academic disciplines as what Jonathan Height has written
about in moral psychology. What Daniel economen has written about in
behavioral economics that in many times we simply, we believe that we have come to our
conclusions based on the evidence. When in reality, we’ve often come to our conclusions
for other reasons. Hight would say it relates to our moral values
that, that resonate more with us. Uh, Daniel condiment would have more of a
logistical, practical behavioral economics approach, but that we are first coming to
our conclusions then finding information to justify them. And that’s where I think social media has
really scaled up this mechanism. Yeah, it’s a, it’s, it’s definitely a, a device,
a mechanism as you just said, uh, to fuel confirmation bias. I mean there’s been a lot of research as,
as most of the listeners will probably know, uh, about this sort of bubbles, the uh, information
and epistemic bubbles that we live in that is, uh, fueled by the personalization we talked
about and also, uh, encouraged by the, the, the, the hard wiring of the platforms as I
was talking about, uh, them to encourage the emotional exchange over informational exchange. I mean, I think what we’re finding is that
both the economy of social media and our, our, our psychology, our human psychology,
our PR, our just to working together and formed me to sort of toxic mix that’s include increasing
this type of arrogance that we’re talking about. And of course you have to add to that politics
ideology. Right now in our country, there is an increasing,
there are ideologies that are starting to celebrate the idea that fat, uh, facts and
unreason and the experts and science celebrate that those things should not be listened to
and that you should trust your gut and that you should trust your child and that it’s
the tribe that gives power and it’s not, and we’re not answerable to the facts that, that
ideology together with the psychology that we’ve already, we were just talking about. And, uh, the, the technology that’s a real
toxic mix and it’s really leading to what I’m calling the know-it-alls society. So that’s what I wanted to talk about next,
which is what do we know empirically, uh, or, or a quantitatively about the partisan
divide on some of these phenomena. Because, for example, there are many reports
which say if you look back at the 2016 election, the amount of actual fake news, not using
the definition of the current president but actual just straight rate fake news that was
shared was significantly higher by conservatives than by liberals as one example of showing
that this phenomenon is not sort of taking root equally across partisanship. What can you add to our understanding of the
partisan element to this, uh, sort of cultural element that you’ve identified? The no, it all society. Okay. Well, you know, when we think about polarization,
so let’s step back a little bit and think about, uh, what, you know, common topic of
conversation conversations like this, which is that, uh, you know, were polarized. W recent data for example, from Pew, suggest
that on a broad range of issues, uh, uh, on, on actual issues, if you pull people, uh,
who are both conservative leaning, conservative, liberal, leaning and liberal, you find, surprisingly,
while of course Americans are, you know, strongly divided on a whole number of issues, there’s
actually much more agreement than you might Annecy Lee think. Yes. At the same time, at the same time, there
is increasingly a dramatic increase in polarization of what we might call effective polarization
polarization or, uh, group polarization. That is, we are more and more prone to describe
the people on the other side of the aisle as distrustful, as, as, as untrustworthy,
as a moral, as ignorant. Uh, and we increasingly know that the other
side describes us. Whoever the up us is in the same way, and
we resent them for it. That, so the first thing I think to keep in
mind is that there’s a sort of, hi, there’s a growing awareness that we, uh, that we are
sort of, uh, polarized in this way and there’s, I’ve strong resentment antagonism that’s fueling
being fueled precisely from that awareness. Now, to get back to your question about, uh,
how these different ideologies both on the left or the right, respond or, or react to
that I think in, in very different ways. There’s no doubt right now, at least in my
mind, that, uh, many of the ideologies on the y on the right, particularly ideologies
that are driven by nationalism, uh, and, uh, white nationalism in particular are ideologies
that are self-consciously celebrating, uh, a, uh, rejection of, um, what we might have
called rational authority authority. Uh, that’s part of what’s fueling, uh, some
of the enthusiasm I think that we see from, from particular advocates of that ideology
online. The thought is, uh, and we, we see it, I think
an indeed by the inhabitant of the White House. I mean, if you want to talk about arrogance,
it seems like, uh, exhibit number one of course is Donald Trump, a man who after all has been
known to say that he’s the humblest person that he knows. Uh, look, I think it’s not, so it’s not, I
think it has surprised most of the, your listeners that, uh, that white nationalism is a view
as a view according to which, you know, uh, whites are superior. Uh, they, uh, the, uh, whites intrinsically
know more, are better people. That sort of, uh, nonsense. That’s clearly an attitude that is symbolized
