Lmao no it's just supposed to be an example of how he kind of rambles on about nothing at all.

Also @Frown that meme is golden

Well that's just not true

Most modern free speech advocates are more along the lines of freedom from criticism advocates. It's a shame tbh

Again that's not entirely true, hate speech laws are rampant in Europe. I couldn't the exact source rn, but last week or so bunch of people got arrested for saying mean things about the gang of Muslim men who raped 1400 girls over the last 15 or so years. They Brits got in trouble for not liking that. Man that is ****ed on so many levels. In America it isn't that dire, but it easily could be and that's the problem.

It's 100% true that the figureheads of the modern free speech movement are simply profiting off of victimizing conservatism.

And you're gonna have to give me a source for that. There are a lot of factors that could be at play if it is even true and I get the feeling that your intel isn't as journalistic as it could be.

Free speech is a more important value than anything else.

Also I'll concede this I was a bit wrong on the second point, less of a speech issue now and of a gross disservice the British govt is doing at actually protecting British people.
https://www.thestar.co.uk/news/rothe...sers-1-6807187

And before you say anything, YES the police did know this was happening, but refused to do anything about.

Idk about it being tops, but that goes without saying tbh.

Thanks for the link. The jury'll blubber over the descriptions of the sexual assault(s) and they'll be good though.

Well I sure hope they do, these guys were pure evil.

Before I watch it is it real or a spoof?

Real. Basically he describes how human behavior is inevitably linked to that of the animal kingdom no matter what. He uses lobsters as an example.

Lol he equates similar biological components with behaviour. Isn't it adorable?

Some trees leak sap when cut into. We bleed when cut into. We are basically trees and it's the most amazing thing that I've ever thought in my life.

If that’s meant to laugh at him it shouldn’t be. That was awesome.

I'm not so sure you'd say the same if it was written down. Dude is an absolute hack. But hey if a bridge of flimsy premises is your thing then so be it.

Sap and blood aren’t the same thing but serotonin is the same. During huge life defeats the brain literally transforms that’s a genuine relatable phenomenon.

Do our serotonin receptors cause our brain to respond identically though? There are a wealth of other factors that can also affect that but he barrels through without considering it. JP is almost as big of a pseudointellectual as I am.

I actually have a pretty solid understanding of evolutionary biology. I’m not claiming it makes me an expert but when I tested to teach it in high school I didn’t miss any at all.

I know that’s a low standard and kind of dickish to say but if you’re going to say flimsy bridges are my thing I’ll retort that I’ve read and thought about it a bit. I’d need to look much deeper to see how well-structured that bridge is but what he’s saying touches on something that at least feels analogous to me. I often feel my own experiences are reflected in the animal kingdom and often in painful ways. When I listen to him speak I enjoy it because I can relate to what he’s getting at. I don’t think he’s a hack but even if he is he’s a great ****ing hack.

He's definitely personable but I've yet to see him make a clear or compelling point.

Maybe considering the format he’s presenting on he should qualify those points but as a listener I’m not assuming it’s worked out. I’m not assuming that these phenomenon grew in a common ancestor I’m just saying the lobster’s experience evokes empathy (in me) when he describes the restructuring of the human brain after difficult experiences.

If it were deep dish science it would take weeks to muddle through the details. Now, if I were his student, I would expect those details because that’s where the practical knowledge is. But as a dude to listen to casually I enjoy it. Maybe his classes guide you through the neural processes or maybe they don’t. If I were dropping 60 grand or whatever I would want information that I could use to formulate something practical and that’s going to be in the tedious details I’m not looking for in a podcast.

If he's presenting himself on the strength of his ideas, they have to be well-formed ideas. I pretty much hold that standard to everybody tbh.

Are you sure? Source?

I didn’t like that either but I feel like you’re more likely than me to write it off because you don’t want it to be true.

I don’t think it’s hidden.

I’m more flexible depending on the context.

Lobsters chit chat with urine.

Can a lobster survive without that communication? It takes a lot more than communication to be a social animal.

My money is on lobster piss chat wouldn’t exist without being evolutionarily advantageous.

Dig holes in him all you want. He’s still interesting. Haters gonna hate because he’s not on the campus party line. Why nitpick him?

I disliked his style before I was aware of his stance on gender identity. I'm gonna nitpick because he's presented as a great thinker when he's really just slick.

Hi, Will. Where's the Fresh Prince?

quoting before inevitable deletion

nice^ :cool:

Quoted before deletion.

Whoa we both pulled the same trick!

Everything is biological

I will concede that he is indeed less of a hack than Will Smith.

Nothing humans do is outside the boundaries of biology unless you believe in woo.

I don't understand why you're presenting this as a dichotomy - we are social animals, yes, but we also are driven by instinct and biology.

What other organisms are social animals? And how are their societies structured?

There’s nothing about it that isn’t biological.

There’s no nature versus nurture. Nurture is a part of nature. And there’s nothing intangible happening. Only the physical, the biological is happening. You sound like you don’t understand that there’s no consciousness beyond the biological.

Social order does not transcend biology. The brains that construct social order are purely biological.

Any sociological jargon that tries to create a divide between nature, and in this case biology, is as unfounded as any other form of mysticism.

Social hierarchy can’t be discussed unless we only deal with reality. You’re using language that suggests a belief in the supernatural. There’s no conversation to be had there.

I appreciate your humility there. That’s a good start.

yes and the drives that make that happen (tribalism in the interest of survival, f.ex.) are all rooted in our shared biology. our understanding of cultural relativism is dependent on biological wiring.