How College Professors Duped The Scientific Community
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 07. 2023
- ExpressVPN: Get 3 Months FREE of ExpressVPN: expressvpn.com/jordanyt
Watch the episode here: Ep. 367 - • You are the Target | J...
Dr. Peterson's extensive catalog is available now on DailyWire+: utm.io/ueSFn
// SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL //
Premium Podcast - jordanbpeterson.supercast.com/
Newsletter: linktr.ee/DrJordanBPeterson
Donations: jordanbpeterson.com/donate
// COURSES //
Discovering Personality: jordanbpeterson.com/personality
Self Authoring Suite: selfauthoring.com
Understand Myself (personality test): understandmyself.com
// BOOKS //
Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life: jordanbpeterson.com/Beyond-Order
12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos: jordanbpeterson.com/12-rules-...
Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief: jordanbpeterson.com/maps-of-m...
// LINKS //
Website: jordanbpeterson.com
Events: jordanbpeterson.com/events
Blog: jordanbpeterson.com/blog
Podcast: jordanbpeterson.com/podcast
// SOCIAL //
Twitter: / jordanbpeterson
Instagram: / jordan.b.peterson
Facebook: / drjordanpeterson
#JordanPeterson #JordanBPeterson #DrJordanPeterson #DrJordanBPeterson #DailyWirePlus #podcast #news #TheJordanBPetersonPodcast
The so-called grievance studies hoax is the best thing that has happened to alert our modern world to the actual truth. Kudos to Peter, James, and Helen 🙏
Yeah it may not be sitting to have a very big effect now, just with how widespread the indoctrination cultural marxists postmodernist corruption has spread... But,
I think the grievance studies hoax will be in the history books if we're able to save history
Indeed. Also, I just spotted that the little red dots on Jordan's jacket are small lobsters. 😆
@@nikosantikythera2422has anyone peer-reviewed Peterson's taste in garments
@@nikosantikythera2422 ahh, lobsters, truly the most fearsome Elden Ring enemy
@@randorover-zk7pw But he needs a matching broad-brimmed hat to top it off.
‘If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit.’ W C Fields
Jordan just inadvertently explained to me why agriculture is uniquely full of conservative creative types. In agriculture if it doesn't work it dies
Yes
God bless the farmers
Even so, working at a State University Agricultural Research Center for 23 years, there were research projects suggested based on acquiring more grant money and not on utility to growing food crops.
but was it really alive in the first place?
I absolutely love how they exposed the system here!
yeah, prob not that hard to do though.
the great thing here is these gentlemen went to the effort to undertake it.
@@haydenwalton2766
Indeed.
They aren’t the first. Do a search for Sokal and Bricmont (possible spelling errors here) in the 1990s. Same problem.
If you like fakes being exposed there are quite a few videos online exposing the fraud and fake that is Jordan Peterson....hopefully you will be as open to that debunking as you are to the one here.
Yes, and jealous of that capacity. Glad they're on our side
The Gentrification of Cornbread sounds like a Harvard course these days.
Queer knowing and understanding of climate
lol
EVERYBODY LOVES CORNBREAD SMOTHERED IN BUTTER IN BROOKSVILLE FLORIDA....POOR RICH BLACK WHITE GAY STRAIGHT TRANS ...SCIENTIFIC FACT
Facist barbie - a white paradise 301
@@tensevoMade me laugh out loud at the word "knowing"
Helen Pluckrose is an intellectual beast. I listened to a two and a half hour lecture where she completely dismantled postmodernism and exposed it as intellectually bankrupt. Lindsay’s work on intersectional social justice has been brilliant as well.
You have a link to that lecture?
@@chrish2112 czcams.com/video/9sUkmBX8jUE/video.html
I think this might be it
I'd like a link as well.
@@crazycoolkids00 I think its this one czcams.com/video/9sUkmBX8jUE/video.html
Link?
When confronted with the question "why did you publish these papers in your journal", the chief editor replied something like, "we presume on the good faith of our contributors, that they're not fraudulent." My follow-up question would be, "why in the world would you do that? It's a scientific enterprise, not a church potluck."
We don't presume on the good will or truth of science. Otherwise it ceased to be self-correcting.
In science someone has an idea. If he/she cannot disprove it themselves, they write a paper and ask other scientists to disprove it. An editor is not qualified to disprove it. You do not understand the basics of how science works. These two have not tried to clear up your misunderstanding.
@@kevinkelly2162 When you accept papers into your journal, you don't just accept whatever anyone submits. There's a rigorous process. For legitimate enterprises at least.
I don't think *you* understand how science journals work.
@@kevinkelly2162The Editor is not responsible for proving/ disproving a hypothesis but he is responsible for ascertaining if a submitted paper is credible or trustworthy. Checking the credentials of an author and citations given is just one method of testing viability for publication.
@@blackdog1392 Yes, that is called peer review. But it does not say if the idea presented is incorrect or why. That is for other scientists to do. Scientific academia is not perfect but the idea being presentsd here, ie these two corrected the scientific world, is just garbage. Low information content for badly informed people, aka Petersons modus operandi. In the kingdom of the blind the one eyed man is king.