by or in, in embodies as type of arrogance that I had been discussing. And I think that the degree to which that’s
continues to be propagated, uh, is the degree to which we’re going to see an increase, uh,
increase in sort of effective polarization that we were talking about before. On the other hand, I also want to point out
that, look, it’s, uh, if you want to look up intellectually arrogant in the dictionary,
you’re probably gonna find a picture of a face very much like mine. I mean, I’m out. I’m a white male, liberal, Progressive College
professor, uh, to do a lot of people in the country. You know, I, I embody intellectual arrogance
and I imagine some of the people listening have probably been thinking that. Fair enough. I think it’s important that progressors realize
that we are not immune to implicit bias. We are not immune to the sort of problems
that are inherent in human psychology that afflict the rest of mankind, so to speak. Uh, progressive’s I think we, and I am, I
have been guilty of this and some of your listeners might think I’ve been guilty of
this already and this is that you can fall into thinking that, uh, well, uh, conservatives,
you know, they’re all like, uh, they all, they all fall into the same buckets. Uh, they all are the ones that have prejudice
and bias and we are the, we are the tribe of reason and rationale and we are free of
those things. That’s a mistake. It is falling into the same type of tribal
arrogance that were there. You know, I, for 1:00 AM trying to combat, so I will, um, frequently, somewhat frequently
get phone calls from viewers who will say, Hey, David, you know, a couple years ago I
fell into an alt-right sort of echo chamber. I was watching some gaming thing on youtube,
which led me to Stefan Molyneux and then Ben Shapiro. And then, Whoa, okay. What they, they described the path in and
they say they, I bought into it completely. And then the algorithm showed me, uh, a left
wing Gamer, which brought me to you and to, you know, they’ll name other people that do
what I do. And now I’m out. I’m out. I’ve, I’ve sort of been deprogrammed from
that. Uh, and of course my initial reaction is,
okay, that’s the outcome is a good one as far as I see it. But is there not a bigger problem here that
merely by clicking around on youtube, you were first pulled to the extreme, right? And then merely by chance you became pushed
to the extreme left too. I hear the, uh, way too malleable nature of
so many people’s thinking and I’m curious what your reaction is to those stories of
radicalization and de Radicalization, which even if we like the way that the outcome went
to me signal a sort of problem plot, problematic, deeper problem. That’s a really interesting point. Uh, like you, of course I celebrate people
becoming de radicalized. Yes, entirely from violent nationalist ideology
is, but I also agree that what that sort of anecdote or story illustrates is the passiveness
by which most of you know the pass away in which most of us seem to know nowadays. Much of what we know we Google now is right. I was talking about earlier, that’s how most
people today receive most of their social, their information. And while again, that’s, that can be really
super useful. I Google know all day every day. Um, it’s also I think changing the way we
interface with information and how we critically evaluate it. I think that one of the things that, one of
the things that I, I talk about in the book is some lessons from some very ancient, uh,
philosophical figures, including going back all the way to Socrates. Socrates. One of the things that’s really interesting
about the license you can get gleaned from the end of his life is that he was somebody
who was interested in questioning, uh, both authority and, and himself. He said, well, you know, one of the things
that I really, the only thing I really can say I know is that I don’t know very much. And he was keen of course, to sort of bring
down the people who claim that they know, uh, quite a bit about things. And he was like that he some a pleasure clearly. And in, in getting them to admit that they
didn’t know as much as I did and that’s great. But he also wanted us to focus on our own
attitudes. And he thought that in order to do that you
needed to get outside on the street literally and start talking to people to start having
conversations. I think there’s something to be said with
that attitude. Not so much as that you can’t talk people
to people online like we’re doing right now. That’s perfectly, I think Socratic what, uh,
Socrates I think was really pushing us there was to think of ourselves not as passive,
just shockers of information, but as, uh, active inquirers people who get out and try
to, you know, read, engage, talk to one another and question, question assumptions. And as I said, continue to question your in
yourself and your own, your own biases and prejudices that you might not have been aware
that you actually have a very, very good advice for sure. And if only I was taking place, if only it
was easier to make that the reality based on how a lot of these online platforms are,
are deliberately configured to, to really generate the opposite. Um, we’ve been speaking with Michael Lynch
who’s author of the new book. No, it all society, truth and arrogance in political culture. Michael, really a pleasure having you on today. Thanks so much. It was great.

100 thoughts on “The Epidemic of Intellectual Arrogance

  1. This could have been titled as "The Epidemic of Self Educated Arrogance" or "The Epidemic of Fake Intellectualism" or "The Epidemic of Dickheaditis"

  2. In order to not fall prey to the toxic aspects they highlighted in this video, I highly recommend the Series, 'Navigating Digital Information' by CrashCourse, it has proven invaluable in getting to the root of objective reality and varied information encountered online:

  3. I have experienced exactly what he's talking about. I was swayed in believing climate change wasn't man-made by the infamous hockeystick. After that, all you look for is information that confirms your beliefs. And it's out there too! But the moment I started looking at views that opposed mine with an impartial viewpoint, my position crumbled completely.

  4. I'll admit to only watching your vids every so often mostly come to Youtube to watch vids on films and sometimes if I'm stuck in a game I will watch a play though for the part I need help with. Somehow in my recommendations section Jordan Peterson Joe Rogan and Ben Shapiro are in it. Never watched any of them and hate that they are in that section. Is there a way to block the content/channels?

  5. The smartest individuals are usually the ones that admit their weak in some areas, admit they do not know something, acknowledge their faults, acknowledge their lack of complete understanding, say they are still learning, and do not claim superiority over others in such a way as to undermine their peers with less experience.

  6. The thing that gets me is when something actually happens in the real world and people deny it ever happened because it contradicts their espoused narrative.

  7. Ironic title from a liberal capitalist animal killer!!

    David you are so "Grift Rhubin" level hypocritical and delusional.

  8. It's basically that /r/imwithstupid or whatever that bullying message board on reddit is called… jeez what a cesspool… they try to be both intellectually superior AND anti intellectual at the same time… stupid bellends.

  9. Ha, I don't use Google, I use Startpage, which… uses Google. 😳
    Yeppers, some of us do read what we post. Call me old fashioned, just like I wouldn't speak to you with a mouth full of marbles, I generally try to write coherent sentences, and proofread them. Also, I think a lot of people post drunk, at this point though, hey, whatever your poison, I can hardly blame ya!

  10. Some guy wrote a comment that they would be poisoning Taco Bell in response to Trump’s insults of México. I tried to tell him that Taco Bell doesn’t serve Mexican food. He wrote, “Google Maps says that Taco Bell is a Mexican restaurant so your [sic] wrong.”

    You can’t make this shit up

  11. A sad fact is that people ignore the substance of a given subject in favour of impressive form. This is easilly achieved through the Internet and particularly youtube. How does one explain flat earthers, as a humorous example. Today provided people see a professionally created video presentation, it matters little to the majority, exactly what the substantive message actually is. Trump is without doubt the main benefactor of this intellectual ignorance.

  12. The last moment summed it up. I am 45 years old and before not so social media, we all interacted a lot more. We need to get back to that. Yes there was political divide, but not like now. I know I sound like conservative on the issue of social media, but perhaps too much tech dependence devolves us

  13. This is a confluence of increased personal narcissism, short attention span, need for instant gratification, 'tribalism' and old fashioned intellectual laziness.  It is worrying that evidence is no loger considered the bedrock of debate, instead being replaced by Dunning-Kruger post rationalisation.  A prime example of this is of course Trump in pretty well everything he does (climate change for example).  Also the flat earth community, where aggressively arrogant Dunning-Kruger sufferers abound.  Trump's cynical strategy to undermine trust in objective facts and reliable news media has greatly fuelled this worrying trend.  Humanity is truly becoming more stupid – counter evolution one might say.