It's no longer self correcting to be fair. 'trust the science' though
I remember when those papers were accepted by the universities to which they were submitted and how ridiculous it was that they had been duped so easily. It showed that they were eager to grow the false science of gender and everything else that they were pressing into our children's minds back then, and frankly it was very discouraging at the same time.
Maybe they were misled on a grand scale with the purpose of undermining the social sciences and humanities.
what is ridiculous is that humanities thinking is even more absurd than the deliberately absurd stuff these guys came up with.
Anyone who knows the process but isn’t a nitwit/true believer, knows the process is a joke.
We truly are fortunate that James (and co) has been able to so clearly and cleverly direct everyone's attention to the ridiculousness of the emperor's woke clothes. Brilliant.
But sadly there are millions who still see him as being dressed in the finest garments! You can't convince some people of reality.
The Emperor’s Woke clothes. Stealing that!
@@johnwhale8316 go for it. Woke clothes are certainly worse than nothing!
I have been stating the emperors new clothes but I like this better.
The emperor needs to find a new groove
What happens when ppl with integrity and intelligence collide.
Thank you guys, great talk.
Keep exposing the lies. Now if the media would do their job
The guest professor mathematician in this clip is one of the finest speakers or communicators through spoken words that I've listened to in a long time. His ability to economically break down complex concepis world-class. I hope we hear a lot More from him in the Future. Thank you doctor Peterson for having him on.
He should learn there is no race to reach his conclusion.
Jordan Peterson is much better at pacing.
@@jerrybrickley2115yes... he is speaking at the same rate of his thought process.
He needs a vocal/speech coach 😎
@thedude702: Because the trio proved that "Grievance Studies" aren't based on science since the scientific method isn't applied in those studies. The trio had 7 gibberish articles published in the leading journals of their fields of specialty, and the "experts" never figured out what had happened.
The "lobsters" jacket is awesome. He's taken that one attempt to mock him and made it a trademark.
I still remember hearing this for my first time on jre. this needs to make it in the history textbooks. it’s so ridiculous, just how obviously full of shit the academics are how desperate they are to have an excuse to push these lies. “trust the science” lmao
@yiannimitropoulos3913 ..another tiny little perfect example is one woman from BLM living in her multiple million dollar mansion...
Well I guess I cab understand why there's no protests.. it was white people's donations by far a majority
Rape in the dog park
Careful bud, don't confuse the humanities with STEM. Typically when people say "trust the science", they are talking about STEM.
Now, people are pretty scientifically illiterate, so I'm not suggesting everyone who says "trust the science" is correct, but our STEM scientific process DOES work. There is SOME corruption and SOME nonsense, but we still mastered quantum mechanics and discovered the Higgs boson and so on, so it's clearly incredibly (unbelievably, really) effective. (I'm a mathematician. You can't fake your way into our top journals, I guarantee it).
Agreed. It’s also unfair to students.
Students are the ones who perpetuate these unfounded/nonsensical ideas to the normies
Never forget the Sokal hoax. I absolutely loved it for revealing sth a lot of us know, but don't admit out loud: outrageous pathological people don't just lie to others 24/7 but primarily to themselves. It's crazy how societies dive head first into complete delusions, risking in the process the authority of valid research.
When they say "trust" the science, they are proselytizing their religious convictions.
Science is a codified means of applied skepticism that demands replicable evidence and the openness to the likelihood that you are wrong, at least a little bit and someone may eventually have a better model to explain the pattern in reality.
• Sokal Affair/Hoax (1996)
• Grievance Studies Affair/Hoax, aka Sokal Squared (2017)
• Sokal III (2021)
Was that the one about the homosexual or sexually harassing dogs?
As a STEM man myself, with a PhD in chemical science, I just love the intellectual content of this interview.
I have read hundreds of papers and run a laboratory devoted to solving complex analytical problems, so reading about the anti-intellectual concepts in Marxism and postmodernism and critical theory affords such an easy debunking protocol that it is almost embarrassing. I'm not an intellectual (thank God, they are the first into the camps) but I know BS instantly when I read it.
I think it all gets down to a problem of axioms. Axioms MUST be irreducible, complete and correct. The modern humanities theoretical construct use Marxist tropes as axioms, and they are fundamentally false. Therefore, all that follows is false, and it takes a Ptolomeic rat's nest of circles within circles to try and account for all the anomalies and untruths that follow from these Marxist axioms. STEM outsiders are the Copernicus's who trash the false paradigms, and the critical theorists are the 21st century version of the 16th century Catholic Church who deny its reality.
You put it into the words I couldn’t attempt to.
We philosophers wrote the book on axioms and are embarrassed for your ilk and their proclivity to chase grants over truth.
@@urex1717 marxist philosopher? So a nincompoop then.
Don’t deify science and denigrate the interpretive disciplines to bolster your ego. I suggest you read widely in the philosophy of science and you will realise that knowledge is not homogeneous and nor is it in a hierarchy. There are different types of knowledge and to conflate them is to commit Ryle’s category error. And if you believe that science is the last resort of epistemological purity, you should consult Kuhn, Popper, Hume, and a multitude of others. (And by the by, where you get the idea that axioms must be irreducible, complete and correct? Sheer fantasy.) Apart from the foregoing I agree with your critical approach to Marx - although there is quite a bit of post-modernism that is worth salvaging.