  14. To go with my other comment on social media and misinformation, Funny Weekly World News the conspiracy rag of yore.went under in print anyhow when social media took off

  15. Good discussion, however, I would like to point out that we as liberals should be somewhat arrogant and aggressive. If we continue to defer–to roll over and play dead, so-to-speak, then the other side is going to start another kingdom of the fascist dictatorship. It is time to stand firm and fight back, no, I don't mean like ANTIFA, but we have already given up too much ground.

  16. If only some of them were really intellectual instead of just pedantically quoting "pseudo-facts" or things they would like to be facts. It might then be interesting.

    From what I've witnessed, it's mostly half-facts and deliberately misrepresented information to support some sort of dumbass ideological nonsense.

  17. Professor Lynch is spot on. Tribalism is the current scourge of America. I may label myself as liberal, but my beliefs on a laundry list of topics all run right down the middle. My hatred for Trump derives from who he is, not his politics. Because as we all know Trump has been a Republican since 2015. Before that he was a Democrat.

    Socrates got it right. I am so glad that I am not tied to the left or right, and get my political views from actual data not commentators or news media that is beholden to one tribe or another.

  18. Many misunderstand scientific method or misrepresent it. Also money controls everything. People over and over refer to science as absolute knowledge, BUT it is NOT. Only religious belief offers the illusion of certainty. Scientific data is only what we know NOW, and that changes as more evidence comes to light. Scientists can lie or be corrupt like other humans.

  19. Before I watched this video I was hoping that David would bring up the malleable nature of humans and he did. That was a good question to ask and I am glad that David asked that.

  20. This should be called 'the arrogance of ignorance' or 'being unaware of what critical thinking is' or 'not being open minded' or maybe 'the Dunning Kruger effect' ! Oh that last one already exists and the former ones also? … ah ok then!

  21. When I was younger My (racist) family would always paint the picture that black people culture was against education, they didn't like school, etc

    Now I see after growing up it's the white evangelical, conservative, racist culture that against education/science/higher education

  22. When a YouTube video leads to a right wing video it’s a trap, but when it’s a left wing video it’s “by coincidence”? C’mon David, you have to admit that sounds kind of stupid.

  23. Emotional response and fact checks plus what is hidden by picking a different word that means about the same but up lifts your view… Tribes, out rage, court systems of 1987 most people convict on eye witnesses instead of DNA and evidence… Black Sheep are screwed…

  24. We have it also in Germany. Idiots are everywhere and they all think they're genius intellectuals and psychologists.

  25. Good video, sometimes it's good to take a breath and take a step back and see how you're viewing the world from your own biases, and to take a critical dose of critical thought and stew on that for awhile. I think now it's time to go back and read some classics and some other good reads, work out that brain a little bit.

  26. Bunch of people here who are confused and think he's talking about academics. He's talking about people who consider themselves smart enough to 'know' what's correct without actually being properly intellectually rigorous about it.

  27. So nice to hear someone else pick this apart, finally.

    I’ve been explaining a lot of these same points to my conservative friends for years, only to be treated like I was talking out of my ass.

  28. These videos make me think about things I’ve never thought about before. It really opens up my mind a little more. Keep it up Dave.

  29. I think that especially for younger people the internet can really shape how they think and what they see can shape their brain in almost an instant.

  30. Pakman shows his own intellectual arrogance and propensity for spreading disinformation to further his leftist agenda. Don't hold back David, slyly insinuating Stefan Molyneux or Ben Shapiro as "Alt-Right" takes a very broad and dishonest new definition of that term. Obviously you must have Googled "Alt-Right" tirelessly until you found a site that defined any member of "Alt-Right" as any conservative or libertarian. Damn, you can find anything on the Internet these days. Of course if your goal Is to just radicalize malleable minds on the left, defining and vilifying anyone who is not a Progressive as a racist bogeyman , then any lies and smears will do, it seems to be the Socialist way.

  31. I don't think these talks help to fix the problem. You end up with people who think if you've googled anything then you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. As if it's impossible to cross reference legitimately or find a holistic understanding of a topic by doing so.

    We desperately need non-partisan experts that the majority can trust to get their answers from. I just don't see more people ever ever ever being more diligent in their research and skeptical of their own held beleifs, not until we're all neurolinked anyway.

  32. Platforms like facebook, youtube and twitter have proliferated the dunning-kruger effect to toxic levels in our society.

  33. Does anyone know if there are websites that aggregates data on science and politcs from trustworthy sources with explanations for why each soruce is trustworthy? Preferably with a huge bank of sources.

  34. OK…I'm sure those of us that watch progressive left news on YouTube have our own blind spots but I'm fairly confident we're getting better News, and thus a better sense of reality, than those watching Cable News or Alex Jones, or Ben Shapiro, or Crowder, etc.

    We could start there. People need to be better consumers of News. Its tough to tease out every bit of sensationalism and propagandization in all the clips a person watches but just the basics of knowing who is paying for the messages you are receiving would be a nice start.

  35. you are going down the rabbit hole there taking us back to the 12th. century the party on the left is the party on the right there one in the same.

  36. When I was young and being raised by future Trump voting idiots I believed that both sides were equally bad. When I was older I thought Republicans were mistaken. When I was older still I realized Republicans were really conservatives and the party was just another name for conservative and I thought conservatives were mistaken. Now my bias is that Republicans are conservatives and conservatives are liars who don't believe in the future because they're superstitious primitives praying for the end times. This wasn't a life long belief, I wanted to like them, instead over time I have come to think of them as a pure form of human evil.

  37. YES FINALLY.. I was not the only one who thinks that there is a lot of arrogant intelligence today.. what wrong with.. “ I can be wrong or I don’t know “ .. we are just humans right.. not every answer is on the internet or in a book or even nature can be wrong now and then.. so let’s find the answer in ourselves and those around us and let us be humble.. it’s hopefully doesn’t cost us anything..!

  38. The stupider an individual is, the more likely they are to think they are f- ing brilliant. Its the Dunning Kreuger Effect (beng too stupid to understand how stupid you are). We call these people Trump voters.

  39. I am much more concerned with the loving the Uneducated movement that glorifies morons. The people who's every other word is fk and they don't care who is around kids or old people. Rump loves the poorly educated because they're easy to con I don't see a rise of arrogant Intelligence I see arise of people proud to lack Intelligence

  40. The right spreads LIES geez now we are letting the Orange turd set the vocabulary. It's not fake news it LIES told by lying liars on the Right

  41. I still don't understand this act of polarization that's happening today. I was a big fan of the "alt-light" and would watch and agree with people like Sh0eOnHead, Sargon, Blare White, and ChrisRayGun, but I was always sceptical of some of their claims. Quite often I disagreed with Sargon, and Blare and I ended up watching one of their videos thinking, "that sounded like poorly researched, poorly reasoned bullshit," And when I watched a Stephan Molineux (I don't know how to spell it), or Paul Joseph Watson, I couldn't watch a single video without thinking something along those lines.
    I also recently started watching, and respecting people like contrapoints, and destiny because they tend to give me a new prespective.

    The channels I used to watch clearly shifted my views to be a little more right leaning, and the new channels shifting my views as well, but whenever I see someone like pigpuncher, who essentially brags about his decent into the alt right, and then shifting to endorsing antifa it troubles me to my very core.

    Thanks for the video, it gave me a little more insight into my previous observations about the polarization in today's culture.

  42. The internet, one of mankind's greatest inventions and one of the most dangerous weapons ever invented. The world now is living proof!

  43. Well it's hard to not to be arrogant against stupid mother fucking idiots when they say stupid shit, especially when they should know better. And lets to be honest it's really fun to tell some one how stupid they are.