@@johnricercato740 Well responded, but i don't understand your criticism of my definition of an axiom. What is your improvement?
Thomas Sowell and Jordan Peterson are two the greatest minds in the past one hundred years.
pls...
@@elizabethharper9081 Pretty please
@elizabethharper9081 why dont you say who you think are the greatest minds in the last century?
@@panzer00 They are two very intelligent individual, among the greatest in the past 2 decades or so but they are nothing compared to any big name scientist from ww2-cold war era.
Carl Jung and Mircea Eliade. Dont get me wrong, I like Peterson, but these two men brought Religion and History back to where it belongs.
I've always been a strict Popperian - if you can't find a reliable way to test and possibly falsify or disprove it, a hypothesis is worthless. Problem is too much of what passes for the modern humanities dismally fails this test. And the same problem is creeping into "hard" science as well. Climate science and projections into the future being an example, too many interfering factors to eliminate and with only one Earth, no ability to do experiments against controls.
There are many legitimate sciences where you cannot do controls. Cosmology for one.
Climate theories can be checked against past data, and if the predictions for the future are found to be supported by the data, that is evidence that the theory is correct.
In 1981, at a time when northern hemisphere temperatures had not risen from the peak in the 1940s which was caused by maxima in solar intensity, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO), Hansen et al published a paper in Science which correctly predicted that the warming signal due to increasing CO2 concentration would become evident above the background signal later that decade, and also correctly predicted the amount of warming over the next forty years.
Climate Impact of Increasing Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
J. Hansen, D. Johnson, A. Lacis, S. Lebedeff P. Lee, D. Rind, G. Russell
Science Volume 213, pages 957-966, 1981.
In 1990, the first IPCC report was prepared which predicted that the most likely amount of warming with each doubling of CO2 concentration, the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) was 3 C.
Global temperature data and Mauna Loa CO2 data have shown that prediction to be correct.
The warming is not due to the sun as solar intensity has been declining for decades toward the Grand Solar Minimum.
Also, if the temperature rise was caused by increasing solar radiation, the troposphere and stratosphere would both warm.
If caused by an increase in greenhouse gases, the troposphere would warm and the stratosphere would cool. That was predicted in1967, and has been shown to be what is happening by satellite data.
Syukuro Manabe, the surviving scientist who made the prediction (his collaborator Richard Wetherald had since died) was awarded the Nobel prize in physics in 2021.
@@yiannimitropoulos3913 Nobody dismisses climate science as a total garbage except those imaginary "climate deniers" that every climate activist or proponent is eager to fight.
Reasonable sceptics just point at the simple fact that many conclusions of climate science are not really proven. E.g. the claim that CC is an existential threat to humanity is questionable.
What's undeniable in climate science is that it has been driven by political agenda for the last 30-40 years.
@@yiannimitropoulos3913 It was worth the read.
I disagree with your take on climate science though. Just a few examples. The IPCC doesn't use historians or archaeologists to describe previous climates. We use models and hindcasts and give them authority over the written records of the day. It's axiomatic that clouds are only a feedback to temperature change and never a forcing. Climate has a huge "inertia" and can only change slowly due to natural forces. Feedbacks cannot exceed 100% without destroying the stability of the system, except in climate.
I was looking into this years ago and found some interesting parallels with Cosmology, Evolution and Geology. All four started with an essentially "constant" idea that was disrupted in 3 of them. Cosmology went from the "Steady State" Universe to the "Big Bang" and an expanding Universe, a huge discontinuity. Geology went from the Earth "Is what it is" to "Continental Drift" and a constantly changing and evolving planet. Evolution went from the original idea of gradual, incremental change to "Punctuated Stability" idea where species would have quite a rapid spurt of change followed by periods of stability.
Climate science was much the same with two schools of thought, the "Gradualists" who said that climate could only change very slowly and the "Catastrophists" who thought natural change could be rapid. As with the others, the Gradualists held the reins of power. But by the 1950s/1960s with the spread of weather stations around the planet (thanks to the Cold War) it became apparent that the climate was changing far faster than thought and had been doing so at least for decades. Apparently debates at the time were quite heated and I did read of actual fights breaking out at times. Rapid change is what the Catastrophists were expecting and so they were pretty happy but there were problems for the Gradualists. There were only 2 possibilities; Either the climate did change rapidly due to natural forces and the Catastrophists were correct and the "Grand Old Men" of climate were wrong and would have to admit so publicly *OR* there was a non natural factor effecting the temperatures. So by the late 60s and early 70s we had plenty of stories about "pollution" blocking the Sun and stories about the coming Ice Age.
Then the temps started going up again and that had to be explained. So the cause was that we'd cleaned up the pollution and were now allowing CO2 to do it's thing. A quite plausible idea on the face of it. However if we look at the long record a different picture emerges. Most have seen the temp/CO2 graph that was used in "An Inconvenient Truth" but haven't looked closely at it. There is no point in the records where a rise in CO2 preceded a rise in temperature, CO2 never started a warming period. Nor has CO2 ever been able to maintain a warm period, the records show several times when temperatures were dropping from their max as CO2 was still rising.
It's all about climate science avoiding it's "Big Bang" moment. Only an incredibly stable climate could allow for the CO2 idea. A decrease of a mere .4% in annual cloud cover since 1850 would account for over half of the perceived warming. With continents moving, mountains rising and falling, etc., etc., virtually all these things must cancel each other out for the CO2 theory to work. The forcings that historically caused 10 degrees of temp rise and fall in decades have apparently all magically disappeared to give this wonderfully (and incredibly unlikely) stable climate. Yes, I'm a Catastrophist. I've read too much history not to be.
Popper bases science on arbitrary hypotheses and denies perception, induction and falsification, not truth. He is just as foolish as Marxists and PMists. But too abstract for many people to identify his foolishness.
Leap Of Logic-David Harriman, physicist; a radically new theory of induction based on sense-based ideas, not statistics; science as basically inductive, not deductive.
@@yiannimitropoulos3913 You evade mans power to focus or evade.
I just finished rewatching the original podcast on the grievance studies papers affair! I hope that Dr. Peterson will invite Helen and Peter back, I’d like to get an update how they are and continue that fascinating discussion regarding the tenuous link between postmodernism and cultural Marxism.
Peter Bogossian has been cancelled shortly after their experiment.
Ever since hearing about this years ago, it has plagued me... Every time I read "studies" around certain types of psychological/behavioral topics that just so happen to align with specific ideologies, I think of this. How many of these "studies" were entirely falsified for the sake of ideology? Who audits them? Who cares/has the drive and expertise to confirm or deny things that are incredibly influential?
Gentrification of cornbread 😭🤣
The interactions between Jordan and James were very interesting to me. They built on each others points so well. I love this clip!
keep it up Peterson love your stuff you really are what the world needs
I'll add a bit here: Yes, we need JP, but it's more than that. We need a thousand of him. And a thousand more.
I very much enjoyed this! Thank you.
"Yes it is a new idea, but it's stupid" 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Two geniuses having what they consider a normal conversation.
Having a STEM mind, I find this extremely interesting. Mathematics is the universal language.
Kronecker says Cantor is insane.
@@thedude702 “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ... applies to businessmen, politicians and professors. Society is terminally corrupt. See book "On Bullshit".
@thedude702 The scientific community is afraid of losing their funding. Most scientific research is government funded. If telling the truth ends a research project, they may lose the funding. So, withholding the truth is a continuation of their unnecessary income.
@@thedude702 Haven't you got something better to do with your life?
@@thedude702 It's more you spamming the same thing in every thread. Get a life.
I learned in college that sociological & maybe even in psychological studies could be easily finessed 😅 I’m elated that someone is trying to expose it.
Not "maybe" on psych studies, more like absolutely. I have an advanced degree in sport psych and had to read through 100's of studies to get it. While there is some good work available, much of it was just garbage. It was easy to see the problems, particularly in methodology, that left too many open variables that weren't addressed or accounted for in some way. It made me realize 25 years ago now that fraud and stupidity were both rampant in academia.
Both are still valid subjects. Its up to you if you take on information that can be verified.
JP wearing a sport jacket full of lobsters proves the man is not only brilliant, he has a sense of humor. If you know, you know.
I didn’t catch that until you mentioned it. LMAO.
Watch the film...
The Lobster. ❤
it is fitting considering what the ‘suit’ in his own words represents - uniformity; willingness to play “the game”. i love it.
I caught that right away with the close up shot-it was great.😆
There was a physicist in the 1990s who wrote a fake article of postmodernism. He got the paper accepted in a peer reviewed academic journal.
That was Alan Sokal who in 1996 had published random gobbledygook titled "Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity" in Social Text, an academic journal of cultural studies.
Any academic 'discipline' with 'studies' in the title should raise a very large red flag.
@@pshehan1 They are literally free loading due to political positions than contributing anything of significant economic value.
@@sriharshacv7760 I do not require that genuine scholarship contributing to knowledge in the humanities or sciences have any immediate economic value.
My own field of research began in 1946 when some scientists were studying the magnetic properties of atomic nuclei with no application in mind. The phenomenon of nuclear magnetic resonance now has numerous important applications, including MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.
If you go back far enough, you will find that almost every modern technology started out as pure or basic research.
The story goes that when Michael Faraday was showing British politician William Gladstone his experiments on electromagnetism, Gladstone remarked; "Very inteersting Mr Faraday, but what use is it?" Faraday replied "I have no idea but in ten years you will be taxing it."
@@pshehan1 Feminism isn't basic research
Well, in a meta sort of way, I guess the paper wasn't fake if it was about postmodernism. Once you destroy the concept of objective truth, "real" and "fake" cease to exist and the only thing that matters is how you feel about whatever it is you're reading.
This is the best REAL conversation I have listened to in a year. Maybe more.
Yes isn't it? It's just packed with smart! And they make it look so effortless.
ikr
When geniuses come up with the ultimate prank/troll. Love it 😂
This has to be the best comment. I love it. So true!
At A Level (11th Grade), I had figured out that for some teachers to get the grade, you just needed to regurgitate what they wanted to hear. By my 1st year at Uni (Freshman) I had it down to a fine art to the extent that my feminist lecturer gobbled up and lauded me for something I came up with in the student union bar as a complete joke - my classmates didn't think I would but with a few beers I did and the lecturer lapped up my nonsense about the patriarchy. That was in the 90s. At least there were a few lecturers and teachers that didn't fall for that, so I was able to synthesise ideas. Sadly, I fell for the climate fraud as I didn't believe a non humanities field could be so nonsensical. Thankfully I woke up to that after nearly a decade as a climate activist. Since then the pathogenic mind virus has infected everything.
There's something very interesting going on in STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics)
In STEM, there's a bit of a chasm between the S--M and the -TE-. If you have a degree in Science or Math, you can really only be employed in the University system (or Education in general). In Technology and Engineering, you mainly end up working in the private sector.
As a result, the -TE- in STEM is starting to evolve SEPARATE from the S--M.
Technology (T) in particular is moving to a post-university model. Why? Because it's too fast moving. If you have a Computer Technology degree from 15 years ago and haven't been employed since, you are nearly useless in the field. As a result, Tech has constructed a vast system of 3rd party certification. If you want to show you have what it takes to do IT, you just take the certification test, and when you pass, you're certified. Many employers do not care about your college, they only care what skillset have you proven LATELY. So in the tech industry, it's all about getting that first job and building a PROFESSIONAL resume (instead of an educational one). Your employer might even encourage you to obtain further certifications while you are employed with them and sometimes pay for your testing fee.
Engineering is starting to also move in that direction. In fact, engineers are finding that they are employable in industries they never would have imagined. For instance, hedge funds hire number crunchers... and in the last few decades they have started hiring with a different attitude. They don't want to hire a finance major to balance their finances. They would actually rather hire an ENGINEER and TEACH them finance.
But one of the magical things about STEM fields is they are EXTREMELY testable. Your answers are either right or wrong. You can test multiple choice and grade tests easily... and even if it's not multiple choice, it doesn't take a super genius to grade a certification exam. In other words, if you can teach yourself, it is EXTREMELY easy to make a test. With math, you can even randomize the variables so that everyone has a different test that covers the same concepts!
So... it seems that everything is moving towards working AROUND getting a degree. Employers don't care if you have student debt and attended classes for 4 years. They only care that you are certifiably capable of the skills they need... and now, school isn't the only way to certify that... and it's getting better every year.
But why did I claim that S--M are different?
That's because in those industries, the University is doing the hiring! The University isn't about to phase itself out.
In the sciences, a lot of your jobs out of college are research related. Guess who's doing all the big-name research... the Universities. And little known to many people, Universities has basically a postgrad slave class. First of all, post-grad is slavery in and of itself. They are basically interns for the college. Second, once you're past post-grad, there are no jobs anywhere. All the companies big enough to fund research are doing their research through the University (who can underbid anyone because of their slave labor. So you've got doctorites floating around fighting for 5 paid research jobs... oversaturated market means low job stability and low pay... but they already have student debt. They MUST take what they can get and the only jobs they can get are at the University as an aide. You've got 100 graduates fighting for 5 jobs and praying for tenure one day... the rest have to teach at community colleges and just pray to be called up by the majors. I live in a college town, and the last time I worked at Dominos as a Delivery driver... I worked with THREE people with doctorites (1 in psychology, one in nuclear physics [our nuclear plant is run by the University], and 1 in a mathematical field).
Anyway, the University likes it that way. They make money from the student, and then they enslave the postgrad student, and then they put the employment squeeze on the doctor. It's an AMAZING racket for them.
Well, mathematics is very much the same. In the private sector, you don't encounter a lot of need for mathematicians. You also encounter an inordinate amount of equality in the ranks. You are hard-pressed to find a question that mathematician A can solve but mathematician B cannot. Math is a very difficult field, don't get me wrong, but once you know all the tricks, you're kinda done. The true mathematical mysteries left in the world are very few and far-between, and the moment they are solved, BOOM! Everyone in the field knows... and there's really no way to make a dollar as a mathematician outside of University system or the school system. If you want to make money, you're better off transitioning to engineering or try to get a job in finance.
But yeah... as a result of this, Certifications in Mathematics or the Sciences probably COULD be done... but the University isn't going to undercut their scam by hiring people from outside it. So for the time being, it looks like Science and Mathematics are under the rule of Universities... while Technology has escaped, and engineering is eyeing the door.
@@MikeG-bw6db
I don't think you followed what I said.
The -TE- is highly highly sought after. The S--M is largely caught up in University. Especially the Science.
Healthcare, Pharmaceuticals, Chemical, Petrolium etc... guess what. They aren't hiring from the REAL private sector. They are paying for the construction of large University buildings, and they are paying the University to research what they want exactly how they want it researched with the University's slave labor - I mean grad students.
As for mathematics... I love mathematics, but it's not exactly a practical discipline outside of the University setting. I think I can best illustrate this by going into the difference between a Mathematician and an Engineer.
Engineers use all of the settled mathematics available. They use Trig, Calculus, algebra, arithmetic, etc...
But what they DON'T spend their day on is the theoretical stuff. The Good Will Hunting style academic maths, an engineer would look at you and go, "neat... can I get back to work now?" See the Engineer uses the quadratic formula and the Pythagorean Theorem... but they couldn't give 2 sh!ts how to prove them. If someone came up with a new proof for the Pythagorean Theorem tomorrow, Engineers would not be involved.
That's because the University has interest in publishing new proofs and theories and quandries, etc... Engineers care about manifesting real products and structures that will stand up to the elements.
There's really only one industry that hires both Engineers and Mathematicians, and it's not probably what you think. Finance. You go to Wall Street, and anymore, you don't find any finance majors. Goldman Sachs would rather hire an engineer or a mathematician and teach them finance than hire a finance guy and teach them to think.
Outside of that though, mathematicians are hard to hire in the private sector. It's hard to justify hiring them to crunch numbers that a finance major could crunch for half the pay... and it's hard to find enough work to keep a mathematician busy in most industries. It's Wall Street, NASA, and the University. That's about it... and what you end up with is 1,000 autists fighting for the last tenure elegible position at the University... and they end up working at Dominos. Seriously... I kid you not. I worked at Dominos with a mathematician. PHD. Especially out here in Missouri, there's no jobs for Mathematicians. They can't even handle engineering jobs because every branch of engineering has specialized knowledge beyond the mathematical. Civil, Electrical, Aerospace, Mechanical... all have industry-specific knowledge that you pretty much cannot acquire without going to school for it.
If you don't believe me, I don't know what to tell you... go talk to a research scientist or a mathematician and ask them how the job economy is. EVEN IF they try to set up business for themselves outside of the University system, they will have a hard time finding clients that aren't using the University system for their research already... and if they do, they will have a hard time undercutting the University's slave labor.
Do you remember the end of Good Will Hunting? He wasn't offered a job at an oil refinery. He was offered a job at a University. Nobody says it... but degrees in Mathematics are in higher supply than demand. There are MANY mathematicians who have to pick up another skill before they are hireable.
Very well thought-out comment
I found that statistical theory was taught better in my undergraduate pyschology courses than it was in most other science departments. It makes sense that the founding psychologists were engineers. And also that engineers make good management decisions even in spheres outside their expertise.
So saith The Illinois Enema Bandit and The Great Cornholio.
@@donwayne1357 Such wit. You must be a riot at parties and very popular. Anal humour is considered very clever amongst the adolescent mind.
@@donwayne1357 frank rocks and forever will!!
Same here in germany, we had 3 semesters statistics in psychology. I've studied sociology before, and I didn't even learned the fundamentals...
Your discussion reminded me of my talks with my father. He was an engineer who LOVED explaining physics.
That is one hell of a lobster suit!
Since we don't always get what we want, that shows that there's a real world out there sometimes resisting, sometimes allowing our wishes.
And we also have “modern art” and I would claim that “experts” could not distinguish between “serious art” and people putting “gibberish” on canvas.
Your claim is correct.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Brassau
Thank you, simply thank you for the cleaver discourse. What a wonderful use of time.
When I was in academia another a colleague of mine asked me if I had read a particular journal article. I said that I had and he told me how he wondered how it had been published. There was six people listed as authors of the paper. It was complete nonsense. Recently on a forum someone brought up the idea of falsified research and every person who responded had seen some of that. One mentioned he was a doctoral student and had seen grant money used for research that was falsified. I would suggest that the publish or perish mentality among universities is a perfect scenario to push unethical actions for money and because money is involved the university will overlook this kind of thing. Universities are allowing students to do "research" for them. Does anyone in their right mind think that companies want cutting edge research done by students who can work for any employer? Companies want one thing---access to students. O worked with some very fine people who had worked in the profession for many years before they taught. It was a privilege to be in the same program with such highly qualified professors. I cannot imagine any of them being unethical and I never saw any evidence of it, I was aware of it at other universities.
Two brilliant minds, awesome conversation!
I could listen to Jordan talk to James for days and not get bored of it. Two of my favorite people on the planet ❤
My favorite spoof article was Chicken Chicken Chicken, Chicken Chicken. It was published, and looked like a real paper with graphs but every word was replaced with the word CHICKEN. It proves that a large number of articles published arent even read at all and how loads of articles don't actually say anything of note just have pretty graphs and other garbage.
Is that true? Published where?
That was an interesting point about the difference between creating ideas and editing ideas, and how being good at one doesn't always translate into being good at the other.
It seems to me that that would be a good use of GPT-4 - use it as an assistant for filling in your own mental weaknesses.
ChatGPT cannot distinguish between good and bad ideas. It can only tell if similar word to word relationships have been posted on the internet.
So what I kind of got out of this is that stupid is as stupid does until you figure out its stupid. A lot of people with a moral and ethical compass and a sense of responsibility and integrity will criticize their own ideas to make sure that they are valid. People that do not want to or lack the ability to criticize our own papers should not be taken seriously until they give good due diligence to criticizing at themselves and then explaining why that idea the successful against the criticism.
Lindsay’s star has been slower to rise but I am so happy that he’s here. His work is so important.
OMG. I could listen to them talk all day. Dr. Peterson (along with Dr. Sowell) is a national treasure and is not allowed to die.
Don't believe they're from the same nation but sure
That’s relevant?
@@johnalbert5786 If you're saying that a Canadian national and a US national are "A national treasure" they the statement itself is confused and confusing; particularly on a global platform.
International treasures may be more apt.
The scary part is that this happens with articles about benefits of drugs, vitamins and therapies. The industry of paid lobbyists "experts" writing bogus scientific shit is huge.
Love this kind of conversations!
I love how sometimes I'll have my own little niche for gaining knowledge and sometimes find that Jordan Peterson and his interviewees are discussing it. These talks are so incapsulating
Like so much of American society, higher education has gone completely off the rails especially in the non-science fields.
Over half of things called "science" are not actually science at all. Actual science is testable, refutable, and above all else, repeatable.
Now we use terms like "soft science" to give complete garbage some sort of legitimacy...
The amount of brain power happening in this conversation is way above any of the “academics” in college today.
That was pretty amazing. Thank you gentlemen.
This guy is on the same level as Peterson in his own field, love this conversation.
World needs you Dr. Peterson. God bless you
Once you begin to question academia, you start to question the health industry, then the pharmaceutical industry then the media, then the government itself.
I am at the point in my life that I question them all. In fact, I am to the point I flat out don’t trust any of them.
Harvard was teaching socialist curriculum in the early 1800's the demise of the American small government experiment makes complete sense when you understand what academia was up to back to the beginning.
Fascinating interview!
I love that you have your ads as a separate person
I would love to read his dissertation on the gentrification of cornbread. 😂
Just when I thought I’d seen and heard it all. This latest (college) scandal is unreal. It’s also hypocritical, especially for students who work hard and complete authentic assignments with honesty and integrity.
That was one of the most interesting interactions i have ever watched
That was certainly eye opening!
I studied decades ago (but didn´t work at a university). But I stayed always in touch with the people there (I taught sports to students - later they became professors etc.).
We spoke frankly about the situation and the circumstances. If you want to pursue a career, gain fame, reputation and resources (money, personnel etc.) you have to find a special "field", establish aknowledged theories.
Maybe it looks like BS (and it is), but that the way it is!
Especially sociology and related "sciences" are "good" to practice this. The are no "hard sciences", so nobody can falsify or disprove the theories or results!
This exercise is great for exposing the fraud within the academic world and the non-sense that is being taught to our youth in colleges all over the world. However, this discussion is at a much higher altitude than the average marginally educated person can grasp. Following the conversation is not difficult if you are astute enough to grasp the concept these gentleman are talking about. However, I submit that few on this platform has that ability, and even fewer on Tik Tok.
I cracked up when he said he was writing a paper on the gentrification of cornbread lol
Holy sh*t!! And actual intellectual conversation without over-talking and posturing for being "right"!
I work in STEM, and following the grievance studdies hoaxes I have from time to time gone and read papers in these disciplines, and what passes for scholarship often astonishes me. Open bias, a rejection of evidence, and the embracing of narrative seem all too common.
Dr Peterson, only the truth will set us free and ensure the tyranny of the past 3 long years will thwart a repeat. We need strong, confident, educated voices to draw the line. FREEDOM♥️🇨🇦
I absolutely LOVE Doc Lindsay and his beautiful Wife!!! Thanks so very much for this discussion!!!🙏🌹
Phenomenal interview
This is not surprising. I taught at university for 14 years. There were some professors we used to wonder “ how did that Bozo ever get a PhD?”.
After seeing this clip I will watch the full interview
Excellent material!
I want to hear more about this!
James is just fantastic.
Legendary. Give these guys a Nobel prize. Love it!
For?
@@kevinkelly2162 Nobel Prize in exposing societal weakness.
@@aidanmeyer944 I meant in the real world.
It's worthless
Sadly, the Nobel Prize "committees" have been compromised by political ideologies, which often render that award meaningless. But I agree with you that these researchers should be applauded. Thank you.
I once took an Anthropology course called "Movements and Migrations" and I shit you not, the professor somehow managed to convince the university that teaching yoga every Friday was a good idea because it was related to the word "Movements". It was somehow absolutely necessary to teach yoga, in a course about people groups moving to different places throughout history. I mean, it was a nice excuse to relax once a week...
Fascinated and understood 50% of 3/4's of the things they said.😮
Not to get off of the main point that James shined light onto but around the 5:40 mark where James is explaining the square number system and how there are two proofs to it (something I've never heard of before with regards to the points on squares if drawn out) and then JP's discussion of how that reminds him of constructs was just a Wow moment for me.
The papers remind me of some of the papers that were published in the old Journal of Irreproducible Results, with studies that produce absurd results. Most of the absurdity was obvious, but some required a bit of critical thinking in order to discover the mistakes and get the joke. I wonder if any of the people behind that publication are still around to talk about it in a kind of retrospective comparison to the quality of real published studies these days.
This is brilliant!
This was more fascinating then i was ecpecting
This discussion between two academics was truly refreshing to watch & to listen.
World needs you Dr. Peterson. God bless you. The Gentrification of Cornbread sounds like a Harvard course these days..
Jordan I realize you have heard this hundreds of times, Thank you for standing up for Men everywhere. More importantly for humankind, because what is good for one is good for all!.
Excellent & thought provoking as usual. It's so heartening to see these truth tellers pulling apart the woke pretenders in education. Truth always finds a way.
Gotta Love Peterson's goofy lobster suits
He has a great sense of humour!
Loved the suits - like them even more now that I've seen the lobsters! 😆
The conversation was interesting but I had hoped for discussion of the papers, what they wrote, responses from academia etc. Now I have to go down a rabbit hole called "Hoax Papers".
Two of the greatest contemporary minds! 🎉
The truth doesn’t need to be protected from criticism.
To dismiss criticisms by citing lack of credentials or being some-ism/ist reeks of intellectual dishonesty, cowardice or laziness.
Legend says they are still comparing metaphors to this day.
Watch the whole episode. Very interesting indeed
Not enough of the public is aware of this magnificent event.
This is a great discussion, but I was just glad to hear his definition of prime numbers.
Wow. I am speechless. I had ideas around alternative methods of quickly figuring primes or alternative methods to what was taught in math from gradeschool up that were brushed off as unnecessary by teachers. I never delved into the fields of study that had interested me most throughoutt my schooling because I assumed the hierarchy in place had a deeper understanding and gave them authority over my education to keep peace with teachers. Life keeps teaching me this lesson over and over again, but I can't help but defer to "authority" when I begin learning a new topic or field of study. Is this simply a hurdle to overcome mentally, or is this a result of corruption and indoctrination of our school systems and our youth?
This is the problem of schooling in general. There is a group of people working within a limited time frame. There simply isn't time to explore anything other than basic methods, especially when the teacher has to ensure the entire group understands the material. It's even worse with mathematics because every class builds upon the previous. So they choose only the most basic and essential information to pass on which will be needed in later classes. If you want to learn the whole story about anything, you have to study on your own time.
I think it’s probably that you’re an agreeable person. If you find it difficult to go against the authorities on the subject, it could be that you just want to go along with things in general. It is absolutely possible to learn to be disagreeable, and it is in fact very valuable to do so. I guess it is just a mental hurdle to get over.
Some of us want to live in a world where "experts" & "professionals" have integrity & honour. We fall for this fantasy too often.
Einstein said: ""To punish me for my contempt of authority, God made me an authority myself."
All of history is false… nobody can truely wrap their head around the game that’s played. It’s dark.
And now the “Honesty” researcher has been exposed more recently….
Yes the system is very broken, and that’s only accounting for the abuse of the system, not even the built in issues (such as funding bias and publication bias)
You should always question everything, even if a so called "expert" says otherwise. Never just put blind faith in someone.
THIS is great stuff.
Isaac Newton was a genius. Jordan and James, two great minds. Thank you both. ❤️✝️❤️
Yet even Newtonian mechanics was superseded by Einstein's relativity.
Scientific theories are never proven, and science is never settled.
If you want proofs, talk to a mathematician.
@@pshehan1 Math makes sense and it’s never based on a theory, numbers never lie, therefore, math is superior to science. Newton was obsessed with decoding the Bible. God bless ✝️
@@Cinderella227 Science uses what is called inductive reasoning based on observations of the real world.
Mathematics is based on deductive reasoning. It starts with certain axioms which are assumed to be true and theorems are proven by following the rules of the system.
Euclid's geometry assumed that space is 'flat' and people, including Newton, believed that described how the universe is. Turns out that space is curved according to General relativity and there are perfectly self consistent non Euclidean geometries.
A valid mathematical system need not describe our real universe.
@@pshehan1 Yes I do agree that math and science are deductive and inductive respectfully as they are ubiquitous in their own right, but math is superior because it’s the foundation/cornerstone of science, biology, astronomy etc. Math, science, poetry, etc. , are all in the Bible. Almighty God is the greatest mathematician, scientist, physician, architect, poet, artist, etc. We have God’s science which differs from men’s science which is limited understanding. God is the creator of all things. His greatest Power and glory isn’t limited to humanity’s mere understanding. Btw In my humble opinion the Mexican Mayans (B.C.) were the ancient masters of Mathematics, science and astronomy. Have a wonderful and blessed evening. Ciao ✝️🙋🏻♀️
Newton was 20 years old and didnt KNOW WHEN APPLES FALL. WHEN THEY ARE MATURE. WHEN THE UMBLIMICAL CORD LETS GO.
While this is a very interesting and educational video, there is a current update which needs to be added to college professors duping the scientific community. Currently, at the Harvard Business School, tenured professor, Francesca Gino, who studies behavioral economics specializing in research on leadership and workplace dynamics is on administrative leave as a result of data fraud being found in her current paper on honesty and previous research papers to prove the hypothesizes of the papers. The allegations have been made by three business school professors who publish a website, "Data Colada," where they've published their findings. This story is also being carried in "The Chronicle of Higher Education." Miss Gino also published a book, "Rebel Talent: Why It Pays to Break the Rules at Work and in Life." A subject she seems to be well versed in.
Also a dean at Stanford just resigned.
This is probably the biggest story of out times. The system is utterly broken.
this is fascinating.