  44. It didn't mean to be this way before the algorithm started prioritizing time on site internet was a much different place look at YouTube for example when it was prioritizing view counts over watch minutes, we had the golden age of animation channels. When we had prioritization of watch minutes over view counts we get PewDiePie and TheQuartering.

  45. Forget about politics for a moment. I was curious about few country songs although this not my type of music, so I searched on YouTube , listened, forgot . I did, but not YouTube algorithm. Now if I just listen to any song, country song that I wanted to hear once is coming up, up, up and up. If I need to run away for min, it comes up, plays automatically and YouTube thinks that it's my favorite song when in reality I already hate it.

    With politics – I am curious with both sides, but when I search for Fox News it takes next two weeks to get rid of them. Then I get exclusively left.

    I think we give too much credit to these tech companies. There is no sophisticated algorithm there. It's simple repetitious loop that selects same over and over again.

    It's not even sophisticated enough for my shopping needs. If I bought mattress, why you show me mattress for another two months? Show me bedding, bed accessories .

  46. If you live in a democratic country of a two party state social media is radicalising to extremes but if you have multi party state it is improving the democracy !

  47. Yeah ive thought of what David talks about at the end ive experienced in my own life of flipping from far right to far left… I voted for trump and now I feel more anti trump then most of the people I see that didn't vote for him. I guess I'm just extreme 🙂

  48. Very interesting information! Honest self-examination is a good rinse-repeat cycle to practice periodically.

    In the 2016 election I was politically ignorant and knew only one thing: vote AGAINST Trump because I thoroughly disliked his seemingly baseless boastful behavior and believed he would make a terrible president. I was shocked and dismayed that he actually won, especially given that he did not win the popular vote.

    Enter Facebook. I rarely posted anything, so most of my "feed" consisted of endless casual sometimes tasteless jokes posted by my "friends." Then came the vitriolic posts by a former high school classmate who absolutely vilified AOC. I had no idea who or what AOC was until I started searching online for information. I commented with a short Wikipedia summary of her history as a rebuttal, and suffice it to say I was "unfriended." I quickly realized that 90% of friends and family were polarized against my "liberal" views without ever offering one shred of factual information to back up their vehement hatred of "socialist scumbag democrats" who, they believed, were obviously trying to steal America – and their guns – out from under them.

    I am a skeptic by nature and will often play the role of devil's advocate in the process of building a litmus test for my own beliefs. Bottom line, if it's not something I'd want to happen to me, then it's probably not something that's good for anyone else. And that pretty much sums up the Trump presidency in my opinion.

  49. Thanks for the great interview and my understanding of the reality about the fact that I will never know everything was after I ride the
    " Allergy of the cave " by Plato , this allegory is one of many in the book " Republic " but for my it's the most understandably important for Plato philosophic idea , the story's about Socrates and his daftsentns by the Geek's, the important of self correct and ottery correct, don't let anyone stop u from asking customers ,

    and do stop looking fore for more reading about stuff that interesting and makes you think more about the world and life
    or want is normal , what you want for your life,
    we don't now it's good because life and the world are still not prefect so we can know more about staff it's never bad

  50. Did I just hear David describe himself as the extreme left? He is not even a whole hearted socialist, and I don't think I have ever heard him quote Marx.

  51. But seriously hardcore Trump supporters are nothing but a personality cult, proud ignoramus and impervious to caring, tradition or data. This is no strawman, I've defended them in the past but I'm now convinced that now they've shed most of the disgruntled working people and now it's just hardcore antiintelectual racists. Honestly there's no getting to them now. What now?

  52. Intellectual arrogance has existed long before the advent of the Internet age and is certainly not a phenomenon unique to political discourse. Read Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.

  53. David, please check your description for a typographical error, likely a mal result of the autocofuck function. Hint: what university is he a professor at? Hope you make the Connection 😉 -peace.

  54. "Intellectual arrogance" has a lot of its roots in entertainment media, where TV and movie characters are always right and catch on to things first and fastest. Presentation of such characters is cynical in nature because viewers want to be them and secretly believe they are. It becomes self-perpetuating.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *